Potential 2010 Playoff Opening Round Format - Suggestions Welcomed

In an effort to make sure that everyone keeps playing, I'm trying to come up with a format which rewards the top two teams but also keeps them playing and not sitting, for possibly two weeks with a first round which can take forever.

Week 1
Game A: 1 plays 2
Game B: 3 plays 6
Game C: 4 plays 5

Game D: W:A plays W:C
Game E: W:B plays L:A

Top two teams are guaranteed into the second round, but are now playing for who gets to play the weakest team and home field advantage.

Also an option we have would be announce at the beginning of the season when the start date of the playoffs would be*, personally I want them to start after Labour Day when all the craziness from the summer is over.

*this may obviously change with makeup games, but it should be known at the beginning of the season, so everyone can plan their August vacations.

Are you suggesting a ONE game knock-out for the losers of game B & C or should that be "series" ?

Bob

These would all be series.

What about teams 7 & 8? lol

I'm with you JW.  A lot easier format ...

1 vs 8

2 vs 7

3 vs 6

4 vs 5

is the first round.

Let's cut the rosters to 14 as well ( maybe even less ) and see if that induces guys to show up knowing they will play instead of half game.

Bob

In my opinion, 8 teams would make for a much better playoff format,

but there is not enough pitching and catching to go around for 8 teams....

pitching would be really watered down.

Cutting the rosters to 13-14 would be great because more playing but some teams

already have trouble getting 9 players out as it is with 15....

If we could increase registration, and have 8 teams of 14-15, that might work better,

as long as there are a few new pitchers/catchers coming into the league.....

but it's worth bringing it up at the AGM and see whst others think.

Year or year when we have had 4,5,6,7, or 8 teams, the results, statistics have remained relatively unchanged.  Actually a slight downward trend this year maybe because of better d.

Heard this argument every time this topic is presented.

Realistically if it creates a shortage of pitchers and catchers then we will simply develop new ones the way we always have. Look at the number of pitchers in appearance on every team and I suggest their are at least another 12-15 guys would give it a go.  Catchers are perhaps a little rarer breed.  Umpires may be the issue but it would allow the UIC to expand his staff and have more flexibility in assignments like double header Sundays.

The idea of reducing rosters may induce some players to come out more knowing they will play fewer half games.  As for the guys who do not commit to their team and show up for at least 60% of their games, allow teams to "add a player" to their roster similar to replacement player registration rules and make the "no-show" ineligible for playoffs.  I have little tolerance for no-shows.  They not only let down their own team the let down the rest of the league as well.

Bob

There may not be the player pool.  As of last year, we had 85 registrants at open reg and needed to scramble to find the final 5 by draft day.  Also, we needed to find 4 extra replacement players after draft day.  There always seems to be a turnover of ~12 players per year, with returning vets / rookies making up the difference.

We currently have 17 players on the waiting list, 9 of which registered after draft day.  So this by no means relates to the amount of players who may be available for next year.  The only way we would be able to go to 8 teams, would be if we had about 40 players on this list, which could give us ~20 players who would be available for draft.

Quick Figures:

8 x 14 = 112
8 x 13 = 104

Cheers,

Usual turn numbers are 12-15.

Not sure I follow your math ... need 40 on waiting list ? but we could try advertising.  Who said we have to go to eight all at once ? Maybe seven for a year or two then eight.

Seven is a *** to schedule, play-offs, ties etc. but one could always round robin the last three or five spots to get to final four. Problem with a round robin is games been manupilated or thrown or even no-shows 'cuz you are out anyway.

Current number should be 6 x 15 = 90

7 x 14 = 98 need eight

7 x 13 = 91 need one

How many is the Thornhill league ? Teams, players etc., we usually draw several a year from there anyway.

The idea of having 40 on the list came to mind because of the registrants on the waiting list usually only 50% come and register in January.  Seven teams is not an option.  I know in Martingrove we carry teams of 13, usually one player drops out.  Last year, by the end we only had 9 players who could play during the playoffs because of injuries.  We usually played games in the regular season with 7-8 of our own and then filled up with call ups.  We had another pool of players since the league is really deep.  Last night for example we only had 8, and we had to call up a midget player.  We all thought he was a Junior, but no, he was midget.  Pretty good too.  Made two plays in the field, though he looked really scared at the plate.  One guy was throwing pretty hard.

I would have to look at the metrics for this, as I don't know for sure.  If I had to make a guess I would say we've recruited ~7 over the last 5 years, which is not too many.

Bob, I'm with you.

We could cut the rosters down to 13 players and then create an additional 2 teams (6 teams minus 2 players = an additional 12 guys.  If we're creating an additional 2 teams, then we only need 14 new guys). 

As for catchers, off the top of my head, we have these catchers: 1 - Boruszok, 2 - Richie, 3 - JR, 5 - Jeff S, 6 - St. John, 7 - Dean, 8 - Bucky, 9 - Reap, 10 - Chin Straps, 11 - Asem, 12 - James W, 13 - Roter (if he comes back)...my apologies to anyone else I left off the list, I just did this off the top of my head really quick.

As for pitchers, sure, you probably won't have a team with three studs, but you could still draft a team with 1 stud (e.g - 1 - Lipson, 2 - Waylen, 3 - Levy, 4 - Vent, 5 - Godard, 6 - Sourlis, 7 - Rocco, 8 - Booth...by the way, these aren't in order, they are RANDOMN)...again, I apologize if I left anyone off this, but I did this too off the top of my head.  1 really good pitcher and then some decent pitchers/inning eaters. 

As of right now, you can't tell me each team doesn't have 4 guys who can pitch.

I just think 8 teams makes the league more competitive and balanced.  Just my opinion, I'd love to hear what everyone else thinks.

There aren't enough catchers.  This means guys like Desi / Budny / Biemiller / Barry need to catch more and guys who don't usually catch like Leitch ( I remember him catching for us in 2006, heck even I caught in 2006 ) / Chick / Berridge / Bobby Hill would all need to catch now to pick up the slack.  I know most teams right now have 2 guys who can catch, some have 3 this is a wonderful luxury I don't know if anyone (even the catchers) want to give up.

I would not object to more time behind the dish in my case....My team has 3 catchers. Because of this i have played every single position, all of them i haven't played since i was in Bantam. I have hardly had enough time myself. Oh...... you guys are forgetting Ninja......................................... :oi

There are 12 teams in the Thornhill league, 14 per roster. What most of the guys in Thornhill have told me, is that they really just wanna play with their friendsand the league allows you to do that - captain A recruits 13-14 reg. forms, sends them in, and says this is my team....that's what keeps most of them there - the chance to play with all their best friends, which our league really cannot offer. Over the past few years, the total number of NEW players the league has acquired from Thornhill league is fairly modest:  myself, Jordan Levy, Michael Goldberg, Mike Tynan, Red Sox rookie Jeff, Matt Kirsh = only 7 by my account unless I am mistaken.  A couple others have come and gone, but 7 is basically the number. I suggest if we really want to expand to 8 teams, we need attract a solid 15-20 more players, i think a good way to do that is put an ad in the Star or Sun sports section....not sure of the actual cost for that, it won't be cheap, but the word of the rhmrbl will definately get out that way....

I would love for the league to go to 8 teams, but I really  think as it stands now, there just isn't enough reliable pitching and catching to go around, unless new recruits bring those credentials with them,  and as much as reducing the rosters to  13 might increase playing time for most, I can see most teams scrambling for players a lot/defaulting, and it's no fun borrowing players from other team, and lending your own out.....

this should be a great discussion topic at the AGM....

For those interested here are some metrics on the state of the teams this year (2009), thanks to Ryan for putting these together.