Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Remember what I said


Lou E Ville

Recommended Posts

What the Angels record is against the Dodgers is irrelevant. Follow this logic....

​

Angels: 19 games against Oak, Tex, Sea, Hou

Twins: 19 games against Cle, Det, KC, Chi

So far so good, right?

 

Angels: 6 or 7 games against each AL East team and each AL Central team

Twins: 6 or 7 games against each AL East team and each AL West team

Still good. So far we are still as fair as humanly possible.

 

Angels: 3 or 4 games against 4 rotated NL opponents

Twins: 3 or 4 games against 4 rotated NL opponents

Still fair. Or as fair as possible.

 

Angels: 6 games against the Dodgers

Twins: 6 games against the Brewers

This is where it stops being fair. It's not fair to the Dodgers or the Angels, or the Mets, or the A's. The Angels would love to swap with Minnesota and get Milwaukee for these six games every year. Milwaukee is good like every five years. Just like Arizona. Just like Colorado. The Dodgers, meanwhile, have spent their way into perennial contender status. They can afford Greinke and Kershaw. Milwaukee couldn't afford either. 

 

All of you saying "well the Angels suck and they got swept by this crappy team so who cares", just remember that all you have to do is get in. The Giants have won three World Series in five years. None of those teams was the best in the regular season. The Cardinals won one World Series with a wild card team and one with an 84 win division champion. We won more games than they did both times but didn't get in. We won a World Series in 2002 between two Wild Card teams.

 

​I don't mind losing out fair and square to another team. The margin of error between these teams competing for the last spot is small to begin with. We're 5-2 against the Twins, but could lose out because of a scheduling gimmick.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, the Giants face the Dodgers 19 times every season, and they have won three of the last five World Series.

Every team in the NL west faces the Dodgers 19 times. Aside from the hometown rivalry series they also face the same other opponents the same number of times. If all teams in a division face the same opponents the same number of times, and whoever wins the most wins a spot in the division series. That's as equitable as possible, which is the entire point of this thread. Not a difficult concept.

Edited by ScottLux
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Scottlux. I swear I don't know what's so hard to comprehend about wanting a level playing field.

 

If we can nab that last playoff spot, we have a chance with Mike Trout. Seen it happen too many times to dismiss it.

 

You continue over and over being an idiot holding on to an obtuse idea that the Dodgers are somehow an unfair opponent for the Angels to face. Every division has a team that is superior either in payroll or talent but the scheduler for MLB doesn't do a statistical evaluation of who they think will be dominant in the forthcoming season to decide what the matchups are. It is a rotation so all teams eventually play each other over the years.

 

Cross town rivalries will not disappear in interleague play, there is just too much money to be made from those games. The owners and MLB want to make money, not make up some mythical Pythagorean schedule so you don't have to squirm in your seat when your co workers give you shit because the Angels lost to the Dodgers this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just think there are too many factors in the games themselves to argue for a "fair" or "balanced" schedule.

 

Is a solid pitcher injured when you play that team?  Do you miss their best pitcher in a series?   Is one team slumping/playing hot when your team faces them? 

 

Not to mention travel times, rain outs etc.

 

 

 

Plus, if the op of this thread didn't start out with a giant internet "I told you so, look at me!" I think the tone of this thread would have been entirely different.

Edited by mtangelsfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again we see Notti calling another poster here an idiot, for having an opinion he doesn't share.

Really?

Seems I just read a post from our fearless leader saying this type of insulting post was unacceptable.

Seems the rules only apply to some, not all.

I wonder how many warning points blarg has received this season..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again we see Notti calling another poster here an idiot, for having an opinion he doesn't share.

Really?

Seems I just read a post from our fearless leader saying this type of insulting post was unacceptable.

Seems the rules only apply to some, not all.

I wonder how many warning points blarg has received this season..

 

Well, I tried three times to get the point across that his whole OP was flawed and history proves it but he disregarded every fact that contradicted a stupid premise.

 

The MLB scheduler completes the years schedule well before the previous seasons end. There is no way to balance by competition the schedule for teams that have yet to be comprised. So his whole OP goes down the drain before it even starts.

 

Case in point, Boston wins World Series, goes down drain the following season. The Giants won the World Series, went down the drain this season. The frigging Angels won the 2002 World Series and flushed 2003. Were their local rivals not supposed to play them the year after the world series because of.... what, too competitive?

 

There is no formula, no magic calculator or crystal ball that can predict the strongest teams for next season. So the cross town rivalry gets played every year, regardless of who is the stronger team because it is good for baseball and not some fans ego because his team got slapped with a whole 6 games of competition above their teams abilities.

 

Stupid, stupid, stupid premise. Auuuugh, so stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One last thing, the Angels won 98 games last season, the Dodgers 94. Both won their division. So with that in mind it was to the advantage of neither team to meet this season for 6 games if you are using wins or team strength of the previous season to determine this season's matchups.

 

Stupid, stupid, stupid premise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're the one being stupid. Look at the NFL schedule. It's laid out as fair as it possibly can be. They don't make two teams from different conferences play every year because the fans want to see it and it would make money. They rotate everything evenly. Every year they have one team that beats another on a tiebreaker to make the playoffs, and no one complains because they have laid out everything fair and square. Yes, some teams still face more difficult schedules, but that's because the divisions ebb and flow. One year, every team in the NFC West was under .500. Three years later, the Seahawks and 49ers played in the NFC title game and the Cardinals won 11 games. Fans understand that. What they wouldn't understand is if the Patriots and Giants had to face off every year "because fans want to see it" while the Bills or Eagles snuck in one year because they got the benefit of playing each other because of the Pats-Giants game.

 

Hey, the Angels and Dodgers draw more fans than other teams. Let's give them 84 home games next year and take three away from the smallest drawing teams. It's just three games, and hell, the Angels didn't have that great a home record anyway. That's what your logic sounds like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're the one being stupid. Look at the NFL schedule. It's laid out as fair as it possibly can be. They don't make two teams from different conferences play every year because the fans want to see it and it would make money. They rotate everything evenly. Every year they have one team that beats another on a tiebreaker to make the playoffs, and no one complains because they have laid out everything fair and square. Yes, some teams still face more difficult schedules, but that's because the divisions ebb and flow. One year, every team in the NFC West was under .500. Three years later, the Seahawks and 49ers played in the NFC title game and the Cardinals won 11 games. Fans understand that. What they wouldn't understand is if the Patriots and Giants had to face off every year "because fans want to see it" while the Bills or Eagles snuck in one year because they got the benefit of playing each other because of the Pats-Giants game.

 

Hey, the Angels and Dodgers draw more fans than other teams. Let's give them 84 home games next year and take three away from the smallest drawing teams. It's just three games, and hell, the Angels didn't have that great a home record anyway. That's what your logic sounds like.

 

using the NFL as an example doesn't work.  It may be balanced for the division winners but certainly not for the Wild Cards.  This year the AFC west plays against the NFC north, which kind of sucks this year.  You don't think that is an advantage for teams like the Broncos and Chiefs?

 

They will be competing for playoff spots against teams who have to play a different division.  It isn't balanced at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They still rotate which divisions you have to play every year. That's what I'm saying. If you're going to play the other conference, rotate so that it's fair. Yes, some years one division is tougher than another. But as long as you rotate it no one can complain.

 

I'm looking mainly at the Twins here. We beat them five out of seven, including three out of four in September. Look at the six Dodgers games we played. Four involved Greinke or Kershaw, two did not. 0-4 against the first two, 1-1 in the remaining games. Now look at the Twins' permanent opponent, Milwaukee. I don't even know who starts for Milwaukee, but I can guarantee you it's no one in the ballpark of Greinke and Kershaw. And if the Angels win 86 games and the Twins win 87, there is the difference right there. Not because they happened to get the Phillies (just as an example) while we happened to get the Giants. Those things cannot be helped. But by God you have to make fair what you can.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2010 in the NFL the NFC west winner was Seattle with a 7-9 record.  I remember fans complaining about how easy the division that played the NFC west had it and how a 7-9 team shouldn't be hosting a first round playoff game.  From 2012 to 2014 the NFC West always had 2 playoff teams and fans were complaining about how unfair it was for the division that had to play them.  

 

As mentioned when Houston came to the AL West we had fans on here who were ecstatic because the Angels would play them 19 times a year.  Three years later the Angels are a whopping 30-27 vs. Houston who they're chasing in the standings as of today.  In the matter of a season or two things can change quickly in all of the major sports.  Any change you make now in the scheduling will still have fans complaining in a season when some team turns it around.    

Edited by Catwhoshatinthehat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...