The wild card has brought new vigor to Yankees-dominated baseball. Is it time to add a second one?
“The wild-card spot in the playoffs hasn’t proved to be a significant disadvantage. In nine seasons since the first wild-card entry, three wild-card teams—the Marlins twice, in 1997 and again last year, and the Angels in 2002—have won the World Series. In other words, though wild cards make up 25 percent of the postseason contenders, they have won 33 percent of the Series since they became eligible.”
It is worth considering.
(Visited 32 times, 1 visits today)
Sparky September 27, 2004 at 4:48 pm
You didn’t understand the point I was trying to make.
I realize that it would be difficult to prove, but after watching a lot of Giants baseball over the past couple of years, I’d be willing to bet that, on average, more runs are scored in innings in which he is walked, then in innings when he hits a homerun.
As for your most recent gloating post on this topic, I’m actually not completely dissatisfied that the Giants will miss the playoffs. In the long run, I’m hoping that it will be better for them. Sabean and Magowan need to understand that they can’t continue to compete with Bonds and a bunch of castoffs. If they make the playoffs again, Sabean and Magowan won’t get that lesson. If they miss the playoffs maybe Sabean and Magowan will try a little harder to get better quality around Bonds.
Jack's Shack September 27, 2004 at 5:33 am
Absolutely. 37% means that he is incapable of making the big play- no homerun to excite the crowd and motivate the team. No RBIs and more time to make him work and try and wear him out.
Smart play.
From a pure fan perspective I hate it, I want to see him hit. But if I am trying to win it is a different story.
Sparky September 26, 2004 at 6:33 pm
So, it’s smart baseball to guarantee that a guy gets on base versus the 37% chance he has of getting on base when he isn’t walked?
The reality is that Bonds the legend has been created, not necessarily by him, but by other teams’ unwillingness to pitch to him.
Jack's Shack September 26, 2004 at 5:43 am
Not pitching to Bonds is smart baseball. If you want to win, you play the odds not engage in a stupid pitching contest.
It just proves that Tracy is not dumb enough to engage in stupid actions. And considering that we are dealing with Bay area folks it is important to make it simple, they aren’t smart enough to follow the complexities of the game. 😉
Sparky September 26, 2004 at 3:12 am
No, it’s not worth considering. It’s one of the fundamental differences between baseball and other major sports … the regular season has meaning. In football, basketball, and hocky, you can get into the playoffs with a mediocre record and, usually, every year, there are some subpar .500 teams that get in. It’s pathetic.
Four teams in each league is just fine. Don’t let the bottom-dwellers in. To make the playoffs, you have to earn it. I’ll admit that having one wild card has greatly expanded the excitement of September baseball for a number of teams of the years, but it’s good enough the way it is. The three divisional winners get in and the best team after those three make it. Why change it?
On to more important topics … your Dodgers’ unwillingness to pitch to Bonds in virtually every situation demonstrates that they don’t have the heart of champions. They’re lily-livered, pathetic examples of major league baseball players.
It’s absolutely ridiculous what is being done. When the Giants were in Milwaukee a week or two ago, they pitched to him. He finished the three game series with three hits, one RBI, and no HRs.