THE BOOK cover
The Unwritten Book is Finally Written!
An in-depth analysis of: The sacrifice bunt, batter/pitcher matchups, the intentional base on balls, optimizing a batting lineup, hot and cold streaks, clutch performance, platooning strategies, and much more.
Read Excerpts & Customer Reviews

Buy The Book from Amazon


SABR101 required reading if you enter this site. Check out the Sabermetric Wiki. And interesting baseball books.
MOST RECENT ARTICLES
MAIL : You ask | We say

Advanced


THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

<< Back to main

Monday, March 08, 2010

Play-ins for the playoffs

By Tangotiger, 11:21 AM

I like the idea for NBA:

How would it work? A couple of different variations are possible, but the basic idea is to guarantee the first seven playoff spots to the teams with the best records, and then leave spot No. 8 up for grabs among the remaining clubs. No. 8 would play No. 15; No. 9 would play No. 14; No. 10 would play No. 13; and No. 11 and would play No. 12. The winners would face off in the semis the next day and the losers would go home. Then the two semifinal winners would meet for a postseason slot. As for locations, a number of options are on the table.

I love the whole craziness about getting the last playoff spot.  Hollinger proposes knocking #15 out so that the #8 gets a bye in the first round of the elimination mini-tournament.

The NFL already has a play-in, but because of the demands of football, it can never work beyond one-week.  Baseball though could easily implement this.  The four best non-division winners meet, with #4 v #7 and #5 v #6.  And then the two winners play one game to be the fourth team in the playoffs.  You can even make it just 5 v 6 will play against #4.  And the winner moves to the playoffs.  It really depletes the starting pitchers so when the division winners meet the play-in team, there’s a definite advantage for the best team in the league.

We ALL love Game #163 in MLB.  Get more of them in there.  That it comes at the expense of a non-division winner is a bonus.


#1    Xeifrank      (see all posts) 2010/03/08 (Mon) @ 13:39

It would have to be done in a way that did not add any length to the post-season.  One game playoffs are crapshoots and I’m sure the Red Sox would’ve loved to have played in two of them against teams they had nearly 10 wins more than. 

I think instead of finding ways to lengthen the season, we should be looking at ways to shorten it, or end it earlier so we aren’t having the most important (World Series, LCS) parts of the season being effected by cold weather.
vr, Xei


#2    Rally      (see all posts) 2010/03/08 (Mon) @ 13:55

For the NBA I like this.  It should be accompanied by shortening the regular season, which I have lost all ability to care about.  The Cavaliers have essentially been playing an 82 game warmup for their real season.


#3    Sky      (see all posts) 2010/03/08 (Mon) @ 14:24

Initial thoughts:

I don’t like just anyone having a chance to make the playoffs/win the championship—it makes the regular season less important (see: NCAA basketball).

Tango’s show that 162 games of baseball says as much about team quality as 32 basketball games.  So any mediocre (or bad) team who makes the MLB post-season has a reasonable chance of winning the World Series.  We’ve already had an uproar over the 82-win Cardinal team winning the WS (which cheapens it, in my opinion).

If anything I’d advocate picking 2 WC teams who played a one game playoff immediately before the first round of the playoffs.  Would keep things exciting and give the #1 seed a small advantage.

Or maybe (better for NBA), include any team within X games of the last playoff spot in a mini-playoff.


#4    Xeifrank      (see all posts) 2010/03/08 (Mon) @ 14:30

#2. Boise St. played a meaningless 14 game schedule in College football this year.  And they say that the best thing about the BCS is that it makes the regular season more important.  In otherwords, I’m with you on the NBA regular season being too long.  Some bean counter has probably determined that it is the best way for each team to make money.  If you cut the NBA season short by X games, that is X less games the Nets, Knicks and Clippers have to earn money from ticket sales.  Oh wait, what ticket sales. smile
vr, Xei


#5          (see all posts) 2010/03/08 (Mon) @ 15:37

I actually like this idea for the NHL… not to determine the playoff rounds, but as a “play for your draft pick” tournament.  Teams 17-30 get into two pools of seven teams and play a double-round robin; top four teams from each pool go into a single three-round bracket, best-of-three.  Winner gets first overall pick. 

The comparative talent and short rounds are enough to give the worst teams a fighting chance.  At the very least, that’s six extra home games’ worth of revenue for clubs that likely really need it.

There would be issues with traded picks, such as Toronto and Boston this year.  You obviously wouldn’t want the Leafs playing for the Bruins’ draft position.  Any traded picks could be slotted exclusively on records; the team in question would have to sit out the Draft Tournament, though.  It would hurt to lose the six (plus) games of revenue but it would make those picks more valuable and possibly increase the return on them, thus improving the team more quickly - kind of the whole point.


#6    edk      (see all posts) 2010/03/08 (Mon) @ 23:42

NBA fan piping up to say that if the regular season lasted 9 months and the playoffs were played over the final 3 months, I would watch it. I never understood how fans could complain that the season is too long.


#7          (see all posts) 2010/03/09 (Tue) @ 12:14

#5 I’m having trouble conceptualizing your draft pick idea.  If your goal with the draft is to redistribute talent to bad teams, then your idea doesn’t work.  The worst of the worst teams have next to no shot at the earliest picks.

Since you’ve created a playoff for bad teams (more games, more fans, etc) you’ve created an incentive for decent teams to finish 17th rather than 15th.  They get the benefit of post-season revenue (even if the tickets are cheaper) and a chance to get that extra $30 mil in franchise value from signing the next Sydney Crosby.  Since they’d likely be knocked out in the first round of the normal playoffs, they could probably earn more money by going to the finals of the draft pick playoffs.

Also, I’m pretty sure there’d be a lot of pissed off players if they know they’re risking injury just for a draft pick.


Page 1 of 1 pages


Name (required)
E-Mail (optional; WILL be published)
Website (optional)

<< Back to main


Latest...

COMMENTS

Feb 11 23:23
Reader Mail of the Day: Why do we need X years of fielding data?  And what about outliers?

Feb 11 22:49
Clutch analogy

Feb 11 22:08
Who is Jeremy Lin?

Feb 11 20:11
Fighting leads to goals?

Feb 11 19:55
Why do players get crappy caps?

Feb 11 19:12
Hero of the month: Brittney Baxter

Feb 11 17:59
MGL: Today on Clubhouse Confidential

Feb 11 10:29
Dwight Evans

Feb 11 02:12
Performance through the ages

Feb 10 23:01
For Your Soul