GDT 8/24/25 Washington Nationals (Irvin, J) @ Philadelphia Phillies (Suárez, Ra)

[andyb]

I think getting the bye means a lot more than 1 vs 2. It is the big flaw in the 3-division setup and a reason they probably go to 16 teams if we every get 4 divisions in each league.

[VoteForKalas]

I get resting the starting pitchers, but we need a healthy and effective pen too for the playoffs. Starters you know are not going to be starting in the playoffs should shoulder more of the load so Nola, Sanchez and Suarez are ready to go full tilt when needed.

I would pitch Alvarado almost every game since I'm not convinced they want to keep him beyond this season anyway and resting Strahm, Banks. Duran, Robertson and Kerkering i.e. the big 5 is important.

Otherwise, it should still be full gas on IMO until the division and #1 or #2 seed is locked up. Having one of the top seeds is crucial IMO.

[andyb]

The 9th bullpen pitcher (Lazar most likely) will let them rest the bullpen more. I think Alvarado needs to prove he can be effective first, but yes I would pitch him as often as they can with him not being eligible for the playoffs. He'll be incentivized to pitch well to get a new deal next year also.

Positive sign is Robertson looks pretty good and is very fresh.

[zambonir]

I think they probably keep Alvarado if he's sharp, his option is still only a little more than they paid Romano (9 million and it's really 8.5 since there's a buyout) and less than they paid Knebel and Kimbrel when salaries and payroll were lower. Also less than Robertson wanted for a full season. Though that's an interestingly conspiratorial approach to his usage.

Strahm is the guy I wonder about. His option is obviously going to vest ($7.5 million for 60 innings) but he's got a lot more innings and years on him than Alvarado.

[dicemen99]

I'm not sure that's really true. It's still pretty rare for for an NFL wild card team to win the Super Bowl. And in baseball avoiding the one-game play-in was powerful motivation. Now it's more of a crapshoot, and one that has so far favored the teams which played in the WC.

I would think the Brewers and the Cardinals (if they were in the mix) would very much want to never play a WC series again. I also think managers still very much want Games 6 and 7 at home, even if it doesn't always guarantee you anything (and of course owners want that, more $$$).

Once you're locked in, you actually rest guys - completely (remember who started the last two games of 2023?). But when the seeds are still in play, nobody is getting extra days off or skipping starts. You might take the foot off the gas a little, depending.

I can't argue with your logic, but all I can point to is the actions that clubs take.

You point out how rare it is for NFL wild cards to win the SB, but almost every year we have teams in contention for the bye (especially when there were 2) and homefield throughout that sit their starters in the final game. Including the Eagles a few years ago.

Baseball is a bit different with all of the games, but I can guarantee you if the Phillies have the playoffs clinched, but are a game behind (1/2 game/tiebreaker) on the last day of the season for the bye you are not going to like the lineup they run out there. And their rotation will already be lined up for the playoffs/WC - Sanchez won't be pitching for sure, probably not Nola.

[andyb]

Baseball has always had more upset potential than football. The new system guarantees that the final 4 in each league will have 1 wild card and potentially 2. So the chances of each wild card team making the World Series are small but the chances of any wild card making it are medium-sized (if 3 of the overall final 8 on average are wild cards and upsets in short series are possible).

The rest and home crowd seem to be bigger advantages in football than baseball (when the rest in particular is a borderline negative for the bye team). The progression to the next round with the bye though is probably worth it compared to the 30%-40% chance of losing a short series even if it is all at home.

If the Phillies need to win the final game of the season for the division they are going to play all out even if the wild card is clinched. Think of it as 100% chance of winning the next series vs 60-65%. That is worth going out in the final game to advance to the next round of the playoffs. Now if it is the 3 seed vs the 4 seed and no bye - then they might rest multiple players.

[dicemen99]

Baseball has always had more upset potential than football. The new system guarantees that the final 4 in each league will have 1 wild card and potentially 2. So the chances of each wild card team making the World Series are small but the chances of any wild card making it are medium-sized (if 3 of the overall final 8 on average are wild cards and upsets in short series are possible).

The rest and home crowd seem to be bigger advantages in football than baseball (when the rest in particular is a borderline negative for the bye team). The progression to the next round with the bye though is probably worth it compared to the 30%-40% chance of losing a short series even if it is all at home.

If the Phillies need to win the final game of the season for the division they are going to play all out even if the wild card is clinched. Think of it as 100% chance of winning the next series vs 60-65%. That is worth going out in the final game to advance to the next round of the playoffs. Now if it is the 3 seed vs the 4 seed and no bye - then they might rest multiple players.

I don't see it Especially, considering that the #1 impact player on the outcome of a game is the starting pitcher. The #1 or #2 will not absolutely not be pitching on September 28th if there is any shot that a team is playing in the WC series unless they do not have the playoffs clinched..I don't care if a bye is on the line - it's not happening.

The situation is often more complex in baseball because of the amount of games - you have 3 in the last weekend compared to 1 in football, but once the playoffs are clinched, seeding is a secondary priority.

Like I said to zamb, your logic makes sense, but we can revisit this when a situation comes up. Nothing you can say will change my mind, only what the clubs actually do in those situations. From what I've observed, the don't care much about byes, seedings, etc. Obviously, they are not going to avoid them, but the number one priority is health and setting the team up for the playoffs in terms of pitching, once the playoffs are clinched.

[andyb]

3 game series with a day off before, so only one starter would be on short rest. I think you go all out if it means a bye. Maybe you cut the starter at 80 pitches to let them be around for a 3-day rest start if needed. Look at the percentage of "best of 3" upsets. One starter is not worth the difference between a 100% chance of winning a short series and a 60% chance (and lately that percent has been under 50%).