104 replies to this topic

[mweb08]

This decision is an organizational one btw.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Burnes should have pitched yesterday

[Pedro Cerrano]

Yankees are a sinking ship so it might not matter but he should have pitched

[Nigel Tufnel]

Winning the division theoretically has playoff benefits, but it mostly hasn't worked out that way for the past two seasons, especially in the NL. 

 

I suppose it could just be a SSS, or maybe I'm gun shy after last year's ALDS, but I don't think there's any question that the new playoff format has reduced the benefits of winning your division.  The only question is to what extent.

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Potential first round bye. Potential home field advantage. Can't see how you can argue against that?

[BaltBird 24]

Just get in and anything can happen. I don't care how they go about doing it.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Potential first round bye. Potential home field advantage. Can't see how you can argue against that?

 

Have you watched any postseason baseball in the past two years?  Division winners haven't done so well.

[makoman]

Last year teams with byes went 1-3 in the div series. In 2022 they went 2-2. Maybe it's bad luck, maybe the Dodgers and Braves are just chokers, but I'm going to need more than a couple years, only 8 series, to think that having a bye is not worth it or even bad. Even if it gives you a worse chance in the div series the 0% chance of losing in the WC round is pretty tough to overcome.

[Mackus]

There is zero question that you'd rather have a bye than play in the WC round. The team with a bye can lose half or more of the time for twenty years and it'll still be obviously better to have had the bye, because half the wild card teams never even made it to the divisional round.

[85Knight]

Have you watched any postseason baseball in the past two years? Division winners haven't done so well.

It's only going to take one playoff season to change this narrative. I think the key is going into the playoffs hot whether you're a wildcard or a division winner but I can't see why a team would want to be a wildcard over winning the division.

[Mackus]

It's only going to take one playoff season to change this narrative. I think the key is going into the playoffs hot whether you're a wildcard or a division winner but I can't see why a team would want to be a wildcard over winning the division.

 

Getting hot in the postseason certainly is important, but being hot coming into the postseason doesn't ensure you're hot once it starts.  Season-long winning percentage (i.e. being good) has a higher correlation to postseason success than September winning percentage (i.e. being hot).  That's among all teams as a whole, so you're going to find anecdotal examples of every possible variety.  But come the postseason, I'd rather be a 100-win team who went .500 in September than a 92-win team that went .666 September.  You never do really get to choose, though.

 

Neither the Rangers (15-14 w/ negative run differential in September) nor Diamondbacks (15-13) were hot entering the postseason last year, but got hot as soon as it began and rode that to the World Series.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Well, again, I didn't say teams should prefer to be a wild card.  I just said that going into the postseason healthy was more important than winning the division.

[Mackus]

Well, again, I didn't say teams should prefer to be a wild card.  I just said that going into the postseason healthy was more important than winning the division.

 

You said winning the division is pretty meaningless.  I don't think you're being misrepresented.

[jamesdean]

At the end of the day, just get to the post season.  It would be nice for them to win the division because of reasons already discussed but it guarantees nothing.  

[BSLRoseKatz]

Getting hot in the postseason certainly is important, but being hot coming into the postseason doesn't ensure you're hot once it starts.  Season-long winning percentage (i.e. being good) has a higher correlation to postseason success than September winning percentage (i.e. being hot).  That's among all teams as a whole, so you're going to find anecdotal examples of every possible variety.  But come the postseason, I'd rather be a 100-win team who went .500 in September than a 92-win team that went .666 September.  You never do really get to choose, though.

 

Neither the Rangers (15-14 w/ negative run differential in September) nor Diamondbacks (15-13) were hot entering the postseason last year, but got hot as soon as it began and rode that to the World Series.

 

Yeah the Rangers' 15-14 stretch included blowing a 2.5-game lead for the division after game 158 for them, they definitely weren't enjoying any sort of positive momentum or good vibes 

[85Knight]

Getting hot in the postseason certainly is important, but being hot coming into the postseason doesn't ensure you're hot once it starts. Season-long winning percentage (i.e. being good) has a higher correlation to postseason success than September winning percentage (i.e. being hot). That's among all teams as a whole, so you're going to find anecdotal examples of every possible variety. But come the postseason, I'd rather be a 100-win team who went .500 in September than a 92-win team that went .666 September. You never do really get to choose, though.

Neither the Rangers (15-14 w/ negative run differential in September) nor Diamondbacks (15-13) were hot entering the postseason last year, but got hot as soon as it began and rode that to the World Series.

Let me clarify. Only 9 World Series champions have ever had losing Septembers and none since the 2006 Cardinals.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Does Cowser need to be sent down?

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Does Cowser need to be sent down?

Traded while he still has some value

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Traded while he still has some value

What value? I think we end up keeping him and hoping he figures things out because right now he has almost no value. High potential but very little value.

[russsnyder]

Does Cowser need to be sent down?

I don't think He'll be sent down.