Do the math, MLB!

[Bob78164]

In this story, baseball's official Web site states that the Cardinals own a seeding tiebreak over the Mets for now because they own a better intradivision record. The implication is that the tiebreak between them could change, depending on the season's final 11 games.

It can't. The Mets and the Cardinals currently have identical records and the Cardinals have a better intradivision record. Every game remaining for each team is within its own division. Thus, the only way for them to remain tied at the end of the season (which is the only scenario in which a tiebreak matters) is for the two teams to have identical intradivision records from now until the end of the season. But if that happens, then since the Cardinals are leading the Mets for the tiebreak now, they will necessarily also be leading the Mets for the tiebreak at the end of the season. --Bob

[Vandal]

I thought this said

Do the math, LB!

Which would be completely understandable.

[littlebeast13]

In this story, baseball's official Web site states that the Cardinals own a seeding tiebreak over the Mets for now because they own a better intradivision record. The implication is that the tiebreak between them could change, depending on the season's final 11 games.

It can't. The Mets and the Cardinals currently have identical records and the Cardinals have a better intradivision record. Every game remaining for each team is within its own division. Thus, the only way for them to remain tied at the end of the season (which is the only scenario in which a tiebreak matters) is for the two teams to have identical intradivision records from now until the end of the season. But if that happens, then since the Cardinals are leading the Mets for the tiebreak now, they will necessarily also be leading the Mets for the tiebreak at the end of the season. --Bob

Actually, the Cardinals are currently playing the Rockies (And losing 6-1), so the Mets have one more intradivision game to play than the Cards do. Though your point still holds that if the two teams finish tied, the Cards would have to finish with a superior inner-division record (Cards 36-30, Mets 33-32). Those two losses to the Braves hurt even more in that respect...

While I didn't pick up on that lack of foresight when I read a similar article last night, I did wonder why record within division should be considered for the second tiebreaker. Due to the unbalanced schedule, a team that cleaned up within its own division compared to a tied team whose wins were more spread across the league would seem to, theoretically at least, be the inferior team. Doesn't the NFL use intraconference record as a second tiebreak for determining playoff spots? Record within the NL (though still affected by division bias, not as much) would seem to be a superior option...

lb13

[littlebeast13]

I thought this said

Do the math, LB!

Which would be completely understandable.

Damn, it looks like Marley's already got competition for the cellar in the next LSWE.....

lb13

[Bob78164]

In this story, baseball's official Web site states that the Cardinals own a seeding tiebreak over the Mets for now because they own a better intradivision record. The implication is that the tiebreak between them could change, depending on the season's final 11 games.

It can't. The Mets and the Cardinals currently have identical records and the Cardinals have a better intradivision record. Every game remaining for each team is within its own division. Thus, the only way for them to remain tied at the end of the season (which is the only scenario in which a tiebreak matters) is for the two teams to have identical intradivision records from now until the end of the season. But if that happens, then since the Cardinals are leading the Mets for the tiebreak now, they will necessarily also be leading the Mets for the tiebreak at the end of the season. --Bob

Actually, the Cardinals are currently playing the Rockies (And losing 6-1), so the Mets have one more intradivision game to play than the Cards do. Though your point still holds that if the two teams finish tied, the Cards would have to finish with a superior inner-division record (Cards 36-30, Mets 33-32). Those two losses to the Braves hurt even more in that respect...

While I didn't pick up on that lack of foresight when I read a similar article last night, I did wonder why record within division should be considered for the second tiebreaker. Due to the unbalanced schedule, a team that cleaned up within its own division compared to a tied team whose wins were more spread across the league would seem to, theoretically at least, be the inferior team. Doesn't the NFL use intraconference record as a second tiebreak for determining playoff spots? Record within the NL (though still affected by division bias, not as much) would seem to be a superior option...

lb13

D'oh! I forgot that the Rockies are in the West. --Bob

[Bob78164]

In this story, baseball's official Web site states that the Cardinals own a seeding tiebreak over the Mets for now because they own a better intradivision record. The implication is that the tiebreak between them could change, depending on the season's final 11 games.

It can't. The Mets and the Cardinals currently have identical records and the Cardinals have a better intradivision record. Every game remaining for each team is within its own division. Thus, the only way for them to remain tied at the end of the season (which is the only scenario in which a tiebreak matters) is for the two teams to have identical intradivision records from now until the end of the season. But if that happens, then since the Cardinals are leading the Mets for the tiebreak now, they will necessarily also be leading the Mets for the tiebreak at the end of the season. --Bob

Actually, the Cardinals are currently playing the Rockies (And losing 6-1), so the Mets have one more intradivision game to play than the Cards do. Though your point still holds that if the two teams finish tied, the Cards would have to finish with a superior inner-division record (Cards 36-30, Mets 33-32). Those two losses to the Braves hurt even more in that respect...

While I didn't pick up on that lack of foresight when I read a similar article last night, I did wonder why record within division should be considered for the second tiebreaker. Due to the unbalanced schedule, a team that cleaned up within its own division compared to a tied team whose wins were more spread across the league would seem to, theoretically at least, be the inferior team. Doesn't the NFL use intraconference record as a second tiebreak for determining playoff spots? Record within the NL (though still affected by division bias, not as much) would seem to be a superior option...

lb13

If memory serves, the NFL uses games against common opponents ahead of conference record for tiebreaks between teams from different divisions. --Bob

[Bob78164]

MLB.com is wrong again. They say the Red Sox have clinched a playoff berth because Toronto and Baltimore can't both pass them. It's true that Boston can't finish worse than a tie for second in the American League East. But Detroit could also end up as part of that tie, in which case Boston would be one of three teams tied for the two wild card spots. --Bob

[littlebeast13]

MLB.com is wrong again. They say the Red Sox have clinched a playoff berth because Toronto and Baltimore can't both pass them. It's true that Boston can't finish worse than a tie for second in the American League East. But Detroit could also end up as part of that tie, in which case Boston would be one of three teams tied for the two wild card spots. --Bob

I checked ESPN, and they also have Boston having clinched a playoff spot, so I did the math, and I admit, it really made my head hurt. But......

So if we assume Boston loses out, Detroit wins out, and Baltimore and Toronto win all of their games outside of the three game series they have left against each other, that gives us four possible final standings....

If Toronto sweeps:

TOR 93-69
BOS 91-71
DET 91-71
BAL 88-74

Toronto wins the East, Boston and Detroit win the wildcards. The same holds true if Baltimore wins one of the three games, so let's skip to....

If Baltimore goes 2-1:

TOR 91-71
BOS 91-71
DET 91-71
BAL 90-72

I believe Boston and Toronto would have to play for the division title (At least that seems fair with the new wildcard rules that tiebreakers shouldn't be used to determine who has to play the wildcard game)... but regardless, Boston is a playoff team.

If Baltimore sweeps:

BOS 91-71
BAL 91-71
DET 91-71
TOR 90-72

Same scenario as above, only with the Orioles in the mix rather than the Blue Jays.

Unless I've messed something up (which as vandal will tell you is always possible), Boston can do no worse than finish tied for the first wild card/division... and with no team that would have to be left out. I think where you messed up is not noticing that Baltimore has played one more game than Toronto (they're one back of Toronto in the win column, but two back in that all-important loss column)...

lb13

[Bob78164]

MLB.com is wrong again. They say the Red Sox have clinched a playoff berth because Toronto and Baltimore can't both pass them. It's true that Boston can't finish worse than a tie for second in the American League East. But Detroit could also end up as part of that tie, in which case Boston would be one of three teams tied for the two wild card spots. --Bob

I checked ESPN, and they also have Boston having clinched a playoff spot, so I did the math, and I admit, it really made my head hurt. But......

So if we assume Boston loses out, Detroit wins out, and Baltimore and Toronto win all of their games outside of the three game series they have left against each other, that gives us four possible final standings....

If Toronto sweeps:

TOR 93-69
BOS 91-71
DET 91-71
BAL 88-74

Toronto wins the East, Boston and Detroit win the wildcards. The same holds true if Baltimore wins one of the three games, so let's skip to....

If Baltimore goes 2-1:

TOR 91-71
BOS 91-71
DET 91-71
BAL 90-72

I believe Boston and Toronto would have to play for the division title (At least that seems fair with the new wildcard rules that tiebreakers shouldn't be used to determine who has to play the wildcard game)... but regardless, Boston is a playoff team.

If Baltimore sweeps:

BOS 91-71
BAL 91-71
DET 91-71
TOR 90-72

Same scenario as above, only with the Orioles in the mix rather than the Blue Jays.

Unless I've messed something up (which as vandal will tell you is always possible), Boston can do no worse than finish tied for the first wild card/division... and with no team that would have to be left out. I think where you messed up is not noticing that Baltimore has played one more game than Toronto (they're one back of Toronto in the win column, but two back in that all-important loss column)...

lb13

Where I messed up is not realizing that Boston can finish no worse than clear second (rather than tied for second) in the AL East. If Toronto finishes ahead of Boston, it means that the Orioles have to finish behind them.

Thanks. --Bob