MLB (Non Phillies) News and Discussion 2025 Season

[andyb]

This explains why Tucker has been mediocre the last couple of months. I think there were doubts about him getting $500 million but if he recovers and has a decent September he probably still will get that level of contract (or a mere $450 million if he can figure out how to live on that).

Cubs’ Kyle Tucker had hairline fracture in right hand, Craig Counsell confirms

[zambonir]

They know

If MLB expands, could its 162-game schedule shrink? It very well might

> One club official we spoke with this week casually referred to baseball’s current 162-game slog as “an endangered species.” Another longtime club executive, also granted anonymity so he could speak freely, was even more emphatic.

> “Expansion,” he said, “means the end of 162.”

(snip)

> Let’s say baseball in the future is a sport with 32 teams, split into eight divisions of four teams each. You know where the math majors would suggest the schedule needs to go if that’s the setup? To 156 games. Here’s our rough sketch of how simple it is to get to that number:

> 12 games apiece versus the other three teams inside the division. That’s 36 games.

> Six games apiece versus the other 12 teams in your league. That’s 72 games.

> Are you adding along at home? No need. That gets us to 108 games. Where do the last 48 games come from?

> Three games apiece versus the 16 teams in the other league. Now we’re at 156. Bingo.

[andyb]

> 12 games apiece versus the other three teams inside the division. That’s 36 games.

The flaw that articles like this fail to understand is that recent schedules prioritize an odd number of games in a season series to serve as playoff tie-breakers. There is a reason we have had 19 and now 13 games in division in recent years. It is because we don't want to have most division ties settled outside of head to head records.

Wild card ties will always be harder of course. And a 159-game schedule does "feel" weird. But I think that is better. Now I would only play half the other league (24 games). Or 26 if they add a short head to head against your designated rival (NY vs NY, etc.). But they really need 13 in division. If the schedule has to have an odd number you can add a 7th game to some of the out of division matchups.

[julio]

I don't know, andyb. Given the proliferation of short series in a multi-layer post-season, winning the WS now has such a large randomness component that I might argue that the simple - and equally "fair" - way to deal with season-record ties is to just flip a coin.

Moreover, MLB could make the "coin flip" a major, made-for-TV circus. Lots of buildup. Lots of talking heads. Lots of commercials. It's what they do.

[zambonir]

You would think Stark is not unaware of that consideration. It is certainly a bit more important than the coin flip julio suggests if significant home field or a bye is at stake, but there are plenty of other ways to have a tiebreaker, as in the NFL. If head-to-head or division doesn't do it then you go to league. Or how about just run differential?

They could always tweak it in any case.

[andyb]

They have been doing the odd games in division for over 20 years through. They clearly don't want 1-game playoffs any more. I am not up on the rules to know if they are even possible these days, but the 3-game Wild Card series really can't be pushed back a day or two with the current schedule.

I think a coin flip between 2 100-win teams to decide a division championships and who gets a first round bye would be a disaster for MLB when an odd number of division games would eliminate that in all but 3-way ties (where the 3-way head to head hopefully is not tied also).

[julio]

I think a coin flip between 2 100-win teams to decide a division championships and who gets a first round bye would be a disaster for MLB

You're probably right about this. But the why is that fans believe that a three-game series between two even-matched clubs (or a one-game play-in) is more meaningful than a coin flip. My point was that, regardless of what fans believe, the coin flip is just about as accurate a way of determining which club is actually better.

But of course, the expanded post-season isn't about determining which club is best - if it were, it would admit fewer clubs, and use longer head-to-head series. The choice has been made - to include additional markets in the post-season (more clubs), at the cost of rewarding mediocrity, because a mediocre club can just get lucky in a short series (or a series of short series!). It's all about the marketing.

Personally, I would prefer a post-season that rewards seasonal excellence with more than a bye in a crapshoot post-season tournament.

This won't happen, but...

1. Decide how many clubs belong in the post-season. My personal preference is...25% of them? That would be eight, in a 32-team environment. That could be eight division-winners (Four-team divisions), or first- and second-place teams in four eight-team divisions. But you have to win or place to get into the post-season.

2. Play longer series - three tiers of seven-game series. 4x7, 2x7, 7. Total possible games in the post-season = 49. (In the current post-season, you have 4x3, 4x5, 2x7, 7, or total possible games = 53.) 2-3-2 series. I know TV won't like it, but play in the afternoon as much as possible - the weather matters!

3. Given my preference for four 8-team divisions (yeah, I know; won't happen; God forbid): 12 games against 7 in-division opponents (84 games); 6 games against 8 teams in other division (same league) (48 games); 3 games against 8 teams in one division from other league (24 games); total 156 games. Break ties using a) head-to-head records; b) run differential; c) whatever.

Yeah, won't happen. I know that. Four-team divisions. Wild cards. 3-game post-season series. But no coin-flips.

I'm old. Time was, you didn't talk about building a team for the post-season - you built a team for the regular season, because if you didn't, you weren't in the post-season. Now? Build a team that's just good enough to nail down a post-season slot (12th-best of 28? Good enough!), but top-heavy with pitching, so likely to prevail in a do-or-die short series.

Time was, the season mattered. You had to perform, to get there. (the post-season). Now...unless your team is bad, you're going to get there; the season doesn't matter that much, the focus is on the tournament. And...given that the tournament is a crapshoot, mediocrity is probably good enough.

Makes sense, I guess, that MLB simultaneously wants to downsize the draft, downsize the minors, rely on colleges that wreck pitchers' arms, etc., to save money. It no longer really matters if there's less talent developed, if teams are mediocre - because mediocrity will get you into the post-season.

[phillychuck]

One issue that is not being mentioned in this discussion is the actual rationale for expanding the post season, which still obtains. MLB wanted more fanbases to believe they had a chance to “win it all,” so the post season expansion is justified based on how many fan bases feel they are in contention.

A model for this is the buyers/sellers dichotomy at the trade deadline...there just are not that many sellers anymore, because so many teams still believe they are in contention for the wildcards. I don’t think MLB wants to change that.

[zambonir]

I don't know that I can really blame them for that though. I suppose it is partly a product of the financial divide/lack of parity, which was not as big a factor in the '90s (let alone before then). Nobody wants to have a team whose season is all but over in the middle of July.

I'm not sure things have changed that much though. In 2019 there were eight NL teams with winning records no more than 2 games out of the sole wild card, and seven under .500 teams. This year there were only seven teams above .500 (with the Cardinals right at .500). It's just that six of those seven teams are going to be in the playoffs instead of four. But the other eight were still pretty much done, and deadline sellers.

[BostonRoss]

My problem has been that teams competing for the same playoff spot often don't platy the same schedule. So a team in a stronger division competing for a wild card spot with a team in a weaker division is at a disadvantage because of the higher number of intra-division games. Even competing for first place in a division has been affected by the interleague schedules where teams always played their "natural rivals," who might be really good or really bad.

The schedule cited in the NYT article is better than most recent schedules but doesn't eliminate the issue of wild card competition between teams in different divisions. Having the top two teams in each division make the playoffs solves that problem, but it increases the probability of a bad second place team making the postseason.

[julio]

Let's do a reductio ad absurdum here.

We want fan bases to believe they have a shot - even with bad teams.

So, instead of 12 teams in the post-season, or 16 teams in the post-season... Let's have expansion to 32 teams, and then a 32-team, five round post-season tournament.

We'll have to shorten the regular season a bit - but so what? Its only purpose is to provide data for seeding the tournament. From March 27th to September 10th there are 168 days. Define the "regular season" as 156 games. That's only 12 off-days, which could be a stumbling block for the MLBPA, but something to work with.

• Organize MLB into 8 four-team divisions, divided into two "leagues."
  • In division, play 12 games against each opponent. 3 x 12 = 36.
• Out of division, but in "league," play 6 games against each opponent (home and home). 12 x 6 = 72.
• Inter "league", play one three-game series against each opponent. 16 x 3 = 48.
• Total games/team = 156
• Five rounds of post-season series, each scheduled as a seven-day series, as follows:
  First round: 9/13 thru 9/21.
  Second round: 9/23 thru 10/1
  Third round: 10/4 thru 10/12
  Fourth round: 10/14 thru 10/22
  WS 10/25 thru 11/2
• Regular season starts same time as currently (the example dates are taken from 2025). Regular season is shortened by...6 games.
• WS ends one day later.
• All 32 teams are "in the running" through September 10th.

Radical. You bet. Not just radical; leftist, liberal, woke radical. Pinko!

Yes, it's absurd. But that's the point of a reductio. The extreme is completely absurd. Somthing halfway along the spectrum to the extreme is...less absurd... but still, in a lot of ways, absurd.

It was a fun exercise.

[phillychuck]

A lot of non-professional leagues do this...a regular season champion, and a playoff champion where all teams get in. NCAA basketball is moving toward this.

I want to play the Rockies in round 1.

[zambonir]

Yeah I don't think julio's proposal is that far-fetched. But they would never do five best-of-seven rounds, and would probably have more of a short-play-in round for the lesser teams and byes for the better ones. Just a more extreme version of what the NBA is already doing, or how football playoffs work with fewer teams (though college is 32 at FCS level and FBS is threatening to do the same. Of course that's with many many more teams who still don't make it0.

[julio]

It was just an exercise. And there's one glaring error - I omitted an all-star break. You'd have to shorten the regular season further to allow for that, and more travel days (although focusing on regional divisions would help there). I could produce sensible numbers for 4 eight-team conferences, but it's harder to equalize things with 4-team divisions, and still maintain a schedule that breaks team matchups into some multiples of 3- and 4-game series.

But you could do it. And still have a regular season that runs April thru August, more or less, and a September-October post-season tourney. And no byes, no 3- or 5-game playoff series.

[andyb]

Baseball still does have a tradition of meaningful regular seasons though. I realize what you are doing is a fantasy exercise but it just would not be popular I imagine. There is already a problem of a mediocre trade deadline because too many teams are stuck in the middle.

A playoff system with byes like we have now actually adds value to the regular season. It is a big reason to stick with 12 vs 16 teams or at least limit it to 14 like the NFL.

One small thing on off days. You are right that your plan would not have enough. It is also a flaw in that Jayson Stark 156 game plan as well that I can't believe he did not notice. He has all 3-game series to cut the schedule from 162 to 156. But that would create a schedule that would probably be the same length but with 6 more off days (i.e. if there are only 3-game series then each team would play 2 a week with an off day Monday or Thursday kind of like the set off day now in the minors).

If the schedule gets shorter the season length needs to get shorter if the goal is to add playoff days.

[allentown]

I don't know that I totally buy that. I well remember the Bill Giles era when any rational person would conclude we had no chance of post-season at the trade deadline, but Giles insisted that we would not throw in the towel by trading our relievers, which other teams wanted -- even about to be FA relievers. The counterpoint is that every trade deadline, teams sacrifice their future by exchanging real prospects for somebody else's soon to be castoff to slightly increase their marginal chances of reaching the WS.

[zambonir]

Mets getting hammered by the Nats tonight

[andyb]

Bubba Chandler finishes the Pittsburgh shutout of the Rockies with a 4-inning save in his major league debut.

Guessing the Phillies are going to be watching how this goes with Painter. Clearly it looks like a tandem start plan for Pittsburgh rather than a pure relief role. No reason for them to do anything different of course since they are not a playoff team.

[andyb]

Dodgers being creative with the draft again here. They drafted a college quarterback coming back from TJ surgery in the 17th round and gave him a bonus close to $500K. He is still in college competing to be Missouri's starting QB with a "low 7 figures" NIL deal. Risky but they are probably getting a top round talent if he eventually chooses baseball. Not related to that other Sam Horn.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2025/08/24/sam-horn-missouri-dodgers/

[andyb]

I kind of love this story. Josh Naylor stole 10 bases in his first 12 games with Seattle. 18 in a row at this point. And he is slower than Kyle Schwarber. 24.5 sprint speed when the average is about 27.0.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6573039/2025/08/25/josh-naylor-stolen-bases-mariners/