My priority is a sweep in Arizona, obviously - but I'm completely torn about what I prefer to happen in Arlington. I really don't think I want them to waste resources on a mostly meaningless tiebreaker game on Monday; *especially* if it ends up being in Arlington. The last thing I want to do is go to New York on the backside of a 15-6 drubbing. IOW, I want no part of the Rangers.
didn't say he wasn't. he's always the preferred option on full rest. the road disparity between him and others is markedly less though, plus short rest on top of that... whichever way hinchy wanted to go, i'd be fine with. i'd honestly probably go the other way and "gamble", if you want to call it that, and keep the longer term goal better lined up, but this way he won't have to hear the collective **** fit from fans about not pitching keuchel tuesday if we lose.
Yes, but road + short-rest Keuchel (who's well over his career high in innings)? If its between that and Fiers/Kazmir on full rest, I'd start Keuchel. If its between that... or LMJ on full rest, I'll start LMJ (and have Dallas ready if LMJ struggles... which would likely be the first inning if he's going to struggle).
Mostly. I said mostly. "Lose and you're... still in! Yea!" doesn't have quite the same urgency as "lose and you're out." And neither path is really preferable to the other, frankly. I'd rather be assured of multiple playoff games - but potentially against the Blue Jays... yeesh. On paper, New York and Kansas City would seem like a better path - but I don't want our postseason to possibly last a game, and Kansas City is the exact kind of seasoned team that you fall asleep on and then they go full-throttle on your nether regions in October.
Come on. Who wouldn't rather win the division than the wild card other just to be contrarian on a message board?
I stated the reason: you're burning resources. You exhaust a pitcher, possibly your bullpen, put more miles on tired players - and you might have to do it all again the very next day in an actual do-or-die. It's not a terribly difficult concept to grasp, frankly.
Eh... much like the post regarding LMJ above... the Astros are going to have to face these teams at some point anyways, regardless of its the LDS or LCS. To me, a division tie-breaking game still carries a great deal of significance... lose, and you're only guaranteed one more game. Win, and you're guaranteed 3 more games against a slightly lesser opponent (which I guess doesn't mean much in the post-season...hell, we just struggled to beat a Seattle team that wasn't trying). A WC game AFTER a loss in the division game really has a consolation bracket-like feel... along with the travel implications of having to now play three consecutive games in three different cities. I would still attempt to win that first game with a full push, and try to avoid another one-game scenario if possible.
Or... quietly, and happily, slip into the WC game with no tiebreaker. Yeah, I didn't even think about/mention the additional travel with a tiebreaker game. I think I'd rather avoid it, frankly... Wait! Is that too contrarian?...
Sure... but this scenario is looking specifically at what if there's a tie for the division. Ideally, I'm simply for least amount of 1-game scenarios possible. So, if there is a tie, I favor trying like hell to win that very next game to avoid having to play in yet another 1-game scenario. In the grand scheme of things, these guys have been playing almost everyday for 5+ months... so it would really be the "extreme" view to say that trying like hell to win one game (and ultimately losing) would really put them at a severe disadvantage if they had a game the very next day. It would literally be just like any other game where they happened to use a lot of pitchers/resources... and had to find a way to win the next day.
A division tiebreaker game is not remotely meaningless. Winning the division advances you a round and roughly doubles your odds of winning a World Series (since you have a 50%ish chance to win the WC game - Keuchel is theoretically an advantage but we have no idea what he looks like on 3 days rest). From a risk-reward ratio, a win advances you a round. A loss slightly reduces your odds of advancing a round (vs just having the WC game in the first place). It's a no-brainer.
Another simpler way to look at it: If you tie for the division, you have to win 1 out of 2 games to get to the "real" playoffs. if you lose the division, you have to win 1 out of 1 games to get to the "real" playoffs.
Mostly. I said mostly. You've focused on nothing but the positives - all legitimate, and I don't disagree. But there are downsides. It compromises your rotation - not just for the (potential) WC game but also for the ALDS; it adds additional miles to players who long ago passed their most-games-played milestone; it adds potentially significant travel (Seattle to site of tie-breaker to New York for WC game - three time zones in 2 days); and it offers a situation in which you might enter the postseason a bit demoralized/disappointed, you know? All things being equal, you take a division crown. But do you really want *this* team to spend 24 hours in Arlington before heading off to New York? Wouldn't they be better off skipping the middle man?
Conversely, you seem to be focused on nothing but the negatives. Perhaps they play the Angels in Houston instead of the Rangers in Arlington. Then, perhaps they win that game and get rest until Thursday.
They aren't compromising the rotation - Keuchel is pitching Tuesday regardless. I couldn't care less about the ALDS rotation - you have to get there first. And really, besides Keuchel, all the others are about equal caliber players - I don't care what order we use McHugh, Fiers, and McCullers (I'm assuming Kazmir is the odd man out). If anything, this helps the rotation - if you win the Monday game, Keuchel could pitch twice in the ALDS. There could be some additional miles, certainly, if it's the Rangers (Angels would be a home game). But it's not like Arlington is a big detour or a long trip. On the last point - given that none of the core of this team have ever been to the playoffs, I don't think losing a tiebreaker division game is going to matter - this is their first playoff opportunity ever. And I don't see how it's more demoralizing than losing the division outright in a September collapse. Basically, you play a Monday game. If you win it, you earned a day of rest and saved Keuchel. If you lose it, there is literally no harm done except for a possible stopover in Arlington for a day. You still have your same pitcher for Tuesday and the stakes will be exactly the same. For a 50% chance to make it to the ALDS? Yes, I take the opportunity every time, no questions asked.
But obviously, that's not an option. If they tie for the division... they HAVE to play that game, and if they have to play that game... they might as well go all-out to WIN that game so they don't have to pack up and travel to another city (for just one night) and do it all over again. And after 162 games... may I just say how extremely silly these "one game to decide it all" feels. I know they'll never go back to it, but at least when there was just 2 teams per league.... you knew just making it to that point meant something, and any sample size issue you get from there on-out cannot diminish the accomplishment you've just achieved. Now, being just the WC or even a division winner in the LDS seems just way too anticlimactic to be considered as a real accomplishment (unless you end up advancing to the LCS as well). In that respect, the Astros achievements in 80 and 86 outweigh the 97,98,99,01 achievements. The 04 and 05 seasons are in between (not division winners, but they did advance to at least the LCS).
Mostly. I said mostly. Look, last week, I advocated (with Nick, that CONTRARIAN!) winning the division above any and every outcome, match-ups be damned, because it guarantees you at least three games. So, no - I'm not focused solely on the negatives. But the play-in game adds a unique wrinkle. It's important, sure - but it's not more important than the WC game. So how much are you willing to spend to win the tiebreaker, if it's not do-and-die and *could* impact an actual do-or-die?
Sure it does because, in an effort to win the division, you're likely exhausting your 2nd best pitcher (I believe it would naturally fall on LMJ) Monday. Now, if you get to the ALDS - a short series, your first- and second-best pitchers are looking at 2, maybe three starts (and likely not until game 3, in which you might already be down 0-2) instead of 3, maybe 4. But you *do* care about it - and we know this because if we could all create the perfect playoff scenario, it'd be clinch the division far enough out to be able to set-up your rotation up exactly how you'd like it, right?... The Monday game has no impact - or shouldn't - on when Keuchel pitches in the ALDS. I don't even understand the thinking? Because you've exhausted one of your pitchers?... That's preferable? Arlington or Houston - you're still traveling *from* Seattle and it might all be to turn around and travel *to* New York. Three time zones in two days. I'd rather take the day off and play the WC game. MO. You've heard about the frog and the frying pan? There's a considerable psychological difference in losing something slowly over a longer period of time vs. losing something in an instant. They're going to exhaust themselves just to force the tie (chasing is *always* more exhausting), only to be punched in the nose. I'm not in the locker room; I don't know the guys - but, generally, we have a decent idea how how humans process disappointment. Ah, ok. So if Carlos Correa blows out his knee in the tiebreaker game and is out for the postseason, literally no harm was done?...
