1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Can anyone explain the logic with MLB tie-breakers?

Discussion in 'Houston Texans' started by The Cat, Oct 2, 2005.

  1. The Cat

    The Cat Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2000
    Messages:
    20,836
    Likes Received:
    5,434
    If this has already been discussed, can someone link me? If not, I'm curious. New York clinched the AL East over Boston yesterday despite the fact that the Sox could tie for first. Why? Head-to-head. Two days ago, the White Sox clinched the AL Central over Cleveland despite the fact that Cleveland could've tied for the lead (at the time). Why? Head-to-head. At worst, the 'Stros will be tied with the Phils after today, and they own the head-to-head... and we'd be headed to a one-game playoff in that scenario. Why?

    I asked a friend about it yesterday, and he commented that the Red Sox and Yankees (and other in-division matchups) play more games and thus have a larger sample size than teams from different divisions competing for the WC. And that's true.

    However, as I understand it, the 'Stros have played every team in the NL at least six times. Do the math... to have a majority, you'd have to win four games out of those six. I don't see how MLB can claim that winning four games isn't a large enough sample size to make a judgment considering that winning four games is the exact requirement to win the World Series!

    Is there any reason other than the supposed small sample size (which I think is bogus) for these differences in tie-breaking procedures? It doesn't make a lot of sense. imo, all races should be determined through a one-game playoff, or all races should be determined through head-to-head record... but not flip-flopping between the two. It's really annoying that beating the Phils 6 out of 6 times isn't enough to give us the edge if the two teams do end up tied.
     
  2. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,683
    Likes Received:
    16,209
    This is a bit of a quirk actually. Bos-NYY and Cle-Chi only "clinched" because there would be no tie for the wildcard. If, for example, Bos-NYY-and-Cle all tied with the same record, NYY would *not* have clinched the division. There would be a 3 team playoff, with Bos-NYY having a game to decide which team won the division.

    The only time they use the head-to-head to break a tie is if both teams involved are guaranteed to make the playoffs anyway. If NYY and Boston tie, it will necessarily mean that Boston won the wildcard (that's why NYY only clinched because Cleveland lost). The idea is that if both teams made the playoffs anyway, it's more important that the teams get rested and set their rotation, rather than have a game to decide who's the wildcard team and who's the division winner.

    It doesn't actually have anything to do with the sample size of games between the teams.
     
  3. The Cat

    The Cat Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2000
    Messages:
    20,836
    Likes Received:
    5,434
    I see. I didn't know what the reason actually was... I was just speaking hypothetically on a friend's scenario. Thanks for the explanation.

    That said, I still disagree with parts of MLB's premise. If I'm Boston, I'd prefer to play the extra game, even if they have the WC won, to take a shot at getting home-field in at least one round, as opposed to going on the road for both as the WC team.

    Also, imo, head-to-head should play a bigger role if we're examining two teams where only one will make the postseason. If one of the two teams in the tie consistently beats the other throughout the season, I'd like for that to take precedent over a one-game playoff where homefield is determined by a coin flip and the starting pitchers are essentially luck of the draw (where your rotation ends up that day). I know it's more dramatic and fun for fans, but I don't think that's the best way to honestly determine the more deserving team.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now