flavum

Eloy Jimenez single to SS Fernando Tatis. True story.

RBI double in his first AB tonight. http://mlb.mlb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?gi...ox&sid=l131

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 20, 2017 -> 05:29 PM) Was it a bad thing when the 82-80 Cardinals won? They were 83-78, with one game not played...and that’s still over .500. But yes, a “no divisions/balanced schedule” would always be better than the 5-team division/heavily unbalanced schedule they’ve had since 2001.

Lineups https://twitter.com/michaelgbaron/status/921483543573868545

Polo 3-3 with sb today.

https://twitter.com/ChrisKuc/status/921486187507970048 Petricka elbow surgery. 3-4 months. Whatever.

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Oct 20, 2017 -> 02:14 PM) It could, but that would be mitigated by playing the teams with the two worst record in each league against the two top WC teams to make sure the best teams are getting to the DLS. So you’re ok with a team under .500 having a shot at the World Series because of an arbitrary geographic location? Can’t happen in baseball. I’ll say it again- the more four-team groupings you have the more likely one of those groups will have four bad teams unworthy of the postseason.

QUOTE (Jack Parkman @ Oct 20, 2017 -> 10:00 AM) If they aren't going to go backwards on the Wild Card game, then same and then top 5, and make the wild card best of 3. If they can find the time, go for it. To me though, if they went to no divisions/close to a balanced schedule, the win totals between the 4th and 5th teams will usually be within 3 games. At that point, those teams are close enough over 162 to just play one game and the winner moves on. It sucks now because an 84-win team could beat a 92-win team in one game and move on. If it's 85 vs 87, or 84 vs 88, is it really that bad? I don't think so.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Oct 20, 2017 -> 09:47 AM) Teams would just leave off the previous game's starter, the next game's starter, and the starter not scheduled to throw a side day that day. Correct. That's why I don't like when people say they should submit a 25-man roster in September. Again, they would just leave off the starting pitchers and use more bullpen arms.

QUOTE (Jack Parkman @ Oct 20, 2017 -> 09:38 AM) I'm all for keep the Leagues, eliminate the divisions, get rid of the stupid Wild Card game, and top 4 records in each league in a balanced schedule get in to Playoffs. I'm with you, but they aren't going backwards on the Wildcard Game. In a way, it's good for baseball to have a lot of teams chasing the 5th spot. Where they would get off the rails is if they just handed the 6th seed a postseason spot. That's way too boring. There needs to be some heartbreak at the end of the season.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Oct 20, 2017 -> 12:55 AM) Maybe there's something in missing but I don't see where you're getting 27 games from because that's not what the post proposes. I'm using 27 games as an example of what they would have to do to lessen the chances of a division winner having a losing record some years. 27x3=81, and the other 81 games vs different teams. Even then, a division winner could certainly win under .500. Nobody wants that. Bottom line, the more 4-team divisions you have, the higher the chance there will be a 4-team grouping that is all unworthy of making the playoffs. It just isn't feasible in baseball. The proposal Ringolsby presents could work, but is bad for different reasons--too many off days and the end of leagues being the two worst.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 11:12 PM) The only division that could happen in is the NLE but the Mets dealt with alot of injuries this year and the Pirates would benefit by not playing the Cubs and Cards 19 times each per year. Both teams would have better records. Take the Astros out of the NLW this year and the angels would have been a .500 team and maybe even Seattle. The rest of the divisions in the proposed format would be fine. If they did 4 team divisions, they’d have to play 27+ games each against division opponent to avoid division winners getting in under .500. I can’t be more clear about this- eight divisions of four teams wouldn’t work in baseball. They aren’t playing that many games against division opponents and they aren’t risking division winners under .500.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 10:46 PM) I really like this idea a lot and makes much more sense if the MLB does expand. 8 divisions of 4 teams wouldn't work in baseball, and they know that. The format above would result in division winners with losing records.

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 10:04 PM) Nathan For You continues to outdo itself. That was hilarious. I saw that Kimmel when it aired.

Gardenhire to Tigers Alex Cora to Red Sox Coming soon to a dugout near you.

QUOTE (Jenksy Cat @ Oct 19, 2017 -> 01:16 PM) It's dumb this isn't a thing already. Bigger roster = better product on the field. I'm not sure 24, 25, or 26 makes the product better or worse...but here's what they could do... Get creative when it comes to service time and using your own 40-man roster throughout the season, and submit a daily 22-man roster. The term "September Callup" needs to go away forever. The product needs to be consistent from Day 1 to Day 186.

8 divisions of 4 teams wouldn’t work in baseball. You’d have to play the same 3 teams 27+ games each, or risk division winners with losing records. If they must expand, the best scenario is: No divisions (2 16-team leagues) Close to a balanced schedule No interleague play Keep top 5 in each league making postseason Top 3 get in. True 4th and 5th best teams play to get in.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 17, 2017 -> 12:46 PM) Why not? The next sentence kinda answered it. 30 teams with tons of fringe major league players is watering the product down. Every team uses 50 players/25 pitchers on average. Add two more teams, that’s roughly 100 more fringe major league players. There would also be more haves and have nots. Also, just odds. Teams are now lucky if they win a World Series once every 30 years. Next, it’ll be 32. The definition of great team is getting blurred. Is it winning an October tournament, or winning 85+ games six out of 10 years. A case can be made that the latter is tougher to do. Baseball is fine at 30. It would be better at 28. It will be worse at 32.

No current fan of a team should want expansion. 30 teams is pushing it, as is. I'd keep it at 30, eliminate divisions, play a close-to-balanced schedule with only 12 interleague games within your own time zone. Top 5 of 15 make the postseason. Only 5 AL teams finished with a winning record this year. Chasing the carrot of the 5th seed is better than just handing over the 6th spot.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Oct 17, 2017 -> 09:18 AM) I'm ok cutting off the 6 (1 week). But they won’t cut a week. They’ll play 156 games in 186 days. Whatever they do, it’ll suck I’m sure.

But the ball isn’t juiced. Just ask Manfred.

A nice video from his local news station. http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/2017/10/15/danie...d-area-coaches/

2 month old baby. Tragic.

Probably a bad play, but a great result. Verlander was awesome.

QUOTE (BlackSox13 @ Oct 10, 2017 -> 03:47 PM) Really? That's messed up. MLB should have told TBS to get bent were starting the game at 1:00. I agree MLB should have that authority, but isn't this why they have all of the built in off days? It should be an easy call to play tomorrow if it's going to rain all night.