This ALCS is scratching my baseball itch
Posted by Andy on October 20, 2010
I have had a lot of problems with post-season baseball in the Wild Card era. The biggest one, though, has been the schedule.
In many recent years, there have been so many scheduled off-days in the playoff series that only 3 starting pitchers were used by each team. It's one thing if a manager chooses to start a pitcher on short rest, but it's another one if the games are scheduled such that only the top 3 starters are needed when going on normal rest.
It has always bothered me that the post-season was decided by games played under different circumstances than the regular season. Teams make the playoffs by virtue of winning the most games with a 5-man rotation. Why, then, can they win in the post-season without using their #4 and #5 starters at all? This sort of thing doesn't happen in any of other major sports. Playoff NFL teams can't feature their skill players and more in a playoff game than they are featured in a regular game. It's not as if a quarterback can somehow play more in the playoffs, nor would a team hand the ball off to its star running back on every down in the playoffs. In the NBA and NHL, playoff series have about the same number of scheduled off-days as the regular season (although the NBA has gotten away from that a bit in recent years, to much annoyance from some fans.)
This year, the ALCS has only 1 scheduled off-day, and it happened between Game 2 and Game 3. That means that neither team can use any starting pitcher more than twice unless they want to start multiple guys on short rest. Both the Yankees and Rangers threw their #4 starters last night and the Rangers once again victimized the Yankees' starter.
Despite not having Cliff Lee for Game 1 and going on to lose Game 1, the Rangers look like the better team in terms of pitching rotation and offense. There's no argument to be made that they have gone up 3 games to 1 due to some sort of quirk. The schedule has gone just like the regular season and they have simply outplayed the Yankees. Now they need to win only 1 game in the final 3. If the Yankees were to come back and win, they would do it by throwing 3 different starters and performing as a team. They cannot rely on just 1 or 2 hot pitching arms.
This is how it should be; the schedule should always be arranged to be similar to the regular season, giving the better team the better chance to win.
At this point, I would be happy to see either team win the series because I know whichever team wins has earned it.
October 20th, 2010 at 6:27 am
"This year, the ALCS has only 1 scheduled off-day, and it happened between Game 2 and Game 3. " I think that there's also a scheduled off-day after game 5, unless you mean that there will only be 1 because the series will only be 5 games. I think that this is the same schedule for the LCS that there has been for the last few years.
October 20th, 2010 at 7:03 am
The extra days between series and between games 4 and 5 of the first two rounds have only been in place for the last couple of years. F
rom 1995 to 2006, if a series went the maximum 5 or 7 games in the first two rounds you would never have more than one day off in a row the entire postseason. (Except for one of the four LDSs, which was scheduled to start on the Wednesday after the season ended.) That meant you could never use an entire three-man rotation on normal rest.
October 20th, 2010 at 7:41 am
In addition to in-series off days, something needs to be done about the huge breaks some teams have between series. Every postseason seems to feature at least 1 team who goes into a series having not played a game in 5 or more days (this year the Phillies had a 6 day break after the NLDS, and if the Rangers win tonight they'll have a long break, too). This not only allows that team to unnaturally reset their pitching rotation, but it can severely disrupt the rhythm of players who are used to playing 162 games with only an occasional off day (and one 3-day All Star Break). Also, it means that the World Series lasts on into November, which anyone who lives in the northern half of the country will tell you is NOT baseball season (though I understand the World Series is being made earlier for 2011).
October 20th, 2010 at 7:44 am
I felt like the original poster was correct. So I randomly selected a series to check on days off: the 2008 league championship series between Tampa Bay and Boston.
Games were played on: Fri Sat Mon Tue Thu Sat Sun
Ten days to play seven games. Three days off. At least one or two additional days off, compared to regular season play.
I suspect this pattern is repeated regularly over the last ten to fifteen years. Don't have time right now to pursue this; perhaps someone else could.
Traditionally, a seven game series would have been: Sat Sun Tue Wed Thu Sat Sun -or- Tue Wed Fri Sat Sun Tue Wed. Traditionally, an extra day off was already built in to the series.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:18 am
You're forgetting one thing about the postseason...$$$$$$$$$$$$. Baseball does as baseball is told when October arrives. I too long for a postseason that puts the final stresses on a long season with those last 3 winner-take-all series. It shouldn't take 4 weeks to play those final 19 (max) games...it's unnatural to baseball. Yet here we are.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:19 am
Oh Larry, I know full well WHY it is the way it is. But it doesn't make it right. Maybe MLB should think about the fact that if the post-season were played more like the regular-season, then fans would value regular-season games more and attendance and TV rating would go up.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:39 am
I agree, the playoff schedule in recent years has been a virtual joke --the NBA playoffs, particularly the first two rounds have also become a joke --the major TV networks have literally pre-planned these events in recent years so there's been nearly no games on Friday, Saturday and even Monday because of apparent low ratings and/or competition with other events.
As it should be, there is one less off day this year in both the LCS and WS, and therefore teams have to go to the 4th starter. From what I've heard, they are also going to trim a day off between series' next year --we'll see if it happens. Money, as always, was again the reason why the playoff schedule had become so disjointed in recent years. Unfortunately we now live in a corporatocracy. 🙂
October 20th, 2010 at 8:53 am
Baseball has a policy of not accelerating the series even if all the series in the previous round have been completed early (I believe that NHL and NBA do not follow this policy). This is done, as others have pointed out, in order to place the games on particular nights of the week in order to increase ratings, specifically playing the World Series on certain nights. It is also likely partially motivated by the same planning problems that MLB claims are the reason it cannot give the team with the better record the extra home game in the World Series. I have wondered at times in years that have featured multiple short series whether this policy has backfired in terms of the ratings because of diminished interest created by the long layoff. This hasn't been an issue much of late with the World Series as every year since 2002 has featured at least one LCS going 6 or more games with most years containing a 7 game series. But it has happened with short LDS.
October 20th, 2010 at 9:12 am
Thanks for this post. I, too, think that this year's format does better at pitting team against team, rather than pushing marquee matchups. In addition to seeing #4 starters, we also see #2 catchers getting starts. This is good for baseball.
October 20th, 2010 at 9:37 am
Great post, Andy. This completely sums up my own frustration, as I love seeing #4 pitchers as much as #1 pitchers; it's wonderful to find a diamond in the rough that otherwise wouldn't pitch with hot #1 and #2 pitchers and a protracted series. Now, we just need to go back to a 154-game season, extend the division series to 7 games, and end the WS well before Halloween. THEN all will be right in the world! 🙂
October 20th, 2010 at 10:26 am
I agree 100%. I say go with games 1-5 in a row, then a day off, then 6 or 7. A season requires 5 starters. So should the post season. Also, end the egregious breaks between series. And let record determine the home field in the WS. It's not ideal, but it's better than the crap we have now. And at least it has SOMETHING to do with the teams involved. MLB claims they can't do it logistically. Basketball and hockey both pull it off. MLB is no different.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:34 am
In fact, there are 2 off days in both the ALCS and NLCS schedule.
Both series will follow the standard format for a 7-game series that has been used for many years:
2 games, off day, 3 games, off day, 2 games.
Day by day for the ALCS:
Fri. / Sat. / [off] / Mon. / Tues. / Wed. / [off] / Fri. / Sat.
That aside, I agree with Andy's general point about the postseason schedules.
The worst aspect, to me, is the often lengthy time off between series.
The schedules for the LCS and WS should not be locked down in advance.
For the team(s) that played last in any given round, there should be no more than 1 off day before the next round.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:38 am
Somehow I misread the schedule for upcoming games--but in any event 2 off-days in a 7-game series doesn't bother me. As long as the #1 can't pitch 3 times unless he goes on short rest, I'm OK with it.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:44 am
John Kruk has suggested having 2 WC teams and they play 1 game to advance to the LCS. Play on Tuesday,a travel day and start the LCS on Thursday. I kinda like this idea. It would certainly add incentive to win the division and would shorten the season enough to finish in October. We could then keep the 162 game schedule that we're accustomed to. Not bad on any of those counts.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:57 am
Other than some teams very rarely being stacked 1-5, have 5th starters ever really started much in the playoffs? I can't remember 5th starters ever starting, but that might have more to do with most 5th starters being irrelevant (not very good that is), especially since there were 4-man rotations 40+ years ago. I wouldn't be in favor of playing games 1-5 in a row to get 5th starters a start. As long as we see 4th starters it's a big step in the right direction.
This is the first I remember in a while there being games consistently on Friday, Saturday, and Monday. Again, a step in the right direction. I do believe MLB is going to eliminate a day off between series' next year --I thought I had heard that that was going to actually happen. The games last week could have started on Thursday (NL) and Friday (AL) instead of Friday (AL) and Saturday (NL). This would be another positive step.
October 20th, 2010 at 11:42 am
BSK, I would rather see a team go with a three or four man rotation than with a fifth starter. yes, your way would be more "true" to the regular season. But what I love most about the playoffs is the fact that the baseball (and especially the pitching) is better than regular season baseball.
October 20th, 2010 at 11:56 am
Dean and Matt Y-
You bring up good points. From a "quality" standpoint, more 5th starters generally will mean a lesser product. Though we can certainly see riveting games started by poor pitchers, either because they have a better-than-typical day OR because we see the offenses battle it out. My approach would leave scheduling somewhat dependent on the prevailing trend at the time. Would we re-adjust the schedule if 6-man rotations became popular? Or if teams moved back to the 4-man rotation? That's definitely a flaw in my logic. Generally, it seems we are in agreement that the breaks not only hurt interest because of frequent and/or prolonged lulls, but also because of the feeling that playoff baseball is TOO different from the regular season, and what gets you there suddenly is not what is needed to win. I think 4 games in a row (or some other configuration that requires at least a 4 man rotation) is more than acceptable.
Matt Y, I do disagree with your comment about the "relevancy" of a 5th starter. While they are obviously not a primary cog of a team, and generally pitch less innings (because of being skipped during off days and/or effectiveness), they are still important to the success of a team. How many teams have struggled in the regular season because they couldn't fill out their rotation reliably? I do realize that there is something unappealing about a couple of crappy starters dueling for the WS. But we have crappy starters dueling for important games all the time.
October 20th, 2010 at 2:03 pm
I od agree that the basebalñl season needs to be shorter and the playoff s fromat amended.
That said, the yankess are down 3 to 1 bewcause their middle bullpen has been god awful......the last three games have gone from 2 or 3 run games to blowouts after the fifth inning.I also see that the Rangers have read the scouting report on the yankees...
October 20th, 2010 at 2:03 pm
Also, I hate the way the major professional and college sports think the weekends are bad times for big games. I realize that the perception is that they are competing with too much, but from what I have seen in reality, they are way off. I miss half the big games that are on week nights because of work and/or sleep. There is nothing I like more than saddling up to a bar on Friday or Saturday to watch a big game. Unfortunately, they're always on Tuesday nights. I realize that the ratings might indicate more viewers, but my guess is that there are more eyeballs on the screen on weekends. Maybe that is unique to my demographic (20-somethings), but I know my fiance is more likely to watch the game if it's on while we are out than to tune in after a long work day. I'm curious how representative my experience is.
October 20th, 2010 at 2:28 pm
I, too, have been thinking about this. While it was easy to go with 3 starters in the postseason (i.e. WS) in the days before divisional play, it seems the expansion of the playoffs over the years should make it more like the regular season, not less. At least bringing the 4th starter into play feels like a better representation of the team that played a 6 month regular season.
And the long delays between series are infuriating. It's no wonder fans tune out. By the time the LCS or WS gets started, the casual fan has forgotten about what happened in the round before. It's almost impossible to feed on the excitement from round to round.
BSK, I'm in my early 50's, but even so I like to saddle up to a bar (or my own fridge) to watch a game as well. I am much more likely to get together with friends on a weekend to watch a game when I don't need to worry about getitng my kid or myself to bed on time to get up the next day. And that shared comraderie is part of the enjoyment of the game. It's just not the same sitting around by myself wearing sweats and deciding if I dare watch one more inning, or if that will make the next work day that much more difficult.
October 20th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
if the post-season were played more like the regular season, then fans would value regular-season games more and attendance and TV rating would go up.
Andy, I don't follow this line of reasoning at all. As I see it, the casual fan watching the playoffs won't care one way or the other, and the more devoted fan will prize the post-season more because it more closely replicates the playing conditions of the regular season. I have trouble seeing the "valuing effect" working back into the regular season, even for passionate fans.
Am I missing a factor that you've taken into account?
October 20th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
KT, my thought is that if the more complete teams who earn the best regular-season records stand a better chance of winning the championship or at least moving deep into the playoffs, then fans will be more interested in following their teams on a daily basis.
If you were a Phillies fan in September when (despite me calling them "done" earlier) they had wrapped up a playoff berth pretty early on, who cared at all on days when the 4th and 5th starter were pitching? Everybody tuned in to see Roy, Roy, and Cole, but if the 4th and 5th starters mattered, people would tune in every day.
October 20th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
KT-
Additionally, the more "legitimate" the post-season is, the more legitimate the sport is. Would you watch 162 baseball games if the WS was decided by a coinflip? Probably not. As much as I love soccer, I struggle sometimes to watch it because the lack of modernization makes the results seem almost entirely random. At times, I think, "Why watch any of this, if the winner is going to be decided by a bunch of rules invented 100 years ago before we had digital clocks?" The more people think that the players and their interaction with the game itself determine the outcome, the more people will follow. When postseason success is dependent on getting the preferred schedule or whatever, people lose interest.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:42 pm
BSK @19
Even though the broadcasters and the advertisers can somewhat account for additional people watching games that are at a bar, they also realize that you are even less likely to watch and pay attention to the ads when you are at a bar than when you are at home. Ad rates are a lot more complicated than just total number of viewers - demographics of the viewers are heavily factored in as well.
Unfortunately the reality is that games aren't scheduled to maximize the number of people who can see them, but rather to maximize the revenue from the broadcasters. My perception is that in recent years (last 10-15 years) the major sports have made an effort to avoid scheduling things opposite each other so that they don't compete, which is another reason baseball might avoid the weekend during the postseason - to avoid competing with football.
October 21st, 2010 at 5:06 am
Evan-
Great point. I believe football also avoids Sunday/Monday night football games during the WS, if there is a game scheduled that night. Phooey.
October 21st, 2010 at 9:41 am
Sunday and Monday night football still take place during the WS-- Those are locked in every year. As for 5th starters pitching in playoffs and playing 5 days in row, I just don't see a good reason to do it that way --5th starters are relevant in the playoffs, they become your long-man, which can be an important role if one of your pitchers bomb. I like 4th starters pitching, it adds more strategy and it's more representable of your full team - I like a more moderate midpoint --4th starters should required in every 7 game format (unless your #1 is pitching on short rest), and two travel days when teams switch location....and a reasonable number of off days b/w series' would be good as well. I don't see any reason to drastically change the format with no regard to history --just give us something more representative of what we had before big money from TV networks started calling ALL the shots.
October 22nd, 2010 at 12:06 am
@26 Actually, Matt Y, IIRC the NFL didn't have a Sunday Night game last year at the beginning of the World Series. I may be misremembering though.
October 22nd, 2010 at 8:53 am
Good call #27, you're right. They did have a Monday Night Game but maybe the WS was off Monday Night last year.
2010 schedule I see no break.
October 22nd, 2010 at 10:04 pm
The NLCS is on Fox, which is, at least in the big cities, a traditionally broadcast network. The ALCS is on TBS, which is a traditionally cable network. I knew that I would be away from home staying in hotels during part of this year's LCS's. I was glad that the series I am more interested in is on the traditionally broadcast network, more readily available on hotel TV's. As it turned out, every hotel room I was in had TBS in its line-up, maybe because I was in the Southeastern US, where its roots are. But I did have to miss the Tuesday NLCS game because its afternoon scheduling coincided with my travel time (although I would not have enjoyed seeing the Phillies shut out).