As I understand the way playoff teams are assigned, in the first round the team with the best record plays the wildcard team, and the two other division winners play each other, unless the wildcard team is in the same division as the the team that has the best record. Currently in the NL the Braves lead the East, the Cardinals lead the Central, and the Padres lead the West, and the Astros have the wildcard. As I understand it, if the playoffs started today, the Braves would play the Astros, and the Cardinals would play the Padres, because the Astros are in the same division as the Cardinals.
But what would happen if a team outside the central took the wildcard? The padres are currently only 1 game over 500, and it is totally posible that the west could be won by a team below 500. Would the Cardinals still play the wildcard team? Even if the winner of the west has a worst record?
It doesn’t matter if the Western Division winner has a worse record than the wild card; the wild card team is always the wild card team.
Here’s the thing you have to remember: it’s actually quite frequently the case that the wild card team has a better record than the worst division champion. If the NL Wild Card is better than the Padres, that’s nothing new. As a matter of fact, it’s happened half the time. Of the 20 Wild Card teams that have made the playoffs (two each from 1995 to 2004) ten of them were better than at least one division champion in their own league, and some were better than two!
It doesn’t hurt that the Bad News Bears could be in the thick of the NL West race at this point, either. That division is horrible.
That said, the Wild Card is probably coming out of the East. The Astros’ rotation is basically Clemens, Oswalt and pray for rain right now, and the entire East is in play.
As of today, the entire NL East is above .500 and the entire NL West is below .500. For some reason, ESPN has San Diego listed as .5 GB even though they are winning the division. When was the last time a sub .500 team won a division?
Since the 1973 Mets won with an 82-79 record, I think it was quite possible for all the teams in a division to be under .500 in the two division era.
From 1969 through 1992, NL teams played 90 games in their own division and 72 outside the division. Say that all the teams in one division split all their games and were 45-45. Then you just need the teams in the other division to beat up on that division.
If the 1973 Mets had dropped a few more games to the last place Phillies as well as the Cardinals doing the same, it would have happened. Also if the NL West last place team that year, San Diego, was a little better, every team in the NL East could have dropped below .500.
It was unlikely, but possible. The 1973 Mets had a winning record against only one NL West team, the Padres, whom they went 8-4 against.
OK, I’ll modify “impossible” to “highly improbable.”
I think it would be easier for it to happen now, with the unbalanced schedule, since every team in that division is bad enough to lose to everyone else in the division a lot.
What I can’t really figure out is WHY that division is so bad. The Dodgers and Giants should be much better. The Rockies aren’t going to win that division no matter how bad everyone else is, and the D-Backs are rebuilding, so I understand why they’re bad. The Padres have been mediocre, but so has everyone else.
It’s easier for it to happen now because the divisions have fewer teams. You need fewer teams to stink.
The Padres can’t score runs anymore.
The DBacks have no bullpen and have been outscored by over 70 runs
The Dodgers (Gagne, Drew, Bradley) and Giants (BONDS) have had major injury problems.