What we've learned about MLB's playoff format: Would changes make it more 'fair'?

NEW YORK — It all looked kinda familiar, almost as if we’d seen it before …

There they were, that where’d-they-come-from wild-card team dancing and hugging in the infield, as fireworks popped and 44,000 people obliterated what was left of their vocal cords …

While across the field, but in another universe, those famous dudes from that latest, fallen 95-win behemoth sat frozen in their dugout, trying to process The End of their World Series dreams …

Yep, we’ve seen that one before. And we saw it again last Wednesday at Citi Field, as the Mets were sending the mighty Phillies off to the driving range, as opposed to the NLCS.

Look, let’s all agree that it takes some impressive mental gyrations to cast a $346 million team like the Mets as a bunch of plucky underdogs. But let’s go with that for now, OK?

Why? Because this is the third October in a row, since MLB went to this new playoff format, that a No. 6 seed — by definition the last team into the field in each league – has made it to the League Championship Series, by toppling a No. 2 seed and No. 3 seed in the first two rounds. And if the Mets upend the Dodgers next, it would make three straight years with a No. 6 seed in the World Series.

So is Major League Baseball OK with that? Now that we have three years of postseason series to analyze, are we sure this format works best? Let’s take a look at that, by examining What We’ve Learned About This Playoff Format after the Division Series and Wild Card Series.

How many ‘upsets’ have there been?

It’s year three of baseball’s 12-teams-make-the-playoffs era. It was designed, in theory, to reward the best teams with a few days off and to make the road as precarious as possible for the last teams in. But is that how it’s worked out?

Are those byes mostly turning into goodbyes for the top seeds? Are all those road games hurting the lowest seeds? Here’s the evidence. You decide.

Upstarts Dept. — We’ll start with the 5-6 seeds, the last two teams into the tournament in each league, so also the teams that have to play nothing but road games in the Wild Card Series. That’s supposed to be an obstacle. But here’s how much that has actually hurt them (or not):

No. 6 seeds — They’ve won 10 series in three years — three of them this year (so far). And as we’ve mentioned, if the Mets win this NLCS, it would make three years in a row with a No. 6 seed in the World Series. (The 2022 Phillies and 2023 Diamondbacks beat them to it.)

Remember, before 2022, these are the teams that would have been fishing, not playing baseball, this time of year. But they’ve been the most dangerous once MLB opened the door for them.

No. 5 seeds — These teams have the second-worst records in the field in each league. But they’ve now won seven series in three years, including the Royals ousting the Orioles this year.

One of those No. 5 seeds — the 2023 Rangers — even won the World Series. And the 2022 Padres made it to the NLCS, blitzing past the 100-win Mets and Dodgers in the process.

So let’s do the math — Those 5- and 6-seeded teams have played 27 series in the last three postseasons. They’ve won 17 of them! Does that seem like a lot? It does!

In fact, it’s a better record than the behemoths — the teams that got five days off before they played a postseason game.

No. 1 seeds — These are teams that averaged 103 wins. Yet before this year, only one of the previous No. 1 seeds even won a series. That was the 2022 Astros, who got on a roll and won the World Series. At least this year, the Yankees and Dodgers both joined them by making it to the LCS, even if the Dodgers’ road was bumpier than the San Diego Freeway.

No. 2 seeds — The No. 2 seeds have averaged 96 wins. So far they’ve produced zero World Series teams and have won a total of three series in three years. One of those came from the Guardians over the weekend. Amazing how much better the record of these teams looks thanks to one shocking swing of the bat by Lane Thomas off Tarik Skubal.

So let’s do the math again — The top two seeds have played a total of 17 series since the inception of this format. They’ve won nine of them — but four of those were by the 2022-23 Astros. The Braves, Dodgers and Phillies, on the other hand, were a combined 0-4 as 1-2 seeds — until the Dodgers figured out how to hang all those zeroes on the scoreboard against the Padres last week.

But if we look only at how those teams fared in the Division Series, the ones immediately following their bye, those 1-2 seeds have won six of 12 series. If that seems surprisingly mediocre for literally the best teams in the sport, just remember how much worse it looked only a few days ago.

Those top teams had won only three out of nine series from 2022 through the Phillies’ loss to the Mets. Then, over the next three days, the Yankees, Dodgers and Guardians flipped that script by winning three in a row, because of course they did. After all, it’s …

Baseball!

Is the best-of-three Wild Card Series more fair than one game?

From 2012-21 (not counting the 2020 pandemic postseason), the only way a wild-card team could advance was by surviving a one-game, win-or-else Wild Card Game. The good news was, it made for awesome drama. The bad news was … well, everything else about that game.

So three Octobers ago, by popular demand, baseball made that game disappear — and replaced it with a best-of-three Wild Card Series, with all three games hosted by the higher seed. Excellent idea. But …

How you’d think that would go — Having zero home games — and a worse record than your opponent — seems like a massive disadvantage, right?

How it’s actually going — Wrong! After 12 of these Wild Card Series the last three years, the higher seeds have gone 4-8. And they went 1-3 this year, with just the Padres dodging the potholes to play in a Division Series.

So what have we learned? That a best-of-three is still so un-baseball-like that it’s proving to be just as much of a land mine for the higher seeds as the win-or-your-beautiful-season-is-over-in-three-hours Wild Card Game. In fact, it’s been worse!

Record of higher seeds in wild-card round 

2012-21* (one game) — 8-10
2022-24 (best-of-three) — 4-8

(*2020 not included)

Is the bye an advantage or an albatross?

We’ve already run through the spotty record of teams coming off a bye: 6-6 through 12 Division Series. It could be worse. And if not for the Yankees, Dodgers and Guardians last week, it would be worse. But it still doesn’t make much sense when you take a step back and look at who’s playing in these series.

Average regular-season wins by teams with a bye — 99
Average regular-season wins by their opponents — 89

Yet even with all those wins and the advantages MLB has bestowed upon them, those teams with the bye have won only half of those series? We asked the Phillies and Mets to offer their theories on why that is. They both turned right to everyone’s favorite magic word: momentum.

Phillies catcher J.T. Realmuto: “In ’22, we were just riding that wave (as the No. 6 seed). We were that team. We were the Mets. We were the team that got hot at the right time and took our talent and played free. That’s what they did to us this series.”

Mets reliever Ryne Stanek: “I think it has a lot to do with the hot team. You fight for your life every day. And then, when you get into the playoffs, you’re fighting for your life still. So it just feels normal. You’re like, we’ve been doing this for three weeks. We had to fight for our life to get here. So why would that change now in the playoffs? And that’s how you have to play to win.”

So is that just a narrative we slap on series like this? Or is it a real thing? After all, the Royals and Tigers were The Hot Team this October … until they weren’t. The Phillies were The Hot Team in each of the last two Octobers … until they weren’t. So beware of narratives after the fact.

Nevertheless, have we seen enough of this now to spot a trend? An executive of one team that missed the postseason, but played in it multiple times before his front-office days, thinks we have.

After all, he said, the teams we’ve seen getting upset in the Division Series “have proven to be really good through 162 (games). And we’re giving them matchups with teams that have already had moments. Already sprayed champagne. … That’s real. The Mets had that (Pete) Alonso homer in Milwaukee before Philly threw a pitch in the playoffs. That’s real momentum built up.”

But is he overvaluing how much momentum truly means in this sport? Is momentum, no matter how much physical and mental exhaustion goes with it, really worth more than those five days off the 1-2 seeds get? I’m not sure. So I asked the presidents of baseball operations of both teams.

Dave Dombrowski (Phillies): “First off, I’m not saying that’s (the reason the Phillies lost). But that’s a long time for people to be off. … So for me, if you could guarantee me we’d win the best-of-three (series) and be healthy, I would rather do that. I just think our game is conducive to playing.”

David Stearns (Mets): “I don’t know the answer. I can tell you we’d prefer to win the division — have (five) days off, rest our bullpen and get a good shot for the series. So I don’t know. I know what’s going on in the industry. I know what’s gone on the last couple of years. I can’t explain it. But we’re playing very well right now.”

So if he doesn’t know the answer, maybe there is no true answer. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth asking a related question, one that this sport has already grappled with, in fact …

Should the Division Seres be best-of-seven?

In the 2021 labor negotiations, the MLB Players Association made this very proposal: Instead of best-of-five, make the Division Series best-of-seven. The league said no, mostly because it didn’t want to add more days to a postseason calendar that is already stretching into November.

You can understand why. No one wants to play Game 7 of the World Series on Thanksgiving, right after the Cowboys’ game. But let’s put that part aside. Let’s talk about the baseball part.

How you’d think it would work — In theory, a best-of-seven should reward the better teams and deeper teams. So if that’s how it worked out, you’d be more likely to see the best teams showing up in the LCS. Right?

How it’s actually going — Ummm, right! At least in the other sports. In the NBA, according to STATS Perform, the top two seeds in each conference win their first series (a best-of-seven) 90 percent of the time. In the NHL, the top two seeds win their first series (a best-of-seven) nearly 60 percent of the time. And there’s no bye in those leagues.

But in baseball, the top two seeds are winning their first series (a best-of-five) only 50 percent of the time under this format. And even under previous formats in the wild-card era, that wasn’t happening nearly as much as in the other sports.

From 2012-21 (one-game wild-card format) — The top two seeds in each league (who were then getting only two extra days off) won their first series 54.1 percent of the time (2020 not included).

From 1998-2011 (no wild-card round) — Back when only one wild-card team made the field and there were no extra days off for division winners, the top seeds didn’t fare much better. We’ll begin with 1998 because it was the first season in which division winners were seeded according to their record. But even under that setup, the top two seeds won their first series only 51.5 percent of the time.

So let’s get back to the original question. In baseball, does the “best” team tend to win a best-of-seven series more often than a best-of-five series? Our friends from STATS did that math:

Teams with better regular-season record in postseason series (all time)

(Source: STATS Perform)

So does the best-of-seven help those teams? Not much! The “best” team wins a best-of-seven 55 percent of the time and a best-of-five 54 percent of the time. That’s practically no difference at all. So let’s try this another way.

Let’s take the exact scenario we saw in this year’s Division Series, in which the higher seeds split the first two games at home, meaning they’d essentially forfeited their home-field advantage.  Do teams in that position have a better chance of winning a best-of-seven series than a best-of-five? Barely!

I looked just at the years from 2012-24, when baseball introduced multiple wild cards in each league.

Record of higher seeds splitting first two games at home, 2012-24*

(*Not including 2020)

Again, with either scenario, there has proven to be practically no difference between how the “best” teams fare in a best-of-seven versus a best-of-five. It still feels more fair. And in baseball, larger samples always seem more baseball-like than smaller samples. But where’s the evidence that going to a best-of-seven would change much of anything, let alone everything?

What else could MLB do?

For the first 65 postseasons of the World Series era (1903-68), the teams with the best regular-season record made it to the World Series 100 percent of the time. Was that nirvana? Or was it merely what you get when you don’t have any such thing as “playoffs” — only a season followed by one series for the championship?

Well, whatever it was, here’s one safe prediction: The chances that we’re ever going from 12 playoff teams back to two are about the same as the odds of the 2024 White Sox winning this World Series.

As in zero.

So what else can baseball do? Here are a few ideas we’ve heard thrown out there — some of which have actually surfaced in the labor talks:

Reseed after each round — When there’s an upset in the NFL playoffs, that league reseeds before the next round. So what if baseball did that after the Mets upset Milwaukee in the first round?

Then the Mets, the lowest remaining seed, would have played the Dodgers, not the Phillies, in the next round. And the Padres, the next lowest seed, would have played the Phillies. I don’t know which teams that helps or hurts. It’s just another vehicle to make the playoffs more “fair” for the “best” teams.

Reseeding is another idea that has surfaced in labor talks. I’ve never heard a good reason that it hasn’t happened. But the NBA and NHL don’t reseed, if that means anything.

Make the wild cards win an extra game — In Korea, the KBO playoffs start with a Wild Card Series unlike anything we see in America. The two wild-card teams play a “best-of-three” series — but the higher seed starts that series with a 1-0 lead in games. So to move on, the lowest seed has to win twice, while the higher seed only needs to win once.

The MLB players union proposed that change three years ago, too. One reason was to give the top seeds a tangible edge in every series. The other was to create fewer days off for those top seeds during their bye. The league again said no thanks.

Why? According to one major-league source familiar with those conversations, the league polled fans on that idea (and others). And whaddayaknow, the fans surveyed overwhelmingly hated that idea. So why do I think they’d probably hate the next one, too. …

Make the Division Series a best-of-seven, but … with the same disadvantage for the lower seed. In other words, this would be a best-of-seven, with a KBO twist. The higher seed would also start this series ahead, 1-0.

So if this had been in effect for, say, the Mets-Phillies series, the Phillies still would have needed to win three games to advance, but the Mets would have needed to win four. Got it?

The outcome very well would have been the same. But it would have been one more advantage for the team that won 95 games during the season — six more than the Mets. And under this setup, you could play a theoretical “best-of-seven” series in about the same number of days as the current best-of-five.

An American League scout laid this one on me during the last round. It has never been formally discussed to my knowledge. And I’m guessing it never will be, in part because MLB has never shown any interest in imitating the KBO.

KBO has a dramatic bye structure: their playoff structure is #5 vs. #4, winner plays #3, winner plays #2, winner plays #1. #1 seed effectively has 2-ish week bye in between end of regular and start of their postseason. Since 2001: #1 seed has won Korean Series 20 out of 23 times

— Tangotiger 🍁 (@tangotiger) October 9, 2024

So what’s the “answer?” There may not be one. But here’s an even bigger question: Are we even sure we need one?

Have you ever watched baseball? If you’ve read this far, you undoubtedly have. And if you have, here’s one thing I bet you’ve noticed:

Upsets happen!

And here’s what else: They didn’t start happening two weeks ago or two Octobers ago. Ask Bob Feller and the 1954 Giants. Ask Ted Williams and the 1946 Red Sox. Ask the ghosts of Tinkers, Evers and Chance, and the rest of the 1906 Cubs.

If you don’t want upsets, then don’t have playoffs. Got it? And if you don’t like how those playoffs turned out, play better. Pitch better. Prepare better.

In theory, it’s true that the current postseason format shouldn’t favor the underdogs as much as it has. But theory never does throw a pitch — not this October, not any October. This sport should always search for the best and most fair version of this tournament. But whatever that version, upsets … will … happen … because …

Baseball!

(Top photo of Francisco Lindor and Bryson Stott: Rob Tringali / MLB Photos via Getty Images)