From The Athletic Pulse newsletter this morning:
Maybe we should reframe that debate about tweaking the MLB playoff format. It’s easy to look at the Braves, Dodgers and Orioles — who won 100 games each and couldn’t survive a five-day postseason layoff — and say they deserved better. But what if this was the NFL? Do we freak out if a 12-5 team loses to a 9-8 team in the playoffs? Or a No. 1 seed losing in the NCAA Tournament? We love it when that happens. The fan base might stress, but that’s just normal business. This should be, too.
I’ve been reading this type of argument a lot over the past week. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. But I have a few thoughts, all of which are somewhat inter-related:
-
Because the game of baseball is different. It just is. 162 games is very different than 17, or 30-something.
-
Not one of those other sports changes their playoff format from round to round. Everyone walks into those playoffs knowing it’s a 1-game situation. You gear up for that. Everything is on the line for that one game.
-
Based on the previous argument, make ALL rounds of the MLB playoffs the best of 3. After all, the argument is the best team shiould just win, right? Why change the number of games in later rounds?
-
At this point, I would argue that winning the division is meaningless at this point. In fact, you might say that not winning the division, and competing for the bye is the best way to go.
-
If you’re going to bring in those other sports, I would argue that baseball does not need a season of 162 games. Introduce off days throughout the season, and lower it to NBA-like 84 games. Playing 162 games is meaningless if it doesn’t gain you an advantage in the playoffs.
-
Lastly, I’m not arguing that the “best teams” shouldn’t just win. They should. I’m arguing you treat all of the teams the same. I’m arguing that no byes exist. Period.
