Two years ago, I wrote a post on the old “Below the Belt” Sports Blog. In light of the 93-win Nationals dispatching of the 106-win Dodgers in the NLDS, I felt that it was appropriate for me to re-release this post, with a few minor alterations to modernize the piece, on my new blog. It is a busy time in my life, so you will have to accept that I am not going to take the time to put pictures in this post. That said, I feel that, since the Dodgers/Nats series represented the 7th time in 16 Division Series matchups in the Wild-Card-Game era (the only era in which the #1 seed in each league has been guaranteed to face the Wild Card in the Division Series) that the Wild Card emerged victorious; it was time for this post to see the light of day once more. If Elton John could make hits out of three different versions of “Candle in the Wind” in three different decades, I can make this post happen again. Thus, here it goes. Enjoy!
Change #1: The MLB season should be cut to 144 games.
There is only one good reason to have a 162-game season. That reason is, “We have no playoffs, just a World Series. Therefore, we want a big enough sample size to ensure that the best AL team and the best NL team make the World Series.” That reason did exist from 1961 through 1968. I will add that, prior to 1961, there were also no playoffs, just a World Series; but the season was 154 games long. Frankly, I would personally love to eliminate divisions and return to the 1961-1968 “162 games, no playoffs” format, but I realize that this country is no longer equipped to handle a scenario in which half the league is eliminated from World Series contention by Memorial Day. Therefore, I am not proposing that. Moving on…
Since 1968, MLB has expanded its playoff three times:
1969 – NL and AL were split into two divisions apiece, and the ALCS/NLCS round of playoffs was born.
1994 – NL and AL were split into three divisions apiece, and the ALDS/NLDS (with one Wild Card per league) round of playoffs was born.
2012 – NL and AL each added a second Wild Card team and a Wild Card play-in game.
In my opinion, MLB and the MLBPA dropped the ball on one major thing with these three playoff expansions: Each expansion of playoffs should have come with a decrease in the length of the regular season. Again, the one good reason to have a 162-game season is to ensure that the best team has enough games to rise to the top of its respective league. However, as soon as a playoff system was created in 1969, that concept was gone. In baseball, the underdog typically has a reasonable chance to beat the favorite in any series. As far back as in 1973, Reds manager Sparky Anderson was quoted stating his displeasure that the Mets (82-79) were even given the opportunity to defeat the Reds (99-63). He felt that the Reds deserved to play in the World Series, as a result of having a far-superior record over 162 games. I don’t blame him. After all, for all of baseball history until a few years prior to that, Sparky’s Reds would have been in the World Series. I can’t find Sparky’s exact quote, but I know that I have heard it.
Anyway, I am glad the 1973 Mets beat the Reds. Without that, Tug McGraw’s “Ya Gotta Believe!” likely would not have become one of the Mets’ mottos, and 1973-Mets-Manager Yogi Berra’s “It ain’t over ‘til it’s over” would be less famous. Meanwhile, Sparky Anderson’s anger unintentionally brought up the reason why I favor a shorter MLB regular season. When MLB decided that playoff series – much more random than a long season – would determine who plays in the World Series, the need to play 162 games disappeared. Unfortunately, when MLB started having playoffs before the World Series, I had not been born yet, so I could not inform anyone of my views. Enough though about stuff from 46-50 years ago. Let’s bring this discussion to the modern era. Let’s look at the regular-season finishes of the World Series participants of the Wild Card era (1995 – 2018: 24 seasons). The chart below shows how many World Series participants finished with the best record, second-best record, third-best record, etc. in their leagues.
|
National League
|
|
American League
|
|
|
Best Record
|
7 teams
|
Best
|
10.5 teams
|
|
2nd-Best Record
|
5 teams
|
2nd
|
6.5 teams
|
|
3rd-Best Record
|
5.5 teams
|
3rd
|
4 teams
|
|
4th-Best Record
|
4 teams
|
4th
|
2 teams
|
|
5th-Best Record
|
2.5 teams
|
5th
|
1 team
|
|
6th-Best Record
|
0 teams
|
6th
|
1 team
|
*If a team finished in a tie between two places, I counted that as “half a team” for each place.
Notice that only 7 of 24 NL regular-season leaders have made the World Series and that only 12 of the 24 NL World Series teams have even finished with a top-two record in the league. (Note: In 2019, the NL World Series participant will have had either the 3rd- or 4th-best NL record.) In the AL, regular-season champs have fared better, with 10.5 (including the 1998, 1999, 2003, and 2009 Yankees) of 24 reaching the Fall Classic. In the AL, 17 of the 24 years have seen top-two finishers reached the World Series. (Note: In 2019, one of the top two AL finishers will again reach the World Series.)
That all said, when you throw the NL and AL together, a mere 17.5 of 48 World Series participants (roughly 36.4%) have been AL or NL regular-season champs, and 29 of 48 (60.4%) have finished in the top two of their respective leagues.
Why am I harping on this? I harp because you don’t need to play 162 games if it is still 40% likely that someone who finished with the 3rd-best-or-worse record in your league is going to make the World Series!!!
Let’s now talk about the 2017 season. In mid-August of that season, what did we know? We knew that the Nationals, Cubs, Dodgers, Indians, and Astros were going to win their divisions. We knew that the Red Sox and Yankees would make the playoffs, with the Red Sox more likely winning the division. We knew that the Diamondbacks would be an NL Wild Card. We knew that the Rockies would likely win the Wild Card. The only thing that was greatly up for grabs was the second AL Wild Card. In mid-August, the entire AL was seemingly alive for the race. By mid-September, the race has been whittled down to just the Twins and Angels, a tight battle that did not exactly captivate the nation during the first month of the NFL season.
Yes, the Indians’ winning streak that season was extremely exciting. Yes, it was interesting to see the Dodgers lose 14 of 15 after winning of 14 of 15 earlier in the year. Yes, August and September were an exciting time for fans of all playoff and potential playoff teams. However, everyone was ready for the playoffs by early September. By that point, we had already known for a few months who the true contenders were. I felt like the Yankees had been at least 3 games up in the Wild Card and at least 3 games back in the division for months.
We really need a 144-game season. We should have really eliminated 6 regular-season games each time a playoff round was added, but let’s make up for lost time and eliminate 18 games now (OK, in 2020).
With a 144-game season, the MLB regular season could end two weeks earlier than normal, moving from Week 4 to Week 2 of the NFL season, and start a week later (More like April 5-6, instead of the last few days of March). This would be great for several reasons:
1 1) The World Series would now end in early-to-mid-October,
as it should.
2 2) There would be fewer cold-weather games in the
beginning of the season.
3 3) Currently, fans of bad teams check out around
Labor Day. Four weeks later, when the playoffs
start, these fans are long gone.
However, with only two weeks between Labor Day and the playoffs, some of
those fans might stick around to watch more of the postseason.
4 4) With the regular season ending sooner, perhaps
demand would more generally increase for watching playoff games. Remember that the addition of the Division
Series more or less coincided with lower ratings for all playoff rounds and the
World Series. While I cannot guarantee
causation for this correlation, I can guarantee that when the supply of a
product goes up, the value of one unit of the product goes down. Therefore, I am going to assume at least some
causation. Now, it’s time to turn things
around. By decreasing the supply of
regular-season games, hopefully the value of postseason games increases.
5 5) In an era in which both it is miraculous to have any
pitcher avoid injury, and also some teams regularly make us suffer through "bullpen games"; 18 fewer games and thus 18 fewer pitcher starts seems
like a good thing.
6) With players not taking amphetamines and
theoretically not using PEDs, the 162-game season takes a greater toll on
players than it did in previous days.
With 18 fewer games, the quality of play would likely improve.
Now that I have mentioned the pros of shortening the season, please allow me to refute some counterarguments. Naturally, the first retort to a “let’s shorten the season” proposal is that teams would lose money. Of course; I realize that, if teams are going to lose profit, my idea will not happen. However, are we really sure that teams would overall lose profit under my plan? Bad teams play in front of empty stadiums all September long. Do teams really profit from these games? There are a lot of costs in running a stadium, and I don’t believe that revenue exceeds costs if the stadium is 15% full.
Maybe I’m wrong. If I am, here’s another thought. With 9 fewer home games (81 down to 72) per team, each team can charge a little bit more per ticket. Each game will be a bit more in demand than with the current schedule, and the same goes for TV. Somebody should do a study as to whether or not ratings would go up per game if there were fewer of them. If ratings were to rise, MLB teams could theoretically maintain the same level of ad revenue as they currently receive. After all, we know the following things:
1)
Football is the ratings king because it has so
few games.
2)
The NHL and NBA did well with ratings and ticket
prices during their lockout-shortened seasons.
3)
MLB would never do a 200-game regular season,
because that would be considered unprofitable (for many of the reasons
mentioned earlier – demand, injuries, etc. – and quality of play). Plus, as I said earlier, the quality of play
should be greater with fewer games. Therefore,
if we have established that a sport with 16-game seasons is king, that a
200-game season would be unprofitable, and that fewer games means greater
quality; are we really certain that a 144-game season would be less profitable
than a 162-game season? I am not. Just because we have done 162 games for the past six decades does not mean it is the optimal number of games.
To
summarize my main point, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. If we are going to spend the summer of 2006
getting pumped for the Subway Series, only to end up with St. Louis/Detroit….if
we are going to spend the summer of 2002 getting psyched for the Braves and the
Moneyball A’s in the Fall Classic, only to end up with Angels/Giants….and if we
are going to spend the summer of 2014 looking forward to a Trout/Harper Fall
Classic, only to get a dual-Wild-Card SF/KC battle; then let’s at least have 18
fewer games and keep more fans watching the playoffs through the disappointing
WS matchup.
Change #2: Go back to having one Wild
Card. Change the Division Series to
Best-of-7. Give the #1 seed 5 home games
against the Wild Card.
When
I first heard the proposal of the second Wild Card and the Wild Card game back
in 2011, I hated it. Eight years later,
I still hate it. As you have probably
gathered by now, I don’t exactly love that a sport that plays so many games
allows so many teams into its playoffs. The
first Wild Card has always seemed reasonable to me, given that there are many
times when a league’s second-best team has the misfortune of playing in the same
division as the top team in the league.
However, in my opinion, the second Wild Card was a bridge too far. For every 2015 Cubs (97 wins), there are a
whole bunch of sub-90-win teams – like the 2014 Giants - earning those second
Wild Card spots.
Having
a one-game playoff in baseball is just stupid.
Baseball is the ultimate marathon, and then you have a one-game
playoff? It does not feel right. Some people advocate making the Wild-Card
Round a “Best-of-3”, but that would not be good either. In baseball, the rust factor usually
outweighs the rest factor. In the NHL or
NBA, it is typically an advantage to get extra rest before a series. This is not so in MLB. Just look for example at the 2006 Tigers,
2007 Rockies, 2012 Tigers, and 2015 Mets.
All of these teams dominated the LCS, only to look rusty in the World
Series after long layoffs.
Why
did baseball add a second Wild Card? One
reason was to keep teams “in the race” longer, but the main cited reason was to
increase the value of winning the division.
I have always liked that rationale.
I didn’t like that, in 2010 (in the one-Wild Card era), the Yankees and Rays, both seemed to want
the Wild Card, not the division crown. Thus, re-establishing incentive to win the division was a good thing. That is why I would have and still would
eliminate the Wild-Card game, extend the Division Series to Best-of-7, and give
the #1 seed home games in Games 1-2 and 5-7 in the Division Series. Also, the #1 seed would automatically face the Wild Card in the Division Series, which was not the case before 2011. Back then, teams from the same division could not face each other in the Division Series.
Anyway, my plan accomplishes the goals of the modern Wild-Card
Game but in a more satisfactory way:
1) There is still a clear benefit to winning the
division over the Wild Card, as a team with only 2 home games is at a major
disadvantage.
2 2)The Best-of-7 aspect actually likely adds more
playoff games and more revenue than just having the two Wild-Card games
themselves.
3
3) I’ve always felt a Best-of-5 is too short for a
baseball series, as teams can often get by with two great pitchers. The Best-of-7 tests a team’s depth. Plus, if a #1 or #2 seed loses Game 1 in a
Best-of-5, the team already feels its back is much more against the wall than
in a Best-of-7. The first playoff round should be kinder to teams who have dominated for six months.
4
4) You don’t have the potential scenario in which a mediocre second Wild Card
team needs to win only one game to upend a superior team. I hate the Yankees to an unhealthy degree,
but having the Twins in the 2017 ALDS because they won one Wild-Card Game against
the far-superior Yankees is just not how baseball is meant to be. I root hard
against the Yankees nearly all the time because I hate them, but I rooted for
them in the 2017 Wild-Card Game to satisfy the baseball purist in me.
Meanwhile,
some might counter my anti-second-Wild-Card logic by saying that more teams would
be out of playoff contention earlier.
While this is true, I don’t think it would be too drastic a change. More years than not, the two Wild Card teams are
close enough in record through at least mid-August that there is not a huge impact. That was certainly the case in 2019 as the
Mets chased the Nationals and Brewers in August and September. Plus, fans of many teams don’t typically even
get that excited when chasing the second Wild Card because their teams usually
aren’t that good. If you are chasing the
second Wild Card, you are likely just a few games over .500, if that, and fans
can spot mediocrity. For example, 2017 Angels
fans were not showing up in droves because of a chance at the second Wild Card.
So
there you have it. Rob Manfred, let’s drop down to 144 games and change the
playoff format.
PS I was going to add a whole thing on how the
NBA and NHL should also cut back from 82 games (6 months) to 66 games since
over half of each league makes the playoffs, but this post is already long
enough. That said, I do advocate those
changes as well, for reasons analogous to those listed for baseball.
No comments:
Post a Comment