Baseball Playoff Tiebreakers: Can it really be this stupid?!

[cthomer5000]

I've been chatting with SackAttack, talking about the playoff situation in the AL right now. We were talking about various scenarios, one-game playoffs ,etc. Since i was unclear on the rules i asked a couple questions and had my mind blown.

If we've got the following situation:

AL East
Boston 94-68
NY 94-68

AL Central
Chicago 95-67
Cleveland 94-68

The Boston-Yankee single-game-playoff loser misses the playoffs without a chance to play Cleveland for the wildcard spot (since they'd be 1/2 game behind after the loss)? To me that's ridiculous. "Gee, sorry you almost won your division instead of losing it outright."

Can this possibly be true? I feel like i just found out there is no such thing as Santa Claus.

[vtbub]

Boston and New York cannot tie, because they will not be three games apart when they play this weekend. It becomes a de facto best of three playoff for the division.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by vtbub

Boston and New York cannot tie, because they will not be three games apart when they play this weekend. It becomes a de facto best of three playoff for the division.

Uhh, yes they can tie. They each have two games remaining before that series. Example:

Boston takes both against Toronto, goes 1-2 in series against Yankees (3-2)
Yankees split with Baltimore, goes 2-1 against Sox (3-2)

[Solecismic]

This actually happened a few years back. I know they've changed the rule since, and would have a two-tiered playoff. I forget whether that starts next year or this year.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

This actually happened a few years back. I know they've changed the rule since, and would have a two-tiered playoff. I forget whether that starts next year or this year.

For their sake I hope it either doesn't occur this year or goes into effect this year. It looks like a pretty real possibility given the situation in the AL Central.

Personally I'm hoping for a 4-way tie and what basically amounts to a double-elimination pre-playoff tournament.

[Crapshoot]

Actually, that's wrong - what would happen is Boston and NY would compete for the division, and the loser of that one game playoff plays CLE for the wild card. They mentioned it on air at tonights Sox game.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Actually, that's wrong - what would happen is Boston and NY would compete for the division, and the loser of that one game playoff plays CLE for the wild card. They mentioned it on air at tonights Sox game.

Ok, but this is a recent rule change, correct?

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

Im officially confused.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Ok, but this is a recent rule change, correct?

Yes. At least as of two years ago, Cleveland would have automatically won the wild card.

[Donnie Baker]

I want to see the White Sox involved in that mess somehow. MLB in their infinite wisdom didn't have them flip against any other teams for home field in the one game lpayoff. Shouldn't they have done that just for the remote possibility of collapse? At least cover your bases.

[digamma]

It's a recent rule change. The reasoning for the old rule was that after the one game play-off, the loser would be a half game behind the wild card team in the standings. Pretty nonsensical.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Donnie Baker

I want to see the White Sox involved in that mess somehow. MLB in their infinite wisdom didn't have them flip against any other teams for home field in the one game lpayoff. Shouldn't they have done that just for the remote possibility of collapse? At least cover your bases.

My hope is for Chicago, Cleveland, New York, and Boston to all end up with identical records. Then we get two 1-game playoffs for the division and then a follow-up 1-game playoff for the wildcards. That would be pretty amusing to me, as the most casual of baseball fans.

Originally Posted by digamma

It's a recent rule change. The reasoning for the old rule was that after the one game play-off, the loser would be a half game behind the wild card team in the standings. Pretty nonsensical.

Monumentally stupid is the only way I could describe that old rule. You're penalizing a team for being closer to winning their division....ridiculous. I feel really bad for any team that ever missed the playoffs because of that rule.

[Young Drachma]

Yeah, they've changed the rule. And it starts this year, IIRC. The two division teams play each other. The loser plays the Wild Card team for the Wild Card.

[Young Drachma]

American League
East: Boston at New York
Central: Chicago at Cleveland
West: Oakland at Los Angeles
Wild card:
• New York at Cleveland
• Oakland at Cleveland
• Oakland at New York
NOTE: If three clubs finish the season with the same winning percentage and one team will be a division winner and another will be the wild card, the games will be played as follows: The two teams tied for the division lead will play the one-game tie-breaker, with the winner being declared the division champion. The losing team will then play the club from the other division for the wild card.

National League
Wild card:
• Houston at Florida
• Washington at Houston
• Florida at Philadelphia
• Houston at Philadelphia
• Florida at Washington
• Philadelphia at Washington
NOTE: If three clubs finish the season with the same winning percentage and one team will be a division winner and another will be the wild card, the games will be played as follows: The two teams tied for the division lead will play the one-game tie-breaker, with the winner being declared the division champion. The losing team will then play the club from the other division for the wild card.

Playoff Scenarios

Scenario No. 1: If there is a tie for a division championship and the winning percentage of the two clubs tied for first place is higher than the winning percentage of each of the second-place clubs in the same League, the division champion shall be:
• The club with the higher winning percentage in head-to-head competition between the two tied clubs during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then to the tied club with the higher winning percentage in intradivision games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then to the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half of intraleague games during the championship season. • If the clubs remain tied, then to the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half plus one of intraleague games during the championship season, provided that such additional game was not a game between the two tied clubs.
This process will be followed game-by-game until the tie is broken.

Scenario No. 2: If there is a tie for a division championship and the winning percentage of the two tied clubs is lower than the winning percentage of the second-place club with the best record among all non-division winners in the same league, the tie for the division championship shall be broken as follows:
• A one-game playoff shall be played to determine the division championship. The site of the game would be determined by a coin flip and the winner of the game shall be declared the division champion.

Scenario No. 3: If two teams are tied for the wild card, the tie shall be broken as follows:
• A one-game playoff shall be played to determine the wild card. The site of the game would be determined by a coin flip and the winner of the game shall be declared the wild card.

Scenario No. 4: If three clubs are tied for first place in a division (or wild card) with an identical winning percentage at the conclusion of the championship season and the tied clubs do not have identical records against one another in the championship season, the tie for the division championship (or wild card) shall be broken as follows:
• If the three tied clubs have identical records against one another in the championship season, the Office of the Commissioner shall supervise a draw that results in the clubs' being designated Club "A," "B," and "C."
• If the tied clubs do not have identical records against one another in the championship season, they will be designated Club "A," "B," and "C" based on their records in head-to-head competition during the championship season as follows:
• If Club 1 has a better record against each of Clubs 2 and 3, and Club 2 has a better record against Club 3, then Club 1 shall choose a designation as Club "A," "B," or "C," and Club 2 shall choose a designation from the remaining two designations. Club 3 shall be assigned the remaining designation.
• If Club 1 has a better record against each of Clubs 2 and 3, and Club 2 and Club 3 have the same record against each other, then Club 1 shall choose a designation as Club "A," "B," or "C," and the Office of the Commissioner shall supervise a draw between Clubs 2 and 3, the winner of which shall choose one of the remaining two designations. The remaining club shall be assigned the remaining designation. • If Club 1 and Club 2 have the same record against each other but each has a better record against Club 3, then the Office of the Commissioner shall supervise a draw between Clubs 1 and 2, the winner of which shall choose a designation as Club "A," "B," or "C." The club losing the draw shall choose a designation from the remaining two designations. Club 3 shall be assigned the remaining designation.
• If Club 1 has a better record against Club 2, Club 2 has a better record against Club 3, and Club 3 has a better record against Club 1, then the three clubs shall be ranked on the basis of overall winning percentage within that three-club group, and the club with the highest winning percentage from among that three-club group shall have first choice among designations as Club "A," "B," or "C," the club with the next highest winning percentage from among that three-club group shall have the next choice between the two remaining designations, and the club with the lowest winning percentage from among that three-club group shall be assigned the remaining designation.
• If two or more of the clubs within such three-club group have the same winning percentage among the group, the Office of the Commissioner shall supervise a draw between the clubs so tied to determine priority of selection among the designations. Club "A" shall play Club "B" at the ballpark of Club "A." The following day, the winner of the first game shall be the home club in a second game, against Club "C." The winner of the game between Club "C" and the Club that won the game between Club "A" and Club "B" shall be declared the division champion.

Scenario No. 5: If three clubs in a league are tied with identical winning percentages at the end of the championship season and two of those tied clubs are from the same division and are also tied for first place in that division and the third tied club has the highest winning percentage among the second-place clubs in the remaining two divisions, the division champion shall first be determined by a one-game playoff. Any playoff games played to determine a division champion shall not count in determining which clubs are deemed tied for a wild-card designation. Clubs that were originally tied with a club or clubs for a wild-card designation shall still be considered tied.

Scenario No. 6: If four clubs are tied for first place in the wild card (or division) with an identical winning percentage at the conclusion of the championship season, the tie for the wild-card (division) shall be broken as follows:
• The four teams will be designated Club "A," "B," "C," and "D" based on a draw by the Office of the Commissioner. Club "A" shall play Club "B" at the ballpark of Club "A" and Club "C" shall play Club "D" at the ballpark of Club "C." The following day, the winner of these games shall play one game, at the ballpark of Club "A" or Club "B," whichever has won the game between the two. The winner of the third game shall be declared the wild card.

Scenario No. 7: There is a two-way tie for highest winning percentage among division winners and a tiebreaker is required to determine home-field advantage in the Division Series.
• If one of the division winners tied for the highest winning percentage is from the same division as the wild card: The division winner from the same division as the wild card cannot play the wild card in the Division Series. The other division winner tied for the highest winning percentage plays the wild card.
• If neither division winner tied for the highest winning percentage is from the same division as the wild card: A tiebreaker system will be used to determine which division winner with the best record plays the wild card.
• The first tiebreaker will be head-to-head competition between the two clubs during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied clubs with the higher winning percentage in intradivision games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in intraleague games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half of intraleague games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half plus one of intraleague games during the championship season. This process will be followed game-by-game until the tie is broken.
Scenario No. 8: There is a three-way tie for highest winning percentage among division winners and a tiebreaker is required to determine home-field advantage in the Division Series. The tied club that has a better record against both of the other division champions during the championship season will be deemed to have the higher winning percentage. The tie between the two remaining clubs shall be broken as follows:
• The first tiebreaker will be head-to-head competition between the two clubs during the championship season. If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in intradivision games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in intraleague games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half of intraleague games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half plus one of intraleague games during the championship season. This process will be followed game-by-game until the tie is broken.
• If none of the three tied clubs has a better record against both of the other division champions during the championship season, then the club deemed to have the higher winning percentage shall be the tied club with the higher winning percentage in head-to-head competition among the tied clubs during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in intradivision games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in intraleague games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half of intraleague games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half plus one of intraleague games during the championship season. This process will be followed game-by-game until the tie is broken.

[MrBigglesworth]

Wow.

Let's play two.

[henry296]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Monumentally stupid is the only way I could describe that old rule. You're penalizing a team for being closer to winning their division....ridiculous. I feel really bad for any team that ever missed the playoffs because of that rule.

No fear. The situation described by digamma never happened.

[Ksyrup]

I didn't read through that monstrosity that Dark Cloud posted, but I guess I should have. I had no clue that "head-to-head record" determined the division winner if the division winning and wild card teams both come from the same division. I know they both make the playoffs in any event, but I still think they should play one game to determine the division winner.

[Young Drachma]

I only posted it for reference.

[Ksyrup]

Yeah, and it was much easier reading the one paragraph explanation in the recap of teh White Sox/Tigers game this afternoon.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I didn't read through that monstrosity that Dark Cloud posted, but I guess I should have. I had no clue that "head-to-head record" determined the division winner if the division winning and wild card teams both come from the same division. I know they both make the playoffs in any event, but I still think they should play one game to determine the division winner.

Why shouldn't the head-to-head record matter?

[Ksyrup]

I just think it's a bullshit way to determine division winner. In football, I understand it, because the logistics of making two teams prepare for and play a one-game playoff makes it impossible. After 162 games, the least they can do is have a one-game playoff like they have always done.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I just think it's a bullshit way to determine division winner. In football, I understand it, because the logistics of making two teams prepare for and play a one-game playoff makes it impossible. After 162 games, the least they can do is have a one-game playoff like they have always done.

I think you've got it wrong. Teams play head-to-head what, 18 times in baseball? To me, you've determined clearly who the better team is over that span. To me, whoever wins the season series should win the tie.

[Ksyrup]

I look at the 162 games as finished after game #162. After that, the playoffs begin. They should playoff to determine the division winner.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I look at the 162 games as finished after game #162. After that, the playoffs begin. They should playoff to determine the division winner.

Right but then a team plays 2 playoff games. And somehow the loser of the division game is kind of penalized for tying for a division win while clev was clear second but only plays one game.

[Huckleberry]

You really want to see a division winner playoff game that will be pointless? Both teams will run out their 5th starter in order to keep their good pitchers rested for the real playoffs.

Hell, any banged up positional players would probably sit, too. Not only that, but the 40-man rosters would be in effect for that game, so you'd have a whole bunch of scrubs playing in a game that neither team cares that much about.

Although I guess it's possible that homefield implications in the playoffs might cause one team to take it very seriously, I tend to doubt it.

[Ksyrup]

You know, I still don't think I understand how the White Sox clinched, if this is the scenario and corresponding rule being applied:


"Scenario No. 1: If there is a tie for a division championship and the winning percentage of the two clubs tied for first place is higher than the winning percentage of each of the second-place clubs in the same League, the division champion shall be:
• The club with the higher winning percentage in head-to-head competition between the two tied clubs during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then to the tied club with the higher winning percentage in intradivision games during the championship season.
• If the clubs remain tied, then to the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half of intraleague games during the championship season. • If the clubs remain tied, then to the tied club with the higher winning percentage in the last half plus one of intraleague games during the championship season, provided that such additional game was not a game between the two tied clubs.
This process will be followed game-by-game until the tie is broken."



And here's the portion of the ESPN article on the White Sox/Tigers game:

"Chicago clinched because Cleveland can at best tie the White Sox, and no team can finish second in another division with 96 wins or more. If the AL Central is decided by a tiebreaker, it would go to the White Sox, who beat the Indians 11-5 in the season series, and Cleveland would be the wild card."


If the White Sox lose their remaining 3 games, and the Indians and Red Sox win their remaining 4 games, they will all end up with 96 wins. Therefore, the White Sox/Indians would NOT have a higher winning percentage than the second place East team - and the Red Sox WOULD end up with 96 wins, contrary to the ESPN article. Haven't they jumped the gun here, or am I missing something?

[Huckleberry]

Scenario No. 5: If three clubs in a league are tied with identical winning percentages at the end of the championship season and two of those tied clubs are from the same division and are also tied for first place in that division and the third tied club has the highest winning percentage among the second-place clubs in the remaining two divisions, the division champion shall first be determined by a one-game playoff. Any playoff games played to determine a division champion shall not count in determining which clubs are deemed tied for a wild-card designation. Clubs that were originally tied with a club or clubs for a wild-card designation shall still be considered tied.

Sounds like a Chicago/Cleveland playoff followed by a Boston/Loser playoff.

However, what you're overlooking is that if Boston finishes 96-66 then the Yankees finish 93-69 or 94-68. Therefore Cleveland is the wildcard.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

However, what you're overlooking is that if Boston finishes 96-66 then the Yankees finish 93-69 or 94-68. Therefore Cleveland is the wildcard.

This is what just dawned on me 2 minutes ago. That would clear it up.