Goodnight 2008
by LeCavs Matt on Sep 18, 2008 12:21 PM EDT
37 comments
Does anybody have a better name than "elimination magic number"?
With the Indians head-to-head record with the White Sox standing at 5-10, with only 3 to go, the Indians need to surpass the White Sox for the division crown.
The White Sox currently stand at 84-67, while the Indians are 75-77. With the best record the Indians can hope to achieve being 85-77, the Tribe are a single loss or White Sox win away from elimination at the hands of the Sox.
The Twins are 82-70, having also already defeated the Indians head to head, 10-8. Versus the Twins, our voodoo number is 3.
Unfortunately, the White Sox and Twins have a 3 game series remaining with one another. Whether the White Sox win a single game or the Twins sweep, the Tribe have been eliminated. Bring on Andy Marte.
0 recs |
37 comments
Email
Print
Comments
MLB calls it the elimination number. Currently, MLB says that Cleveland and NY both have an E# of 2. The Yankees’ number in the Wild Card race is 3.
by FredOx on Sep 18, 2008 12:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m sure their calculation is a basic formula that only accounts for the first place team and the team in question without accounting for schedule. The number could be 2 if I’m mistaken about the tiebreaker. I believe that in the event of a divisional tie, the crown goes to the team with the better head to head record. Then again, with the season series still not complete, MLB might just not account for that either.
by LeCavs Matt on Sep 18, 2008 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm…I may be pulling this out of my ass, but I think head-to-head record only comes into play for homefield advantage. If two teams end the year tied at the top of the division, I think they play a single game against each other.
by Logodaedalus on Sep 18, 2008 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The single playoff game only occurs if it involves making the playoffs or not. In this case, both of the division teams will make the playoffs, so the tiebreaker decides who gets the division title and who gets the wildcard.
You know Selig? Ombudsman.
by rolub on Sep 18, 2008 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um, no? If we win every game and the White Sox lose every game but 1 against the Twins, we’ll both be below the Red Sox/Rays for the wild card, so the one-game playoff would be needed to determine which team gets to go to the playoffs as the division winner.
by Logodaedalus on Sep 18, 2008 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aha…
Scenario #2: If there is a tie for a Division Championship and the winning percentage of the two tied Clubs is lower than the winning percentage of the second-place Club with the best record among all non-Division winners in the same League, the tie for the Division Championship shall be broken as follows:
A one-game playoff shall be played on Monday, September 29 to determine the Division Championship. The site of the game would be determined by a coin flip and the winner of the game shall be declared the Division Champion.
Example of Scenario #2: The Houston Astros and St. Louis Cardinals tie for the NL Central Division Championship. The Florida Marlins have a better record than both tied Clubs and would be the Wild Card. The Astros and Cardinals would play a one-game playoff on Monday, September 29 to determine the Division Championship.
So it would be a one game playoff, meaning the Tribe is still alive, if only the White Sox can take 1 out of 3 from the Twins and both teams lose every other game while the Indians win out.
by LeCavs Matt on Sep 18, 2008 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, it’s the number to be mathematically eliminated from winning the division title. I’m sure they do it that way to avoid having to account for the tiebreaker, which depends on the wild card race. In this case, however, the tiebreaker would be a one-game playoff, as you note below.
by FredOx on Sep 18, 2008 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because it’s required in what is essentially a magic number thread:
by FredOx on Sep 18, 2008 1:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I never really noticed it until this year, but it’s kind of scary just how few games decide your fate for a season. Swing a game or two our way in each month of the season and you are talking about a totally different reality.
by Toxicadam on Sep 18, 2008 1:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yea, I was going to write an addenum that this is only possible when the division leader wins 89 games or less.
by Toxicadam on Sep 18, 2008 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My Lord, I forget sometimes the pure ridiculousness of that season. I think we still have the record for earliest clinch, even though the season started three weeks late. We were 14 games better than the next best team, the Red Sox, even though they were on pace for 97 wins.
by Jay on Sep 18, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
With Tony Pena catching and Paul Sorrento at first. Plug Sandy into that line-up and they might’ve never lost a game.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on Sep 19, 2008 7:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sandy came back on June 29 and played fairly consistently after that. Strangely enough:
Record in games Alomar started: 38-16 (.703)
Record in games someone else started: 62-28 (.688)
What I want to do is cross the 1995 and the 1999 teams, so you get both Alomars, Belle, ’95 Lofton and ’99 Ramirez all in the lineup at the same time. Plus, Thome switched positions, so he gets to play twice. Swap Burba for Mark Clark, let Jackson set up for Mesa, and that team would never lose.
by FredOx on Sep 19, 2008 9:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
44 games out of first place is very, very sad. Just imagine if they had played all 162 game!
The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay
by Buckeye Brad on Sep 18, 2008 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Imagine the numbers Albert Belle would have put up had we played that full season.
Platooning with Jamey Carroll is not freedom. Free Andy Marte!
by woodsmeister on Sep 18, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To answer the orignal question, I believe that the analog to “magic number” – for a team hoping to make the post season is “tragic number” – for a team that is anticipating being eliminated.
That being said, the fact that the team is not yet mathamatically eliminated gives me little solace. This team is not been in contention for the playoffs for some time.
I am enjoying things of late – including the sweep of the Twins and hope that we can do the same to both the Red and White Sox (and that all of the games played against them matter for their post seasons.)
"It's hard to win when you don't score." Cliff Lee, 9/28/05.
by Harry Doyle on Sep 18, 2008 3:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Red Sox have all but clinched a playoff spot. If we can help keep them to the wild card, they will have to play the Angels rather than the White Sox/Twins in the first round. I imagine a dual sweep would get us closer to my (revised) ideal scenario of the Twins beating out the White Sox and the Red Sox losing in the first round.
by LeCavs Matt on Sep 18, 2008 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As much as I’d like it, the Red Sox, White Sox and Twins cannot be all be eliminated from the playoffs this year. That being said, I’d be happy to see the White Sox left out and the Red Sox eliminated in the first round, but the bottom line is whatever team wins the AL, it won’t be the Indians, so I can’t get too excited about it.
"It's hard to win when you don't score." Cliff Lee, 9/28/05.
by Harry Doyle on Sep 18, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not that there’s any real reason to post this here, but Salomon just pulled a total Borowski for the Brewers … allowing four runs in the bottom of the 9th to tie the score. I cannot even believe how that team is screwing up.
by Jay on Sep 18, 2008 5:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And this after three relievers — Coffey, Mota and Gagne — all arguably terrible — had each pitched a scoreless frame.
by Jay on Sep 18, 2008 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Coffey and Gagne made it through their innings on a combined 9 pitches. Why wasn’t either back out for a 2nd inning?
by LeCavs Matt on Sep 18, 2008 6:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mota is arguably terrible as in:
“This [Tribe reliever] is even worse than Mota!”
“No, he’s not!”
"...leading the league in most offensive categories. Including nose hairs."
by sarcasmdave on Sep 18, 2008 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I just saw this also. That Borowski game was horrible. But in the middle of a pennant race? Four run lead, 2 outs, no one on? Ouch.
by oxforddave on Sep 18, 2008 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Somebody obviously wants me to pick an avatar for him …
by Jay on Sep 18, 2008 9:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I just noticed the “Battle for 15th place” standings on the main page. Nice.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Sep 19, 2008 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So if I read that right, our magic number there is 7. Houston seems to be trying to protect their draft picks; Florida is trying for the psychological lift of closing strong. Finally, the Dodgers could theoretically end up in the bottom 15 and make the playoffs.
by FredOx on Sep 19, 2008 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe our magic number is 7 vs. the Cards, 8 vs. the Dodgers, 9 each vs. the Astros and Marlins. We’re in good shape, except that any of those teams could take a big dive. Basically, if we go on a run and two of those teams (plus the D’backs) take a dive, that’s what would screw it up.
On the other hand, if the Cards finish 4-6 or better — and the Dodgers 4-5 or better, the Astros and Marlins both 3-7 or better — then the Indians end up in 16th place even if they go 7-3 to get to 82 wins. That would be a nice little win-win to close the season, and it’s totally plausible.
by Jay on Sep 19, 2008 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, I did the magic numbers backwards. It’s 7 each vs. the Cards and Dodgers, 6 each vs. the Astros and Marlins.
by Jay on Sep 19, 2008 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, so with the White Sox winning tonight, now we’re officially mathematically eliminated, even from playing a tie-breaker game/series. Break open the ironic champagne!
by Logodaedalus on Sep 19, 2008 11:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Indeed. I think the actual procedure for cases like this is to wring out any moisture from your hair and funnel it into champagne bottles.
by Logodaedalus on Sep 20, 2008 1:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Sweet Baboo
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
