The correct answer?
Zero.
It's that simple. The best playoff system is to not have a playoff system. It's such an obvious answer that there's literally no argument against it.
Of course, it's not exactly that easy. Because it actually depends on the answer to the question, "Why do we have playoffs in the first place?" If your answer to that question is "to determine the best team of the year", then you don't need any playoffs. After 162 games, if you haven't figured that out by now you're just not paying attention. So why on earth would you need more games? All playoff games do it give the inferior team a chance to win the series. If after a 162-game season one team is five games behind another team...why would you want a playoff series to give the losing team another chance? What purpose would that serve? We've already determined the best team.
Now, if your answer is "To create excitement and sell tickets and tv contracts"...well...then you still don't want any playoff teams. At least not how they're currently constructed.
If you're thinking, "I want more money and excitement", then why limit the teams at all? Bring excitement and money to all the teams.
Or, at least all the ones that deserve it.
I've asked the question before, but what if baseball had two champions? There's the 162-game champion and then a new equally important "tournament champion". "What is this tournament?", you ask. Well, I don't have all the details yet. But, Im thinking a midseason timeframe. July perhaps. It would be a 28 team tournament. Which 28? The top 28 teams from the previous season. On July 1, those 28 teams would be ranked based on the current year's standings. (Or, perhaps after 80 team games or something to make it even.) The top two ranked teams would get a first round bye. If my math is right, then the other 26 teams would then be seeded according to that same record and start a single game elimination tournament over the next week or so to determine the champion. A "July Madness" if you will. What does this tournament do? For one thing it punishes the true "tankers" from the previous year. They miss out on the excitement...and the revenue. It also lets every team get involved. Think the Mets could make a run with deGrom and Scherzer? How about any non-playoff team with a top ace. With the excitement of the single game, they all have a chance. But, it still rewards the better regular season team...both with entry to the tournament and with the seeding.
You'd also think the tournament could get a decent TV contract to help incentivize everyone to make this happen.
Obviously there are some kinks. A couple off the top of my head...With rain, my guess is that these would all need to be played in dome/roof stadiums. Also, with pitching rotations, I'd like to space it out so the top two teams could have their ace pitch the finals, and somehow not make it as easy for the other teams. Not quite sure how to schedule that, though. But, those are minor adjustments.
You also have to get the teams to buy into the fact that it's an "equal" championship and they need to play to win. This isn't a weeklong exhibition to rest their stars. It's just as important as they playoffs are now. But, once that's settled, I think this'll work.
You reward the best team with a championship, and you award one to the tournament champion too. Reward skill, but still have excitement and cash flow.
Everyone wins!
So, basically like European soccer, where you have the Premier League champion and the FA Cup champion. Not a bad idea. I don't think baseball would ever take that kind of risk with its traditions, but it's interesting.
ReplyDeleteNot 100% sure how soccer does it, but yes. That was the starting point for the plan. The traditions would be the tricky part, as with everything in baseball.
Delete