PDA

View Full Version : Houston magic number is now 1!!!!!!!!!!


WSox8404
10-01-2004, 09:39 PM
Yes!!!

JB98
10-01-2004, 09:49 PM
Well, their magic number to eliminate the Scrubs is 1, which all I really care about frankly. I think Houston's magic number to eliminate the Giants is 3. I don't mind either Houston or SF in the playoffs. Just not the Cubs.

WSox8404
10-01-2004, 10:03 PM
Well, their magic number to eliminate the Scrubs is 1, which all I really care about frankly. I think Houston's magic number to eliminate the Giants is 3. I don't mind either Houston or SF in the playoffs. Just not the Cubs.
That is my point. I am taking for granted Houston is going to win the wild card. I meant that the Cubs are screwed.

zach23
10-01-2004, 10:17 PM
Any scrubs fans with the MLB extra innings package who watched that game had to be just as frustrated with the Rockies as they were with the hateable losers the past few days. The Rockies had numerous chances to score and kept blowing it.
It is nice to think about some of the scrubby fans sitting there going through even more agony tonight.

StillMissOzzie
10-01-2004, 11:17 PM
That is my point. I am taking for granted Houston is going to win the wild card. I meant that the Cubs are screwed.
Not so fast, my friend. The Giants, should they win tonight (up 4-2 as I type this), will remain tied with the Astros, who already won tonight, with 2 games left. While the Giants need to sweep the Dodgers to win the NL West title, if they just match the Astros, there will be a wild card playoff game. As long as EITHER the Giants or Astros win one of those next two, that wild card playoff will NOT include the sCrUBS.

SMO
:) :gulp:

Viva Magglio
10-01-2004, 11:44 PM
Giants win...which pins the Cubs even further against the wall! Not to be premature, but any win by either Houston or San Francisco (or, of course, a Cubs loss) will result in....

:hawk
"THEY GONE!!!!!"

:supernana:

Viva Magglio
10-01-2004, 11:45 PM
Not so fast, my friend. The Giants, should they win tonight (up 4-2 as I type this), will remain tied with the Astros, who already won tonight, with 2 games left. While the Giants need to sweep the Dodgers to win the NL West title, if they just match the Astros, there will be a wild card playoff game. As long as EITHER the Giants or Astros win one of those next two, that wild card playoff will NOT include the sCrUBS.

SMO
:) :gulp:
If the Giants sweep the Dodgers, they will fininsh in a first place tie with L.A. And if Houston sweeps Colorado, they will be tied (record-wise) with S.F. and L.A. How would these ties be broken?

HomeFish
10-01-2004, 11:46 PM
If the Giants sweep the Dodgers, they will fininsh in a first place tie with L.A. And if Houston sweeps Colorado, they will be tied (record-wise) with S.F. and L.A. How would these ties be broken?

LA and SF have a one-game playoff for the NL West. Loser plays the men from Houston for the WC.

zach23
10-01-2004, 11:48 PM
Giants win...which pins the Cubs even further against the wall! Not to be premature, but any win by either Houston or San Francisco (or, of course, a Cubs loss) will result in....

:hawk
"THEY GONE!!!!!"

:supernana:


Add to that the pitching match ups for the games tomorrow.
Rockies send Shaun Estes against Roy Oswalt and the Dodgers have Elmer Dessens going against Brett Tomko.
The way the Dodgers have looked lately, I would not be shocked if the Giants sweep them.

gobears1987
10-02-2004, 11:09 AM
:thankgod
nough said

Mickster
10-02-2004, 11:28 AM
If the Giants sweep the Dodgers, they will fininsh in a first place tie with L.A. And if Houston sweeps Colorado, they will be tied (record-wise) with S.F. and L.A. How would these ties be broken?
Homefish says:

LA and SF have a one-game playoff for the NL West. Loser plays the men from Houston for the WC.
That is incorrect. If SF sweeps LA and Houston sweeps the Rockies, you are correct that there would be a 3-way tie. In that scenario, Houston automatically wins the WC. Why, you ask?

LA and SF would indeed play a 1 game playoff with the winner claiming the NL west division. Unfortunately for SF or LA, the game counts towards the overall W/L record so the loser of the 1-game playoff for the NL West crown would finish 1/2 GB of Houston for the wildcard.

Houston truly controls their own destiny. A sweep of the Rockies and they are automatically in.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-02-2004, 11:36 AM
That is incorrect. If SF sweeps LA and Houston sweeps the Rockies, you are correct that there would be a 3-way tie. In that scenario, Houston automatically wins the WC. Why, you ask?

LA and SF would indeed play a 1 game playoff with the winner claiming the NL west division. Unfortunately for SF or LA, the game counts towards the overall W/L record so the loser of the 1-game playoff for the NL West crown would finish 1/2 GB of Houston for the wildcard.

Houston truly controls their own destiny. A sweep of the Rockies and they are automatically in.
Wow. That's just amazing. A division championship playoff game that automatically sends Houston to the wild card -- simply for sitting on their dead ass and watching (and laughing) at home.

My God... the Wild Card is the most ****ed up idea the MLB owners have ever cooked up. To hell with the 162 game schedule... let's just have 30 wild-cards and get the ****ing season over with. We'll beat the NFL to the punch!

Idiots. ****ing idiots.

cornball
10-02-2004, 11:38 AM
The Astros have to be the favorite to make the playoffs now (with 2 games at home vs. the Rockies), and if/when they do the price of Beltran will go up.

Because of the exposure and his performance down the stretch.

Palehose13
10-02-2004, 12:17 PM
I just loved to wake up and see this on the yahoo sports page:

Wild-card chase
http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/spo/bullet.gif Winners: Astros | Giants | Loser: Cubs

:bandance: :bandance: :bandance: :bandance: :bandance:

Chisox353014
10-02-2004, 12:46 PM
6 games left...if only one of them goes against the Scrubs it's Season Over. Couldn't have happened to a whinier bunch of jag-bags, too.
Go Braves!
Go Astros!
Go Giants!

Erik The Red
10-02-2004, 01:05 PM
My God... the Wild Card is the most ****ed up idea the MLB owners have ever cooked up. To hell with the 162 game schedule... let's just have 30 wild-cards and get the ****ing season over with. We'll beat the NFL to the punch!

Idiots. ****ing idiots. The wild card has gone a long way in creating exciting, meaningful games in the last weeks of the season. I'm all for it.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-02-2004, 01:46 PM
The wild card has gone a long way in creating exciting, meaningful games in the last weeks of the season. I'm all for it.Sure. The wild card has gone even further to make the 162 games played across 6 full months completely meaningless, too. But to each his own... some people LIKE the fact baseball is a steaming pile of **** compared to football. Most of them like the wild card, too.

santo=dorf
10-02-2004, 02:01 PM
Sure. The wild card has gone even further to make the 162 games played across 6 full months completely meaningless, too. But to each his own... some people LIKE the fact baseball is a steaming pile of **** compared to football. Most of them like the wild card, too.And if he still had two divisions, half the teams in the league would be playing meaningless game since the All-Star Game.

Those 162 games across the season setup the wild card and the 4 playoff series, hardly meaningless.

I do agree with you that it's BS that if the Giants or Dodgers lose their division deciding game, they'll be eliminated from the playoffs all together. Jeff Brantley brought this up on BBTN, but Tim Kurkjian wasn't sure it if works out that way.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-02-2004, 02:11 PM
And if he still had two divisions, half the teams in the league would be playing meaningless game since the All-Star Game....
I think you're missing my point. I'm all for making the end of the season exciting. Furthermore I agree the wild card adds excitement for leagues like the NFL where only 16 regular season games are played. Think about it. It would take nearly TWO FULL SEASONS for every team in the NFL to play one another just one time.

Baseball is completely different. There are other ways to add excitement to the end of the baseball season without this ridiculous wild card scheme decided between virtually randomly-selected teams that played different and unbalanced schedules. Even the one-game playoff has been cheapened by the wild card! Let's get real!

It doesn't take too much creativity to figure this stuff out, but it clearly surpasses the imagination of any of the dim wits who run MLB and the lemmings who believe the nonsense Selig and his minions spout.

santo=dorf
10-02-2004, 03:04 PM
Homefish says:


That is incorrect. If SF sweeps LA and Houston sweeps the Rockies, you are correct that there would be a 3-way tie. In that scenario, Houston automatically wins the WC. Why, you ask?

LA and SF would indeed play a 1 game playoff with the winner claiming the NL west division. Unfortunately for SF or LA, the game counts towards the overall W/L record so the loser of the 1-game playoff for the NL West crown would finish 1/2 GB of Houston for the wildcard.

Houston truly controls their own destiny. A sweep of the Rockies and they are automatically in.
Fox Sports says otherwise. They just showed the graphic.
3 way tie between LA/SF/Hou

Monday: LA vs. SF for West
Tuesday: Loser of that game vs. Hou for Wild Card.

Do you still think the Cubbies have a chance now Homefish?:rolleyes:

Mickster
10-02-2004, 03:11 PM
Fox Sports says otherwise. They just showed the graphic.
3 way tie between LA/SF/Hou

Monday: LA vs. SF for West
Tuesday: Loser of that game vs. Hou for Wild Card.

Do you still think the Cubbies have a chance now Homefish?:rolleyes:
I was mistaken in previous post. Apparently, if the tie involves a Divisional champ only, the games NO NOT count towards the regular season stats.

from the MLB site:

What happens if the Dodgers, Giants and Astros all finish the season with the same record, leaving the NL West and the NL Wild Card winners undecided?


The Dodgers and Giants would have a one-game playoff in San Francisco to determine the West champion on Monday at 4:05 p.m. ET. The loser would play the Astros in a one-game playoff to determine the Wild Card winner on Tuesday. If the NL West runner-up is the Giants, the game would be played in San Francisco. If the NL West runner-up is the Dodgers, a coin flip will determine which team plays at home. A Giants sweep this weekend over the Dodgers, combined with an Astros loss would give San Francisco the NL West title based on a 10-9 season record against Los Angeles. The Dodgers would be the Wild Card team in this scenario.
My bad. :redface:

PaleHoseGeorge
10-02-2004, 03:14 PM
I was mistaken in previous post. Apparently, if the tie involves a Divisional champ only, the games NO NOT count towards the regular season stats.

from the MLB site:


My bad. :redface:
Okay, so MLB automatically moves back the start of the post-season to accommodate the wild card. Great...

Mickster
10-02-2004, 03:16 PM
Okay, so MLB automatically moves back the start of the post-season to accommodate the wild card. Great...
:D:

santo=dorf
10-02-2004, 04:27 PM
Okay, so MLB automatically moves back the start of the post-season to accommodate the wild card. Great...Yeah, so what?

Would you rather have the Dodgers and Giants just play another game on Sunday if the Giants and Astros sweep (people assume that's already a given?)

Or we could just go back to two divisions where the most Eastern "West" team (Atlanta Braves) would've already clinched the division, and we wouldn't be forced to watch a season ending series, that has a huge effect on the playoffs, between two of the greatest rivals in the history of the MLB.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-02-2004, 04:32 PM
Yeah, so what?

Would you rather have the Dodgers and Giants just play another game on Sunday if the Giants and Astros sweep (people assume that's already a given?)Indeed, so what.

Instead of pushing back the playoffs to accommodate the wild card, why not just have a home run derby right after the Dodgers/Giants game? Houston vs. the LA/SF loser. Winner goes to the post-season as the wild card.

That would be REALLY exciting. Isn't that what you're trying to tell me you're all about? Why don't you have some balls and stand up for what you believe in?

Face it. You can't handle the truth.
:cool:

santo=dorf
10-02-2004, 04:34 PM
Face it. You can't handle the trut.
:cool:
Steve Stone? Is that you?

:rolleyes:

PaleHoseGeorge
10-02-2004, 04:35 PM
Steve Stone? Is that you?


Whoops... I knew I heard that somewhere recently.
:redface:

Erik The Red
10-03-2004, 03:52 PM
Who can't handle the truth? For all your bloviating about the cheapening of the one-game playoff, it turns out that's not even the case in this scenario. You're taking one unlikely hypothetical situation and using it to argue against the entire system, and in the process ignoring all the good that the 3-division realignment has done.

Daver
10-03-2004, 04:02 PM
Who can't handle the truth? For all your bloviating about the cheapening of the one-game playoff, it turns out that's not even the case in this scenario. You're taking one unlikely hypothetical situation and using it to argue against the entire system, and in the process ignoring all the good that the 3-division realignment has done.
And what good has the three division realignment done?

Aside from adding money to the MLB coffers via playoff games that are aired on Fox Family during the day, has it really done that much to affect what a championship season is supposed to stand for?

Or has it muddied the waters by giving the also rans a chance to get lucky in a short series?

The World Series used to be pitting the best teams from each league against one another, now it is a reward for whatever team gets lucky at the right time.

To quote Milt Pappas "The game sucks nowadays".

SOXSINCE'70
10-03-2004, 04:14 PM
Astros-5,Rockies-3.

It's over.YEEEESSSSSS!!!!!!!!:supernana: :supernana: :supernana: :supernana: :supernana: :supernana:

Erik The Red
10-03-2004, 04:26 PM
And what good has the three division realignment done?

Aside from adding money to the MLB coffers via playoff games that are aired on Fox Family during the day, has it really done that much to affect what a championship season is supposed to stand for?

Or has it muddied the waters by giving the also rans a chance to get lucky in a short series?

The World Series used to be pitting the best teams from each league against one another, now it is a reward for whatever team gets lucky at the right time.

To quote Milt Pappas "The game sucks nowadays". And yet few people here would be complaining if the Sox squeaked in as a wild card winner and won a World Series.

The Angels and Marlins did not "get lucky". They had solid teams, that just happened to benefit from the opportunity created by the Wild Card.

Daver
10-03-2004, 04:34 PM
And yet few people here would be complaining if the Sox squeaked in as a wild card winner and won a World Series.

The Angels and Marlins did not "get lucky". They had solid teams, that just happened to benefit from the opportunity created by the Wild Card.
You missed the point.

The Angels and the Marlins were also rans, solid teams maybe, yet they failed to win their division.

Where is the reward for being the best team in your division?

There is none, because Bud and the powers that be have created a situation where you no longer need be the best team to win, you just need to get lucky at the right time. Bud and the rest of the owners love it, because they all share the payday, and that is the only reason it exists.

Erik The Red
10-03-2004, 04:46 PM
You missed the point.

The Angels and the Marlins were also rans, solid teams maybe, yet they failed to win their division.

Where is the reward for being the best team in your division?

There is none, because Bud and the powers that be have created a situation where you no longer need be the best team to win, you just need to get lucky at the right time. Bud and the rest of the owners love it, because they all share the payday, and that is the only reason it exists. Where's the reward? I'm sorry, did the Braves not make the playoffs last year? So they couldn't take care of business against the Scrubs, well that's their fault. And Florida's NLCS win must rest solely on the shoulders of a cubbie collapse, right? I mean, it's not like the Marlins didn't have good pitching, excellent defense, and one of the best (if not THE best) leadoff hitters in baseball. And don't forget, this team was abysmal at the beginning of the season, and had the best record in the majors from the point that McKeon took over. Lucky my ass, they were a great team.

Waaaaah, I won the division but didn't make the World Series :whiner:

*****.

Tragg
10-03-2004, 04:47 PM
You missed the point.

The Angels and the Marlins were also rans, solid teams maybe, yet they failed to win their division.

Where is the reward for being the best team in your division?

There is none, because Bud and the powers that be have created a situation where you no longer need be the best team to win, you just need to get lucky at the right time. Bud and the rest of the owners love it, because they all share the payday, and that is the only reason it exists.If you are going to have divisions, a wild card is an essential component---what does "winning a division" mean when some divisions are stronger than others? Nothing really- it's a bogus confection. If a wild card is a bad idea, just have no divisions like the old days, and take the 162 game champ as your pennant winner.
If you have these artificial designations known as divisions, wild card actually brings some equity into the playoffs.
Frankly, I think Boston should have 2nd home field advantage and not last home field advantage.

Daver
10-03-2004, 04:51 PM
If you are going to have divisions, a wild card is an essential component.
No it isn't.

It does add a series for the TV payday though.

Daver
10-03-2004, 04:52 PM
Where's the reward? I'm sorry, did the Braves not make the playoffs last year? So they couldn't take care of business against the Scrubs, well that's their fault. And Florida's NLCS win must rest solely on the shoulders of a cubbie collapse, right? I mean, it's not like the Marlins didn't have good pitching, excellent defense, and one of the best (if not THE best) leadoff hitters in baseball. And don't forget, this team was abysmal at the beginning of the season, and had the best record in the majors from the point that McKeon took over. Lucky my ass, they were a great team.

Waaaaah, I won the division but didn't make the World Series :whiner:

*****.
And you still miss the point.

santo=dorf
10-03-2004, 04:54 PM
The Angels and the Marlins were also rans, solid teams maybe, yet they failed to win their division..
A 99 win team is not an "also ran." Neither is a team that won 90 games in a season after posting the best record in the entrie MLB since the middle of May.
I guess the Marlins got "lucky" at the right time of the season, the middle of May. :rolleyes:
Where is the reward for being the best team in your division
You get homefield advantage over the wild card team.

Under the previous two-division format, what was the reward if you finished with the second best record in your league, but it was also the second best record in your division?

NOTHING!!

Which is more BS than calling a 99 win team "lucky."

Daver
10-03-2004, 04:57 PM
A 99 win team is not an "also ran." Neither is a team that won 90 games in a season after posting the best record in the entrie MLB since the middle of May.
I guess the Marlins got "lucky" at the right time of the season, the middle of May. :rolleyes:

You get homefield advantage over the wild card team.

Under the previous two-division format, what was the reward if you finished with the second best record in your league, but it was also the second best record in your division?

NOTHING!!

Which is more BS than calling a 99 win team "lucky."
Hence my point about muddying the water.

Reading is a skill.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-03-2004, 05:08 PM
Hence my point about muddying the water.

Reading is a skill.
Nice patience, Daver. However I'm afraid you and I are talking to the wall. The NFL has divisions and the NFL has the wild card. For some people that's all they care about. It's good for the NFL, so it must be good for MLB, too.

Let's go with a 16-game regular season and a dozen or so tiebreakers to determine champions and wild cards. You know... stuff like head-to-head games, common opponents, road wins, run differential, how many times your pitcher had a 'roid rage fit, etcetera... This will make everyone happy. As these deep thinkers have repeated over and over again, the end of the baseball season is boring. It won't be boring when we only play 16 games.

I've got better things to do than waste my time arguing with the likes of this sort of logic. Of course calling it logic is really stretching the definition of the word.

Erik The Red
10-03-2004, 06:28 PM
You know, you're the only one I see here saying "It's good for the NFL, so it must be good for MLB, too". For someone accusing others of doing that, it's kinda ironic, huh?

Brian26
10-03-2004, 06:29 PM
Who can't handle the truth? For all your bloviating about the cheapening of the one-game playoff, it turns out that's not even the case in this scenario. You're taking one unlikely hypothetical situation and using it to argue against the entire system, and in the process ignoring all the good that the 3-division realignment has done.
What if there were no divisions in either league....just two leagues with 14 teams and 16 teams. Isn't it possible there could be a 3-way or 4-way tie at the end of the season? There's a possibility playoff games would be necessary in that scenario to determine who would move on. It's possible the postseason would be moved back in that scenario also.

The system, the way it is setup right now, is working fine for me. I like the extra excitement down the stretch. HOWEVER, there should be NO MORE tinkering with it. No more extra rounds of playoffs! Keep it the way it is for a long time to come.

Erik The Red
10-03-2004, 06:29 PM
And you still miss the point. No, I get your point. Wild card winners are not division winners.

I just don't care.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-03-2004, 06:32 PM
You know, you're the only one I see here saying "It's good for the NFL, so it must be good for MLB, too". For someone accusing others of doing that, it's kinda ironic, huh?
You have no clue what you are talking about, do you?