The Playoffs: Crapshoot?

[UMFan83]

Billy Beane was mocked when he stated that the MLB playoffs are essentially a crapshoot. But the more I think about it, the more I wonder if this is true. With the success of Wild Card teams in baseball since their inception, and the number of 100 win teams this decade that have faltered out in the Division Series, you have to wonder if it really is the hottest team that takes it all. Here are some interesting examples:

 

2007:

The Rockies, mired around .500 in early September, go on an amazing run to streak into the playoffs, and through the National League to the World Series

 

2006:

Cardinals almost blow a large division lead and come into the playoffs an afterthought of an 83 win team, then get red hot, receive stellar performances from unlikely sources and win the World Series. Meanwhile, the Tigers, who held a huge divisional lead into September, collapse and lose the division on the last day and taking the Wild Card. They then get hot and go 7-1 through the playoffs on the way to the World Series.

 

2005:

White Sox start out the season red hot, build up a 12 game division lead and appear coasting to the playoffs. All the sudden in August, they start to trip up, and the Tribe gets hot. Suddenly its late September and the White Sox hold a 1.5 game lead. They eventually get hot, win their last 5-6 games, win the division and go 11-1 en route to winning the World Series.

Meanwhile the Astros suck almost all season, are complete afterthoughts, but get hot and beat a 100 win Cardinal team in the NLCS to get to the World Series

 

2003:

The Braves and Giants both win over 100 games and seem destined to meet in the NLCS. However the Cubs shut down the Braves league leading offense, and the Marlins handle the Giants and meet in the NLCS

 

2002:

A's win over 100 games and get cold and lose in the first round

 

etc etc etc.

 

Basically, I've come to the mindset that winning 95-100 games is nice, but all that matters is getting into the playoffs and getting there hot. Sure there are some factors that increase your odds of succeeding in October (if they allowed the Nats to participate in the playoffs, I don't care how hot they were they aren't doing anything), pitching certainly helps, having good patience helps, etc. but overall I can't help but feel like whichever team is hotter is going to succeed in October.

 

Thoughts?

[UK1679666180]

That's what it is, which team is playing better during that timeframe. Each of the playoff teams will have enough talent to beat their opponent.

[UMFan83]

That's what it is, which team is playing better during that timeframe. Each of the playoff teams will have enough talent to beat their opponent.

 

True, thats a simple way to look at it. But the thing is, in this NL I think you have a better shot at beating this crapshoot by having a better team, or at least hypothetically since a lot of teams can't matchup on talent.

 

It just upsets me to think that the Cubs could win 100 games, but go into the playoffs cold and get swept away again. It's not like getting hot or cold is something you can really control. It's basically just something that happens as a fluke.

[shnsajax]

I have always thought this since around 2000. Remember the Mariners in 2001, White Sox in 2000.

 

A dominate #1 & 2 can carry any .500 team in October. Astros had Clemens and Oswalt, I can't even name another starter from that 2005 team.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It's a weighted crapshoot.

 

I give the Cubs a 65% chance of beating most first-round opponents, 55% chance of beating a team like the Brewers, and 50/50 against the Red Sox or Rays.

[CubinNY]

It's the short series. Luck plays a really huge role in a short series. AJP and the third strike was nothing but luck. Many times though, the best team does win.

 

The only way to give yourself a shot is to be as strong as you can. Luck favors the prepared and the more talented.

 

I'd love to see a best of 13 WS.

Edited August 15, 2008 by CubinNY

[UK1679666180]

That's what it is, which team is playing better during that timeframe. Each of the playoff teams will have enough talent to beat their opponent.

 

True, thats a simple way to look at it. But the thing is, in this NL I think you have a better shot at beating this crapshoot by having a better team, or at least hypothetically since a lot of teams can't matchup on talent.

 

It just upsets me to think that the Cubs could win 100 games, but go into the playoffs cold and get swept away again. It's not like getting hot or cold is something you can really control. It's basically just something that happens as a fluke.

 

The Cubs do have that advantage b/c they do have the most talent in the NL and they will be playing more home games tham road games until they hopefully make it to the WS. With that said, that isn't good enough to overcome those other teams playing better than the Cubs,

[Schwarber Fan]

I have always thought this since around 2000. Remember the Mariners in 2001, White Sox in 2000.

 

A dominate #1 & 2 can carry any .500 team in October. Astros had Clemens and Oswalt, I can't even name another starter from that 2005 team.

 

Andy Pettitte?

[Slugger_16]

I have always thought this since around 2000. Remember the Mariners in 2001, White Sox in 2000.

 

A dominate #1 & 2 can carry any .500 team in October. Astros had Clemens and Oswalt, I can't even name another starter from that 2005 team.

 

Andy Pettitte?

 

Brandon Backe!

[nolanwood]

I have always thought this since around 2000. Remember the Mariners in 2001, White Sox in 2000.

 

A dominate #1 & 2 can carry any .500 team in October. Astros had Clemens and Oswalt, I can't even name another starter from that 2005 team.

 

Andy Pettitte?

 

Brandon Backe!

 

Wandy

[treebird]

you just have to hope that jim edmonds can come up with the right tip or wisecrack at the right time to push us over the top.

[SouthSideRyan]

I have always thought this since around 2000. Remember the Mariners in 2001, White Sox in 2000.

 

A dominate #1 & 2 can carry any .500 team in October. Astros had Clemens and Oswalt, I can't even name another starter from that 2005 team.

 

Andy Pettitte?

 

Brandon Backe!

 

Wandy

 

Pockmark Astacio.

[BigSlick]

It's a weighted crapshoot.

 

I give the Cubs a 65% chance of beating most first-round opponents, 55% chance of beating a team like the Brewers, and 50/50 against the Red Sox or Rays.

Agreein' wit dis post

 

Although it may be better or worse depending on who we play in the first series, because of who we can trot out in a 5 game set. Against the Dodgers? I might bump that up to about 70%

[Backtobanks]

I have always thought this since around 2000. Remember the Mariners in 2001, White Sox in 2000.

 

A dominate #1 & 2 can carry any .500 team in October. Astros had Clemens and Oswalt, I can't even name another starter from that 2005 team.

 

Pitching rules in the playoffs, but a hot hitter can really help dominate a short series. We've all seen what Soriano can do in the matter of 7-10 days, but sometimes it's the least capable hitter on the team that goes 15 for 28 during a 7-game World Series. The Cubs should be in pretty good shape because of their all around depth.

[Choonch]

It's a weighted crapshoot.

 

I give the Cubs a 65% chance of beating most first-round opponents, 55% chance of beating a team like the Brewers, and 50/50 against the Red Sox or Rays.

 

Yep. Sure, it's a crapshoot, but the better the team, the more likely they get hot.

[Banedon]

I've thought it was a crapshoot for a while now. But weighted crapshoot is a better description.

 

It's like the NBA draft lottery. Certain teams have better odds, but occaionally you get a "Chicago Bulls" that sneaks in there and grabs it.

[UMFan83]

I've thought it was a crapshoot for a while now. But weighted crapshoot is a better description.

 

It's like the NBA draft lottery. Certain teams have better odds, but occaionally you get a "Chicago Bulls" that sneaks in there and grabs it.

 

The thing I like is that the Cubs have all the pieces that you need to weigh things on your side and give you better odds of succeeding

 

-Great top end starting pitching

-Very good bullpen

-Balanced patient offense

 

But even still, we see teams with all those crap out in the first round. The Angels have been doing it for years. In fact, look at the 2007 Angels and tell me that team doesn't remind you a little bit of this year's Cubs team.

[jersey cubs fan]

you just have to hope that jim edmonds can come up with the right tip or wisecrack at the right time to push us over the top.

 

That is the key.

 

 

I always thought the crapshoot story was overplayed. Everybody has a chance, and the best team doesn't always win. But the better teams have a better chance of winning. It's just a chance though, and no guarantee.

[CubinNY]

I've thought it was a crapshoot for a while now. But weighted crapshoot is a better description.

 

It's like the NBA draft lottery. Certain teams have better odds, but occaionally you get a "Chicago Bulls" that sneaks in there and grabs it.

 

The thing I like is that the Cubs have all the pieces that you need to weigh things on your side and give you better odds of succeeding

 

-Great top end starting pitching

-Very good bullpen

-Balanced patient offense

 

But even still, we see teams with all those crap out in the first round. The Angels have been doing it for years. In fact, look at the 2007 Angels and tell me that team doesn't remind you a little bit of this year's Cubs team.

Just stop this and enjoy the ride. The Cubs have a dominant team with likable players. They are really soapdropping good. Wait and see what happens before starting to obsess about the down side of the playoffs.

 

It's like Royko wrote, "An optimist looks at the glass and says it's half full. A pessimist looks at the glass and says it's half empty. A Cubs fan looks at the glass and says when is going to spill."

[Derwood]

the crapshoot aspect of it just shows that it's better to build a team that makes the playoffs every year (while hoping you get hot in the right year) instead of throwing all your eggs in one basket for a small window of opportunity

[Electron Blue]

the crapshoot aspect of it just shows that it's better to build a team that makes the playoffs every year (while hoping you get hot in the right year) instead of throwing all your eggs in one basket for a small window of opportunity

 

Good call. It's also why I think the Cubs easily got the better deal in Harden than the Brewers with CC. I don't see CC in milwaukee next year...

[UMFan83]

I've thought it was a crapshoot for a while now. But weighted crapshoot is a better description.

 

It's like the NBA draft lottery. Certain teams have better odds, but occaionally you get a "Chicago Bulls" that sneaks in there and grabs it.

 

The thing I like is that the Cubs have all the pieces that you need to weigh things on your side and give you better odds of succeeding

 

-Great top end starting pitching

-Very good bullpen

-Balanced patient offense

 

But even still, we see teams with all those crap out in the first round. The Angels have been doing it for years. In fact, look at the 2007 Angels and tell me that team doesn't remind you a little bit of this year's Cubs team.

Just stop this and enjoy the ride. The Cubs have a dominant team with likable players. They are really soapdropping good. Wait and see what happens before starting to obsess about the down side of the playoffs.

 

It's like Royko wrote, "An optimist looks at the glass and says it's half full. A pessimist looks at the glass and says it's half empty. A Cubs fan looks at the glass and says when is going to spill."

 

You are completely right, and now that the Cubs have put some decent space between themselves and the Cardinals, I am starting to really relax and enjoy the ride. But I just can't allow myself to dream of the Cubs in the World Series until we potentially get there.

[JeffH]

Sure there are some factors that increase your odds of succeeding in October

 

Number one on this list: Having a good organization that puts a team into the postseason frequently.

 

If you only get in once every ten years or so, your chances of winning it all decrease significantly.

 

Let's hope that we're starting to see the early signs of the Cubs no longer being MLB's worst organization.

[UMFan83]

Sure there are some factors that increase your odds of succeeding in October

 

Number one on this list: Having a good organization that puts a team into the postseason frequently.

 

If you only get in once every ten years or so, your chances of winning it all decrease significantly.

 

Let's hope that we're starting to see the early signs of the Cubs no longer being MLB's worst organization.

 

Hey if we make the playoffs this year, thats 3 times in the last 6 years, 4 out of 6 years over .500 (and 5 out of 8), and 5 out of the 6 years (and 6 out of 8) with at least 79 wins. Then again a lot of it wasn't because we had this great organization that planned for it with smart moves, a lot of it is just throwing money at problems. But the last year or so I feel the org. finally grasps the concept.

[Soul]

I agree, it's all about putting playoff-caliber teams on the field year in and year out. Sure you can get lucky one year and win it, but the chances are smaller.