Please hold on Cubbies

[beaner]

As a longtime Cubs fan, I fully expect a complete meltdown this week, especially now that the lead is down to 2 games. Playing the Marlins brings back terrible memories of the 2003 playoffs. I can only hope that the Padres playoff hopes are still up in the air as they go to Milwaukee for the weekend. I know there a few other Cubs fans around here, I hope tehy can send some positve vibes my way. I need to feel good about this.

[Crazysilver03]

While I want to see the Cubs make the post season, I feel as if they would just be dominated.

[beaner]

While I want to see the Cubs make the post season, I feel as if they would just be dominated.

I can see any of the playoff eligible teams coming out of the NL to be honest. My big concern with the Cubs is the back end of the bullpen, but otherwise I don't see any team being that much better. Plus I'll take Lou Piniella over any of the remaining managers. Although Bob Melvin must be one hell of a manager winning with that team in Arizona.

[Crazysilver03]

I can see any of the playoff eligible teams coming out of the NL to be honest. My big concern with the Cubs is the back end of the bullpen, but otherwise I don't see any team being that much better. Plus I'll take Lou Piniella over any of the remaining managers. Although Bob Melvin must be one hell of a manager winning with that team in Arizona.

I guess the Lou factor is one thing.

Though if the Rockies enter the playoffs winning 14 straight, or 12 of 14, they are going to be on a tear.

I wonder if the Cubs would even include Trachsel on their playoff roster at this point.

[beaner]

I guess the Lou factor is one thing.

Though if the Rockies enter the playoffs winning 14 straight, or 12 of 14, they are going to be on a tear.

I wonder if the Cubs would even include Trachsel on their playoff roster at this point.

The Rockies could be scary, but remember the Twins last year. They were on fire to end the regular season, but got swept in the first round vs. Oakland. As for Trax, I would assume no, at least for the best of 5 series.

[DrungoHazewood]

While I want to see the Cubs make the post season, I feel as if they would just be dominated.

The Cards and Tigers of '06 proved (as if it needed to be proven) that any team that gets to the post-season, no matter how cold or how mediocre, can win it all.

They really need to start calling the playoffs and World Series the Baseball Tournament, 'cause that's all it is. Just like the NCAAs in basketball. Whoever gets hot and gets the right matchup gets to be called champ, and the regular season is almost unconnected to the winner.

[beaner]

Thank God the Brewers don't appear to want this division either.

[davearm]

While I want to see the Cubs make the post season, I feel as if they would just be dominated.

Dominated by whom?

The Cubs are arguably the least flawed of the NL playoff contenders.

Solid lineup. Good rotation. Bullpen's been great. Some depth on the bench. Everyone's healthy.

All of the other NL teams seem to have at least one big red flag waving.

If the Cubs can come together and play good baseball (as they've shown the ability to do over extended stretches already), and they'll have as good a chance as anyone.

[rolliefingers]

The Cards and Tigers of '06 proved (as if it needed to be proven) that any team that gets to the post-season, no matter how cold or how mediocre, can win it all.

They really need to start calling the playoffs and World Series the Baseball Tournament, 'cause that's all it is. Just like the NCAAs in basketball. Whoever gets hot and gets the right matchup gets to be called champ, and the regular season is almost unconnected to the winner.

I like that, though. That's why both are more interesting than any other sports' postseasons.

[DrungoHazewood]

I like that, though. That's why both are more interesting than any other sports' postseasons.

I hate it. I hate the idea that the team that proves itself to be the best over six months and 162 games has only a tiny advantage over a 83-win team when the playoffs start. The regular season is lurching towards meaninglessness. I'm definitely not a traditionalist, but I love the simplicity and definitiveness of the pre-expansion Majors: two leagues, two league Champions, and one World Series to crown an overall champ.

Please, I beg of all of you, don't turn this into a soccer debate... but I love what European soccer leagues do. Each team plays each other team twice during the season, whoever ends up with the best record is the champion. No unbalanced schedules, no wildcards, no playoffs. Just a fair schedule with a fair champion.

[rolliefingers]

I hate it. I hate the idea that the team that proves itself to be the best over six months and 162 games has only a tiny advantage over a 83-win team when the playoffs start. The regular season is lurching towards meaninglessness. I'm definitely not a traditionalist, but I love the simplicity and definitiveness of the pre-expansion Majors: two leagues, two league Champions, and one World Series to crown an overall champ.

Why even have a World Series, then, unless both league champions have identical records? That's just asking for another 2006 Cards team to win.

I understand what you're saying, but playoffs are fun. And while I wish they would go back to a balanced schedule and just take the top four teams in each league, regardless of division, having more playoffs maintains more fans' interest for a longer period of time.

The Cubs' and Brewers' seasons would be over now if my plan was in effect; if the pre-1994 system were still in place, you could (and likely will) counter that while mediocre teams would be done by now, the top-four AL teams would all be fighting for one spot this weekend, as would the top-five NL teams.

One can reasonably argue which plan yields the better fan experience. But I think the current plan is just a safeguard against the scenario of one team completely owning their league, a la the 1975 Reds or 1998 Yankees.

[DrungoHazewood]

Why even have a World Series, then, unless both league champions have identical records? That's just asking for another 2006 Cards team to win.

Because they'd have never played one another - there's no interleague play in my vision.

One can reasonably argue which plan yields the better fan experience. But I think the current plan is just a safeguard against the scenario of one team completely owning their league, a la the 1975 Reds or 1998 Yankees.

Sure. But I think if a team wins their league by 10 or 15 games they don't need to prove themselves again in a 5- or 7-game series against some of the teams they just blew away. It's like the Temple Cup Series in the 1890s. There was just one league, so in a weak attempt to continue the primitive World Series of the 1880s they set up a series between the 1st and 2nd place teams. So they'd go through this long pennant race, then have to play each other again. Predictably, no one really cared - fans didn't show up, the players made backroom deals to split the money, and they just went through the motions in what amounted to exhibitions.

[rolliefingers]

Your idea makes sense. But playoffs are fun, and they attract viewers. Including me, and probably you, too.

[DrungoHazewood]

Your idea makes sense. But playoffs are fun, and they attract viewers. Including me, and probably you, too.

Yea, I know, that is true.

[davearm]

I hate it. I hate the idea that the team that proves itself to be the best over six months and 162 games has only a tiny advantage over a 83-win team when the playoffs start. The regular season is lurching towards meaninglessness. I'm definitely not a traditionalist, but I love the simplicity and definitiveness of the pre-expansion Majors: two leagues, two league Champions, and one World Series to crown an overall champ.

Please, I beg of all of you, don't turn this into a soccer debate... but I love what European soccer leagues do. Each team plays each other team twice during the season, whoever ends up with the best record is the champion. No unbalanced schedules, no wildcards, no playoffs. Just a fair schedule with a fair champion.

Who ever said the champion has to be the best team?

The beauty of all sports is that the best team doesn't always win. If it did, then things would be terribly dull and anticlimatic. The Euro soccer league you describe sounds like it would create very little late-season suspense, or at a minimum, would be suspenseful for only two or three teams.

Regardless of how the playoffs come out, everyone will recognize and appreciate whichever team finishes with the best record in baseball. That's certainly worth something, but it's not the be-all, end-all -- and shouldn't be.