I wouldn't post if I had to wear that avatar pic...gives me the chills just thinking about it

Nice! CoA gettin' classy!

Commander of Awesome;1281629 wrote:I want to beat me up.

Nice to see you've turned to the side of good

Is anyone else a little worried about the 2-3 format in the divisional round? I thought it was bull back in the 90s. So having one the 2 best records in the league earns you the right to start on the road ? Horrible planning.

They wanted to get the extra wildcard game,but not add length to the total time of playoffs, but yet give days off for all travel days. So that is what results. Which would you rather sacrifice? Getting 3 of a possible 5 games at home, and play the rubber game away? Not have a travel day off between a possible game 4 and game 5?

What would I want? 2 home. 2 away. Game 5 home. That is the advantage the top two seeds have earned. I would say the wildcard and the Giants should be favored in the divisional series.

georgemc80;1284094 wrote:What would I want? 2 home. 2 away. Game 5 home. That is the advantage the top two seeds have earned. I would say the wildcard and the Giants should be favored in the divisional series.

With no day off for travel then between game 4 and game 5.

I just do not get this attitude, as expressed by John Fay:

With the No. 2 seed in the playoffs secured, the series in St. Louis doesn’t mean a great deal.


With all the crying about going on the road for the first 2 games of the NLDS, why not a higher priority in getting games 1,2,6,7 at home in a possible NLCS instead of just games 3,4,5 at home?

The Reds lost the season series against Washington, so essentially they have to gain another game on the Nats. The Cardinals have the wild card clinched, so this series actually means less to them. If anything, they will be focused on the play-in game against Atlanta.

The Nationals need to just win once to clinch the East and just match the Reds to clinch home field. It will be interesting to see how these teams proceed now because there isn't really anything to play for if the Nats win or the Braves lose tomorrow. Will they value setting the rotation more than seeding? I think in the playoffs that is far more important, especially for the teams needing to play a 1-game playoff.

Atlanta has Tim Hudson scheduled for Wednesday and St. Louis has Adam Wainwright. I wouldn't be surprised to see some adjustments in their rotations.

Cardinals have to win at least 1 to clinch.

Aren't the Giants playing for absolutely nothing against the must win Dodgers?

It's possible though that the reds could already be in St. Louis, who they would play possibly. So it wouldn't be that bad. Plus St. Louis is gonna have to use wainwright to beat the braves. So if they played us, we wouldn't see him till back in Cincinnati.

Wainwright at GABP doesn't scare me at all either.

Azubuike24;1284188 wrote:The Cardinals have the wild card clinched, so this series actually means less to them.

The Dodgers have not been eliminated yet. If we sweep the Cards the Dodgers can take the last WC with a sweep of the Giants.

I'm kinda hoping they end up tying and are forced to play a play in game for the play in game.

justincredible;1284439 wrote:The Dodgers have not been eliminated yet. If we sweep the Cards the Dodgers can take the last WC with a sweep of the Giants.

I'm kinda hoping they end up tying and are forced to play a play in game for the play in game.

I agree with your last statement 100%

karen lotz;1284441 wrote:I agree with your last statement 100%

Braves throwing Medlen in the wild-card game?

justincredible;1284589 wrote:Braves throwing Medlen in the wild-card game?

Yup. Hudson will go game 1 of wild card series unless they have a chance to tie Washington on Wednesday. Then it would likely be Minor game 1, unless Atlanta plays in East tiebreaker. In that case I have no clue what they'd do. The original plan is to carry three starters for that series but I think they'd need 4.