Is Bigger Better?

Is bigger better? No, we are not talking about the size of today’s players or equipment. And while it is an age old question that has been bandied about thousands of times, from an NCSHAA play-off perspective, we only have one year of data to help draw our conclusions.

In 2007, the NCHSAA increased the number of teams that qualified to participate in each of the state’s four divisions to 64, up from 32. The increase allowed over two/thirds of all NCHSAA teams into the tournaments.

Revisiting the 2007 4A bracket, the east side played close to “caulk” with most of the top seeds advancing, while the west side was more upset prone. There were three of 15 conference champions (number one seeds) to lose in the opening round: Smithfield to #4 Sanderson; West Meck to #5 Ardrey Kell; and East Forsyth to wild card Davie. In the East, lower seeded teams won eight of 26 games (31%) while the west saw the “underdog” win 12 of 30 (40%). After the first two rounds of action, the east had six of eight number one seeds in the district round (plus a #3 & #4) with all four sectional slots in the bracket being filled by number one seeds. The west saw only three of seven top seeds make the districts (plus two #2s, two #3s, & a WC), while the sectionals were comprised of two #1s, a #2 and a #3.

With the addition of more teams, the bracket still produced the highly anticipated clash of the titans in the sectionals. The east saw heavy weights Richmond and Ashley square off late into the night before Ashley ended it in the 12th via a walk off HR. It also manufactured a 4-3 classic between Middle Creek and Leesville. In the west, a 24-2 South Caldwell bested a 24-1 Butler team before an over capacity crowd.

Both regional series were highly competitive as Ashley overcame Leesville 4-2, & 5-4 while South Caldwell hung on to win 3-2 in game three after coming from behind to win the opener in extra innings.

In the opener of the championship series, down to their final out and trailing 1-0, South Caldwell got the break they needed when a missed played ball ended in a four run game winning rally. From there, the destiny’s darlings rode the wave of momentum to the title, ending it in five the following day, on an inside the park home run.

The number one seeded teams out scored their “last in” opposition 100-37 in the opening round of the redesigned 2007 4A play-offs. While some of the early round match-ups provided an opportunity for a struggling team to continue a season for a fleeting moment (and TBRers some addition fodder) it might have been best if the time and energy was directed elsewhere. For in the long run, the addition teams and games added nothing to the championships other than teams and games.

Not only did the increase tournament draw water down the tournament, it also unintentionally detracted from team’s regular season and conference tournaments. With the large amount of play-off births, teams and coaches were no longer were forced into desperation mode, either consciously or unwittingly. With teams playing for tomorrow, the increase intensity that produces the peak performances and special moments were diminished.

There has been long debate at the local watering holes, on this board, and many places in between on the best way to determine a championship. Some states invite all members while others start with a limited amount of teams.

Proponents of large tournament fields like to point at the success of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament and the excitement of the opening week games were Cinderella annually makes an appearance. What is not recognized by these proponents is that there are 181 Division I basketball schools so roughly only 35% make the tournament field, with the majority of the teams earning their way onto the bracket by automatic birth and not association membership. By reducing the number of births back to 32 in the NCHSAA bracket, the field would be comprised by a near identical percentage of teams as the NCAA basketball tournament with the majority of the field earning their way there via league or tournament championships, restoring the competitiveness in the regular season and conference tournaments leading to the play-offs and help increase the state play-off competitive balance in the early rounds.

A factor greater than how large the championship field should be is the tournament format. Baseball play-offs are unlike any other team sport. In all other team sports, the opportunity to use the same players game after game is available, an option not practical on the diamond. This dynamic can make each game dramatically different. Further, you can play perfectly and still lose, for the unhittable pitch, breaking out of the zone, somehow dribbles safely between the pitcher, catcher and third baseman or the flawless swing that laces a liner is remarkable speared by a diving shortstop.

In no other sport do the best teams have a lower winning percentage than baseball. Putting it as simply as possible: in baseball, the best team does not always win. Then why do we try to identify the champion with a format that increases the statistical possibility of crowning a lesser team? By using regular season and conference tournament results for little more than seeding purposes and then playing single elimination, we are doing just that. If the goal is to find the best teams, we should use a formula that optimally suits that objective.

Unlike professional sports, we do not need concern ourselves with additional rounds of playoffs for added revenue. Extra rounds at the high school level most likely cost nearly as much, if not more, in umpire’s fees and travel expenses than the revenue generated.

In 2007 the NCHSAA used 66-69 play dates to determine state champions. Reducing the number of entrants to 32 and then playing the best of three in each round, the tournament can be conducted in the same number of play dates. After game one, the series venue would shift where games two and three (if needed) would be conducted on the same day. This configuration would require no more game days or travel than was required with the 64 team formula.

More importantly the play-offs would become, once again, more of a reward for outstanding work accomplished during the regular season or conference tournament, intensifying inspired play throughout the season. Additionally the smaller field series format would decrease opening round mismatches; lessen the chance of having top teams derailed by an opponent with a single star pitcher; and most importantly increase the statistically probability that the best teams are identified. Is that not the ultimate goal?

 

Great post-I have said for years we need Best of 3 in each round and keep 3 of teams at 32-start playoffs on Tuesday like we used to instead of Friday like last 2 years.Play best of 3 in each series to find "true" best team.If I am not mistaken,state of Ga. uses this format and if used playoffs would end at same time they end now.The other option I like is take 32 teams,seed just like football(seed # 1,then 2's then 3's,etc.) and place in 4 4-team pods-similar to what NCAA does with their Reginals.You can play a double elimination tourney with those 4 teams(like state of SC does).You then have 4 teams to advance to regionals and play another 4 team tourney to decide who advances to play best of 3 for state title.Home field can be decided by seeds in early rounds, and then refigured when final 4 comes-either way would be better than one and done.

 

Yes, I like this. I bet if you polled all the coaches, the majority will say they don't mind being invited into the playoffs as the 63rd team, but they prefer the 32 team format....and I'm in favor of the 3 game playoffs in all rounds.

Mincmi- I know this was a typo, but I couldn't help chuckling at this; plus, I figured I would give you a heads up before you get an ugly email

"the density’s darlings"...that's a sure way to getting a ticket in Caldwell County, but I can imagine that their opposition might chuckle at that, too.

By the way, Mincmi, another great job of putting this information together and posting it on here. Very insightful!!!

 

64 teams is too many.

 

Expanded format - One and Done Playoffs

The expanded playoff format. Diminishes the regular season. The one and done format allows for a team to beat a much better team with one player. This happens way too many times. We have been on both ends of this scenario in the playoffs. We beat the #1 ranked team in the state by throwing a stud lhp. If we would have played a 2-3 series we would have been lucky to play 2 7 inning games in games 2 and 3. They were a much better team than we were. But on that one day in a one game series we had a guy that could beat anyone. Next game we lost. Then we have been beaten the same way. Why is the Eastern and Western finals 2-3? Is it because they want to make sure the best team makes the state finals? If so is it not also just as important to make sure (or at least try) to make sure that the two best teams are in the Eastern or Western Finals?

 

It changed some things too

Before you played round one on Tuesday with round two on Friday. Now you play round one on Friday with round two on Tuesday. The big difference here is before you had two days rest between round 1 and 2. Now you have three days rest between round 1 and 2. What you saw last year is many teams throwing the ace in round 1 and 2. Before with only two days rest most schools that have a tendency to throw a guy alot and on short rest would have been at more of a disadvantage at doing this. Actually if you went to 2-3 in every round you might see less guys getting thrown too much. And there is no doubt it would be much more likely that the best team would advance.

 

That is what happens when I ghost write for George McFly!

No offense intended.

 

Way TOO Many!

Way Way too many "berths."

If you're not the best team in your conference how can you be the best team in the State? More 2 out of 3 or 4 team double elimination competition sounds way better than the one and done non-sense going on now.

Letting bad teams in and playing one and done is a travesty. Can someone from the NCHSAA come forward and explain it????

 

Agreed. But it does led to teams with powerhouse pitching. Which of course we would have to bring up the dirty word. "T". I will only say that maybe reduction in the number of teams and expanding games on a graduated scale.

 

It means different things to different people

To me making the playoffs should be a reward for earning the right through your play during the regular season. To some the playoffs should be every kids right. Or as many kids as possible right to have the experience. I say earn the right to have the experience.

When I was in HS you won your conference or you stayed home. I think they had a wild card to balance out the brackets if it was uneven. My Jr year in football we were 8-2 5-1 in the conference and stayed home. We didnt think anything about it because we believed if you did not win your conference you didnt deserve to play for a state title.

To me I think only the top 2 teams in a conference should advance in baseball. And if they gave me the choice of 64 teams like now or only the conference champion I would vote only conference champion. Playoff berths should be earned not given out like candy at a Christmas Parade.