Ghost Games

One of the (many) sticking points in the unnecessarily long MLB lockout is whether to expand the playoffs to 12 teams or 14.  The players would prefer 12 teams, while the owners want 14 (mainly because they've already sold the TV rights to the extra games, as well as the incredibly dumb-sounding "pick your opponent" show).  Personally, I think both ideas are stupid, but 12 is definitely the less-bad option.

The concerns the players brought up about a 14-team playoff were spot on!  One of the best things about baseball's playoffs is how exclusive they are.  After a 162-game season, only 10 teams make it.  So you can't sneak in with a mediocre record.  Which is definitely something that could happen if there are suddenly four wild cards per league.  And the players are rightfully worried about that!

Their biggest worry is that it'll discourage spending.  If a team knows they only need 83-84 wins to get into the playoffs, they're less likely to make a move at the deadline.  Likewise, there's not really much incentive to win the division.  So why try to win 100 games when 90 will be more than enough to get into the playoffs?  The players don't like either of those scenarios.

Toronto and Seattle both just missed the playoffs last season.  They both had 90 wins, and they would've been the sixth and seventh teams in the American League.  The National League was so top-heavy, though, that the 83-win Reds and 82-win Phillies would've been the extra two wild card teams.  That's right.  There were a total of seven National League teams that had a winning record last season.  Under the owners' proposed playoff format, they all would've made the postseason.  The 82-win Phillies would've had the exact same opportunity to win the World Series as the 107-win Giants.

And who are we kidding?  The owners only want 14 teams because it's more postseason games to sell to FOX, TBS and ESPN, which means more money in their pockets (that they don't want to share with the players).  If it means you can be a mediocre team and still make the playoffs, so be it!  In fact, I think there are some owners who would prefer that.  Why spend Yankee/Dodger/Met/Red Sok money when you don't need to?  Especially when you can still get that playoff revenue?

Plus, the 14-team proposal doesn't actually help the No. 1 seed.  It actually kinda screws them.  While everybody else is playing the Wild Card Series, the No. 1 seed is just sitting around waiting.  Yes, they'd have the opportunity to set up their pitching, but that's literally the only advantage they'd have!  It'd almost be better to have 16 teams and let them play a best-of-three at home against the 8-seed like we saw in 2020.

With 12 teams, however, the owners still get their playoff expansion and the players still get their competitive safeguards.  Most importantly, it incentivizes winning the division.  Suddenly there's a big difference between the No. 2 seed and the No. 3 seed.  The 2-seed gets that first-round bye while the 3-seed has to use its top two pitchers to get by No. 6.  That's a much more significant advantage than just the extra home game should the Division Series go five.

It might just be enough incentive to go out and try to get the 94 wins to be the No. 2 seed, too.  We knew Brewers-Braves and Astros-White Sox were gonna be the 2 vs 3 Division Series for weeks last season.  None of the four teams really cared who got which seed.  But if the 2-seed doesn't have to play that extra round, they actually will care.  Thus, we'll have more competitive games down the stretch.  Sounds like a win-win to me.

Unfortunately, I can't describe the 14-team playoff scenario as a "win-win" for anyone.  Sure, more teams would be "in the race," but the best teams would all be locked in so far in advance that they'll have less incentive down the stretch.  They'd be more concerned with setting themselves up for the playoffs than their actual positioning.  And does anyone think teams will actually care about this dumb "choose your opponent" thing at all?

In the late-night negotiations before talks broke off, the players appeared to finally get the owners off their 14-team position.  It's evidently back on the table, though, with a little quirk that was suggested by Max Scherzer.  The ghost game.

They've used the "ghost game" in Korea for a few years.  It's essentially a free win for the higher-seeded team.  So, they're starting a best-of-three or best-of-five series with a 1-0 lead.  That's even more significant in a best-of-three, which would basically become a best-of-two where the lower seed has to win both (on the road) and the home team only has to win one.  Ask any team that's advanced to the championship round of a double-elimination tournament out of the loser's bracket how much more difficult that is!

While I'm not saying I like the idea of the "ghost game," I do have to admit I'm intrigued by it.  It's actually worked pretty well in Korea.  The lower seed has forced the deciding game about half the time, but the home team usually ends up advancing.  Which makes sense.  Because winning one home game is a much easier proposition than winning a two-out-of-three series.  And, frankly, the No. 2 seed deserves to have a bigger advantage over the No. 7 seed than just playing that series at home.

Of course, the "ghost games" would mean that each best-of-three series would essentially become a best-of-two, reducing the potential TV inventory by as many as 12 games.  But, it would also make scheduling a lot easier, since they'd only need to plan on two games instead of three.  And the fact that they're even talking about it when they won't even talk about things that could actually end the lockout is significant.

Will a 14-team playoff with "ghost games" ultimately end up being adopted?  My guess is probably not.  But it's actually not as crazy an idea as it sounds.  So, while it doesn't seem likely to happen, it's still an interesting thing to think about.