SI.com: Why the O's Post Season Dream is all but Impossible

[DrungoHazewood]

.

Imagine what it would be like if the standings were keep according to the Pythagorean formula instead of W-L record ???

Players would be stealing bases when the team was up by a score of 13-2 in the 8th inning.

Teams would celebrate one-run losses because they won 2 blowout games earlier in the week, which would far outweigh a silly little one-run loss. If the Orioles were having a good pythagorean year, Jimmy Johnson and Matt Wieters would be smiling and shaking hands when the Orioles lost by a score of 4-3. Nick Markakis, Adam Jones, and Lew Ford would be doing the outfield jump after a 5-4 loss.

Can you imagine what it would be like if someone took the Pythagorean theorem as a rule of thumb and a pretty fair predictor of coming games, rather than an affront to decency, morality, and the American Way?

Man. That would be more fun that Division I-A college football voting for their champions and voting for which teams get to play for a championship.

You gotta come up with some way of figuring out the champions, or even who gets in a playoff, when you have a league with 120 teams that plays 12 games a year. If you don't have some kind of voting or weighting system then you're just assuming the champion of the SE South Dakota Conference who went 12-0 is the same as, or better than, the University of Florida.

[OFFNY]

You gotta come up with some way of figuring out the champions, or even who gets in a playoff, when you have a league with 120 teams that plays 12 games a year. If you don't have some kind of voting or weighting system then you're just assuming the champion of the SE South Dakota Conference who went 12-0 is the same as, or better than, the University of Florida.

Yes, of course you do. But Divison I-AA, Division II, and Divsision III all have a 16-team playoff, which is what Division I-A football should have always had, and never has. College basketball has a 68-team playoff for 300-plus teams, and although every year there are complaints about teams being "snubbed", those complaints and critiques pale in comparison to the ludicrous and unjust system of Division I-A football. And they choose to continue to do what they do. The 4-team playoff that will go into effect is only slightly better than the BCS, which was only slightly better than the previous system .......... which was horrible in the first place. Making slight improvements every 20 years or so isn't going to cut it if you are trying to establish your product as having a legitimate playoff system, and subsequent crowning of your champion.

[weams]

I mean, if I went 'round saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!

I had forgotten about this.

I think I will adapt it in retrospective of my life, as my ongoing motto.

[OFFNY]

Yes, of course you do. But Divison I-AA, Division II, and Divsision III all have a 16-team playoff, which is what Division I-A football should have always had, and never has. College basketball has a 68-team playoff for 300-plus teams, and although every year there are complaints about teams being "snubbed", those complaints and critiques pale in comparison to the ludicrous and unjust system of Division I-A football. And they choose to continue to do what they do. The 4-team playoff that will go into effect is only slightly better than the BCS, which was only slightly better than the previous system .......... which was horrible in the first place. Making slight improvements every 20 years or so isn't going to cut it if you are trying to establish your product as having a legitimate playoff system, and subsequent crowning of your champion.

EDIT: Diivsion I-AA, Divsion II, and Division III football now have 20, 24, and 32 team playoffs, respectively.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Championships/Postseason+Football/Overview

My bad. Still, the point remains the same, as the expanding of teams in their playoffs would only (if anything) undermine the ridiculous Division I-A football system even more.

[OFFNY]

Can you imagine what it would be like if someone took the Pythagorean theorem as a rule of thumb and a pretty fair predictor of coming games, rather than an affront to decency, morality, and the American Way?

Yes, I can imagine that. And I still think it's hilarious to imagine what it would be like if that were the determining factor in the standings, and seeing teams celebrating close losses, regardless of what any of it meant to decency, morality, and the American Way.

[Saintbird]

Sure! The longer we're seen as the underdog the better. I don't really care about what SI says, only the scoreboard at the end of the game, because THAT'S how teams make the playoffs. Not by analysts predictions.

[OFFNY]

Sure! The longer we're seen as the underdog the better. I don't really care about what SI says, only the scoreboard at the end of the game, because THAT'S how teams make the playoffs. Not by analysts predictions.

I think that that is probably true. The players are professionals, but they are human, too. They are aware of the schnide that they are on in regard to breaking the streak of 14 consecutive losing seasons, and even though they would probably say that they don't think about it much (if at all), I'm sure that they occasionally do. So perhaps for this season, maybe it's just best that everyone expects them to completely fold, whether it be using the Pythagorean formula, or if it's just the opinions of the baseball "experts."

As a fan, no matter how well we happen to be playing over a certain time period, that number 82 can't appear in the left-hand column of the standings soon enough.

[Flash- bd]

Can you imagine what it would be like if someone took the Pythagorean theorem as a rule of thumb and a pretty fair predictor of coming games, rather than an affront to decency, morality, and the American Way?

You gotta come up with some way of figuring out the champions, or even who gets in a playoff, when you have a league with 120 teams that plays 12 games a year. If you don't have some kind of voting or weighting system then you're just assuming the champion of the SE South Dakota Conference who went 12-0 is the same as, or better than, the University of Florida.

Funny thing is I actually like pythag RS/RA as a playoff decider, anyways. The baseball season is long enough that justice is usually done--hence pythag outliers like us only occurring once every (big) handful of years--but let's face it, the current playoff format does a horrible job of deciding the champion.

I suggested a 2 game playoff to decide the 4/5 WC game, in which 18 innings are played (9 one day, 9 the other) to determine an aggregate winner (much like how it's done in the Champions League) and if things are tired on aggregate after the second 9 innings than you go to extra innings.

A similar model could be adopted in the DS and WS; 5 game series (3 at home for the higher seeded team, 2 away so to give them a reward for their season achievements) and the aggregate winner of the 5 games advances/wins, and if it's tied after 5 games you could play another 9 innings in a tie-breaking 6th. It would w/o a doubt in my mind do a better job of making the best team the winner without much (if any) drama lost. But as you note, it's an affront to the American Way.

[OFFNY]

Funny thing is I actually like pythag RS/RA as a playoff decider, anyways. The baseball season is long enough that justice is usually done--hence pythag outliers like us only occurring once every (big) handful of years--but let's face it, the current playoff format does a horrible job of deciding the champion.

I suggested a 2 game playoff to decide the 4/5 WC game, in which 18 innings are played (9 one day, 9 the other) to determine an aggregate winner (much like how it's done in the Champions League) and if things are tired on aggregate after the second 9 innings than you go to extra innings.

A similar model could be adopted in the DS and WS; 5 game series (3 at home for the higher seeded team, 2 away so to give them a reward for their season achievements) and the aggregate winner of the 5 games advances/wins, and if it's tied after 5 games you could play another 9 innings in a tie-breaking 6th. It would w/o a doubt in my mind do a better job of making the best team the winner without much (if any) drama lost. But as you note, it's an affront to the American Way.

Sometimes I get very insecure about defending the points that I make, so I'm going to take the easy way out, and agree with you here. This is my final stance on how baseball playoffs should be played, and how champions should be crowned. Thanks, I owe you one.

[O's are Legends]

This is precisely why I don't care about war and all these new stats. They take the fun out of baseball, at least for me they do.

This guy has the DBacks ranked 5th, the Royals above the O's, and the Red sox, Mets and Phillies are ranked above the A's, White Sox and Pirates.

Good thing they still play the games.

[AZ Oriole]

I know I'm late to this party but looking at some of the numbers, if you take away the wins where the O's won by 5 runs or more (11) and the games where they lost by 5 runs or more (17). The O's show another statistical oddity. Their run differential is exactly even (81 games, 378 RS and 378 RA).

I know this is not scientific in anyway but if you remove the games where we get blown out and we blow the other team out I feel like this gives a better idea of the Orioles competitive makeup. Why go to your key bullpen guys when your down 6 runs in the 8th when you can give innings to KG and keep the important guys fresh?? I just have a hard time believing that this team is "done for" solely based on run differential.

I would love if the O's came out everyday and gave it their best and put the best players in but a 162 game season doesn't allow that, it isn't realistic so why hold a team to that standard without taking natural attrition into consideration. Just some thoughts!!

[OFFNY]

I know I'm late to this party but looking at some of the numbers, if you take away the wins where the O's won by 5 runs or more (11) and the games where they lost by 5 runs or more (17). The O's show another statistical oddity. Their run differential is exactly even (81 games, 378 RS and 378 RA).

I know this is not scientific in anyway but if you remove the games where we get blown out and we blow the other team out I feel like this gives a better idea of the Orioles competitive makeup. Why go to your key bullpen guys when your down 6 runs in the 8th when you can give innings to KG and keep the important guys fresh?? I just have a hard time believing that this team is "done for" solely based on run differential.

I would love if the O's came out everyday and gave it their best and put the best players in but a 162 game season doesn't allow that, it isn't realistic so why hold a team to that standard without taking natural attrition into consideration. Just some thoughts!!

AZ ORIOLE: 1 Post

OFFNY:OOo 16, 246 Posts.

Quality over quantity at its finest.

[DrungoHazewood]

This is precisely why I don't care about war and all these new stats. They take the fun out of baseball' date=' at least for me they do.

This guy has the DBacks ranked 5th, the Royals above the O's, and the Red sox, Mets and Phillies are ranked above the A's, White Sox and Pirates.

Good thing they still play the games.[/quote']

If you let other people you will never meet and stats you don't care about or understand take away your enjoyment of the game I think you need to reassess some stuff.

And if you want the teams ranked by wins alone they publish this table, I think they call it the "standings".

[Flash- bd]

I know I'm late to this party but looking at some of the numbers, if you take away the wins where the O's won by 5 runs or more (11) and the games where they lost by 5 runs or more (17). The O's show another statistical oddity. Their run differential is exactly even (81 games, 378 RS and 378 RA).

I know this is not scientific in anyway but if you remove the games where we get blown out and we blow the other team out I feel like this gives a better idea of the Orioles competitive makeup. Why go to your key bullpen guys when your down 6 runs in the 8th when you can give innings to KG and keep the important guys fresh?? I just have a hard time believing that this team is "done for" solely based on run differential.

I would love if the O's came out everyday and gave it their best and put the best players in but a 162 game season doesn't allow that, it isn't realistic so why hold a team to that standard without taking natural attrition into consideration. Just some thoughts!!

The obvious problem with this is that we've been blown out 6 more times than we've, er, been the blow-er outer. That hasn't happened for any old reason; the 19 blow outs are symptomatic of the overall condition pythag does a very good job of measuring.

OFFNY: I'm sorry if I struck a nerve. I just saw an opportunity to push my anti-amurrican agenda and seized it with zeal (not exactly, but hey, we all have our partialities and predilections) but I don't see why you should be insecure about defending your points...

[O's are Legends]

If you let other people you will never meet and stats you don't care about or understand take away your enjoyment of the game I think you need to reassess some stuff.

And if you want the teams ranked by wins alone they publish this table, I think they call it the "standings".

I don't let them bother me. Thus the reason I rarely pay attention to them.