|
|
Post by RaysGM (Paul) on Sept 8, 2017 8:19:27 GMT -5
Maybe I'm not reading the playoff rules right. Based on the ending Combined Standings, the Division Winners were the Rockies (leader), Astros(20 GB), Indians(28 GB) and Mets(78 GB). The WC teams are the Royals(36.5 GB) and Yankees(38 GB) in the AL, and the Diamondbacks(55.5 GB) and Dodgers(68.5 GB) in the NL. There are only two teams with better records than the Dodgers - the Rangers (49 GB) and the Mariners(65.5 GB). There is less than a 20 game difference between the last WC team (LAD) and the best team not to make the playoff (TEX). I agree that the NL East is the weakest division, but that happens in the MLB also - at times teams with less than a .500 percentage make the playoffs. The league has only been in existence for 2 years - why not wait another year or two and see how teams improve/get worse before changing the playoff rules. I know I haven't been in the playoffs yet (though I just missed it last year), so I can understand where TEX and SEA might be upset. But I don't see the necessity to change things just yet. IMHO.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 9:07:14 GMT -5
Why not just make it a category in the vote? Seems pretty straight forward to me. Its a democratic process, right? Because for those that don't want any change, your 2 options above are a lose/lose. Make what in a category in the vote? To clarify, in my previous post discussing the 2 options, I never said those are going to be the ONLY 2 options we're voting on. I was trying to figure out exactly what it is we're voting on. The vote would be whatever we choose as the 2nd option against keeping things the same... I'm not saying we vote between those 2 options I made up and ONLY those 2 options. It's of course a democratic process - not just changing the rules on my own haha. Just trying to make it clear that I wasn't saying it's being changed no matter what and y'all have to pick one of those 2 options. Yes, I agree we just need to vote on it. As a result, how about this for the 2 options to vote on? 1) Keep things the same 2) Change it so that the 4 wild card teams are the best teams, regardless of division (rather than having 2 from AL and 2 from NL). The 4 division winners would still get playoff seeds like they do now Does that sound good? If so, I'll post the poll when I get some time later this week or next week. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 9:10:23 GMT -5
And to respond to people's resistance to change, I totally get it. I typically don't like making changes to rules IF I think they're rules that make sense. The problem I have with this is that I don't see why we're splitting up 2 wild cards in each league. In a league as competitive as this, I'd like to reward the better teams rather than penalizing them because they happen to be in the wrong league and the wrong time. Even if we did change how the wild card teams work, it doesn't change how important it is to win your division.
|
|
|
|
Post by RockiesGM (Jarrod) on Sept 8, 2017 10:27:49 GMT -5
nm
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 10:37:30 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 11:35:11 GMT -5
And to respond to people's resistance to change, I totally get it. I typically don't like making changes to rules IF I think they're rules that make sense. The problem I have with this is that I don't see why we're splitting up 2 wild cards in each league. In a league as competitive as this, I'd like to reward the better teams rather than penalizing them because they happen to be in the wrong league and the wrong time. Even if we did change how the wild card teams work, it doesn't change how important it is to win your division. I personally dont mind change if its done correctly. As long as everyone has an option in the vote is all im saying. There were a few not represented in the vote as originally presented and I dont think that's fair. Kudos for adding it to the vote. You can never please everyone, but they should at least have a vote that takes their opinion into account and they in turn should accept the results of the vote. |
|
|
|
Post by RaysGM (Paul) on Sept 8, 2017 11:55:12 GMT -5
Maybe I'm not reading the playoff rules right. Based on the ending Combined Standings, the Division Winners were the Rockies (leader), Astros(20 GB), Indians(28 GB) and Mets(78 GB). The WC teams are the Royals(36.5 GB) and Yankees(38 GB) in the AL, and the Diamondbacks(55.5 GB) and Dodgers(68.5 GB) in the NL. There are only two teams with better records than the Dodgers - the Rangers (49 GB) and the Mariners(65.5 GB). There is less than a 20 game difference between the last WC team (LAD) and the best team not to make the playoff (TEX). I agree that the NL East is the weakest division, but that happens in the MLB also - at times teams with less than a .500 percentage make the playoffs. The league has only been in existence for 2 years - why not wait another year or two and see how teams improve/get worse before changing the playoff rules. I know I haven't been in the playoffs yet (though I just missed it last year), so I can understand where TEX and SEA might be upset. But I don't see the necessity to change things just yet. IMHO.
If the teams I listed as making the playoffs are correct (see previous post above), the only sub .500 team to make the playoffs are the Dodgers, at .497. The Mets are at .464, but they won their division. If you're suggesting that the 8 teams with the best record should be in the playoffs, then maybe we should just have one division. That way a division winner who doesn't have a top-10 winning percentage wouldn't make the playoffs (I am exaggerating, please don't think this is what I want). I just don't think our current situation is that unfair. There will be an ebb and flow with the teams each season. IMHO
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 12:11:29 GMT -5
And to respond to people's resistance to change, I totally get it. I typically don't like making changes to rules IF I think they're rules that make sense. The problem I have with this is that I don't see why we're splitting up 2 wild cards in each league. In a league as competitive as this, I'd like to reward the better teams rather than penalizing them because they happen to be in the wrong league and the wrong time. Even if we did change how the wild card teams work, it doesn't change how important it is to win your division. I personally dont mind change if its done correctly. As long as everyone has an option in the vote is all im saying. There were a few not represented in the vote as originally presented and I dont think that's fair. Kudos for adding it to the vote. You can never please everyone, but they should at least have a vote that takes their opinion into account and they in turn should accept the results of the vote. Yeah, totally agree. Again, I never intended for that post suggesting 2 options to mean those are the ONLY 2 options - that was just intended to figure out what the 2nd option should be when we vote (the other option being keep things as is). I would never push a vote and not include an option that others in the league want. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the post with the 2 options was NOT intended to be the options we vote on haha. We've always done things democratically in this league and that won't change. Just wanted to clarify again! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 12:14:47 GMT -5
Maybe I'm not reading the playoff rules right. Based on the ending Combined Standings, the Division Winners were the Rockies (leader), Astros(20 GB), Indians(28 GB) and Mets(78 GB). The WC teams are the Royals(36.5 GB) and Yankees(38 GB) in the AL, and the Diamondbacks(55.5 GB) and Dodgers(68.5 GB) in the NL. There are only two teams with better records than the Dodgers - the Rangers (49 GB) and the Mariners(65.5 GB). There is less than a 20 game difference between the last WC team (LAD) and the best team not to make the playoff (TEX). I agree that the NL East is the weakest division, but that happens in the MLB also - at times teams with less than a .500 percentage make the playoffs. The league has only been in existence for 2 years - why not wait another year or two and see how teams improve/get worse before changing the playoff rules. I know I haven't been in the playoffs yet (though I just missed it last year), so I can understand where TEX and SEA might be upset. But I don't see the necessity to change things just yet. IMHO. If the teams I listed as making the playoffs are correct (see previous post above), the only sub .500 team to make the playoffs are the Dodgers, at .497. The Mets are at .464, but they won their division. If you're suggesting that the 8 teams with the best record should be in the playoffs, then maybe we should just have one division. That way a division winner who doesn't have a top-10 winning percentage wouldn't make the playoffs (I am exaggerating, please don't think this is what I want). I just don't think our current situation is that unfair. There will be an ebb and flow with the teams each season. IMHO I get what you're saying Paul, but to be fair, I never suggested we have the top 8 teams make playoffs. I totally agree that if we did that, there is no point to divisions (or even AL and NL). All I suggested is that we realign divisions some (which no one really wanted so that's fine) and/or we change how the wild card teams work. I think some people are thinking that the latter change is a lot bigger than it is. Divisions would still mean something AND we'd be doing a better job of making things more fair. I'm really confused as to how making a slight change to ensure the wild card teams are the ACTUAL 4 best teams (other than division winners) makes things less fair... but to each his own. There will always be an ebb and flow, but why not make things more fair for all teams involved? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 12:21:13 GMT -5
By the way, I'm not just saying that the part where 2 wild card teams have to come from each league is a bad rule or unfair. Another HUGE aspect to it is how unbalanced the playoffs are in each league since they're separated by league (until the championship). This year, we have 4 of the best 5 teams in the entire 20 team fantasy league in the AL... I'd have to go back to look, but I believe it was the same way last season as well. It makes way more sense to me to have the playoffs merged between leagues so that being a good team in the regular season actually means something (e.g. you get to play a lower seed rather than being stuck in a super stacked AL). Right now, 4 of the best 5 teams in the entire league are rewarded by having to battle it out against each other rather than getting to play a lower seeded team. And before someone says there will be ebb and flows, that doesn't make merging the playoffs (e.g. AL teams can play NL teams in first couple rounds) less fair - it's still a WAY more fair way to determine a champion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 12:32:47 GMT -5
By the way, I'm not just saying that the part where 2 wild card teams have to come from each league is a bad rule or unfair. Another HUGE aspect to it is how unbalanced the playoffs are in each league since they're separated by league (until the championship). This year, we have 4 of the best 5 teams in the entire 20 team fantasy league in the AL... I'd have to go back to look, but I believe it was the same way last season as well. It makes way more sense to me to have the playoffs merged between leagues so that being a good team in the regular season actually means something (e.g. you get to play a lower seed rather than being stuck in a super stacked AL). Right now, 4 of the best 5 teams in the entire league are rewarded by having to battle it out against each other rather than getting to play a lower seeded team. And before someone says there will be ebb and flows, that doesn't make merging the playoffs (e.g. AL teams can play NL teams in first couple rounds) less fair - it's still a WAY more fair way to determine a champion. Seattle still misses the playoffs under the proposal of cross league wild cards. Just so thats out there once you guys put this up for a vote. |
|
|
|
Post by RaysGM (Paul) on Sept 8, 2017 12:39:32 GMT -5
Ryan, I understand what you are saying also. It just seemed like guys were suggesting that the playoffs are WAY out of wack, and I just didn't agree with that. I understand that Baltimore is going to the NL East for  ? That may help. If the majority wanted to make the WCs the top 4 teams regardless of division, I would go along with it. I just think we should give it some time, since it's only been two years. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 12:45:39 GMT -5
By the way, I'm not just saying that the part where 2 wild card teams have to come from each league is a bad rule or unfair. Another HUGE aspect to it is how unbalanced the playoffs are in each league since they're separated by league (until the championship). This year, we have 4 of the best 5 teams in the entire 20 team fantasy league in the AL... I'd have to go back to look, but I believe it was the same way last season as well. It makes way more sense to me to have the playoffs merged between leagues so that being a good team in the regular season actually means something (e.g. you get to play a lower seed rather than being stuck in a super stacked AL). Right now, 4 of the best 5 teams in the entire league are rewarded by having to battle it out against each other rather than getting to play a lower seeded team. And before someone says there will be ebb and flows, that doesn't make merging the playoffs (e.g. AL teams can play NL teams in first couple rounds) less fair - it's still a WAY more fair way to determine a champion. Seattle still misses the playoffs under the proposal of cross league wild cards. Just so thats out there once you guys put this up for a vote. But 4 of the top 5 teams in the entire league still have to battle it out vs each other rather than playing lower seeds... that was the point of my message that you quoted. I think a team who finishes 48.5 games above another team (that's SIGNIFICANTLY better) deserves to get a better 1st round playoff matchup... I don't really think that's a crazy opinion haha. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 12:49:01 GMT -5
Ryan, I understand what you are saying also. It just seemed like guys were suggesting that the playoffs are WAY out of wack, and I just didn't agree with that. I understand that Baltimore is going to the NL East for ? That may help. If the majority wanted to make the WCs the top 4 teams regardless of division, I would go along with it. I just think we should give it some time, since it's only been two years. I know it has only been 2 years, but I guess I'm just not really understanding why separating playoffs by league and doing 2 wild cards from each league is a better option... the only real reasons I've heard for keeping the playoffs as is and not changing how wild cards work (and subsequently making it to where AL teams can play NL teams in the 1st 2 rounds of playoffs) is because that's just how we set it up. Just because it was set up that way when the rules were officially written a couple years ago doesn't make it better - it's still way, way less fair than the other option. I guess I'd just like to hear the logic behind keeping playoffs separated by league (AL and NL) other than that's just how it is so let's keep it that way. I hope that makes sense... I may be rambling now haha |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 12:49:57 GMT -5
But 4 of the top 5 teams in the entire league still have to battle it out vs each other rather than playing lower seeds... that was the point of my message that you quoted. I think a team who finishes 48.5 games above another team (that's SIGNIFICANTLY better) deserves to get a better 1st round playoff matchup... I don't really think that's a crazy opinion haha. Well everyone apparently has their side picked. Put it up for vote and if it passes im good with it. I really don't like either option to be honest, so if i had to pick, I'm voting no. Full disclosure. |
|
? That may help. If the majority wanted to make the WCs the top 4 teams regardless of division, I would go along with it. I just think we should give it some time, since it's only been two years.