Game 163

[Judge Jude]

What does MLB know about what a regular-season game constitutes?

It's not like the Dodgers and Maury Wills played 165 regular-season games, back when men were men, in 1962

it's this new-fangled rule we must rebel against

oh, wait, they did

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/LAD/1962.shtml

too bad Hornsby wasn't around back then to correct the record

[Hornsby]

What does MLB know about what a regular-season game constitues?

It's not like the Dodgers and Maury Wills played 165 regular-season games, back when men were men, in 1962

it's this new-fangled rule we must rebel against

oh, wait, they did

http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/LAD/1962.shtml

too bad Hornsby wasn't around back then to correct the record

And why oh why did they have to play 165 games then Jude? Please educate we great unwashed masses...oh that's right, it was a 3 game PLAYOFF series to get into the World Series.

[Weapon1]

My opinion is that we acquire our players to get their regular season stats, and if stats count for the players, they count for our games too.

[Judge Jude]

And why oh why did they have to play 165 games then Jude? Please educate we great unwashed masses...oh that's right, it was a 3 game PLAYOFF series to get into the World Series.

No, it was a three-game play-in series to get into the World Series, which is why they counted as regular season games. You can rail against facts all you want - and in this case you might have a point questioning why they did what they did - but it doesn't change the facts.

Kind of weird to worship at the altar of a lazy stats site over the actual sport itself, isn't it? If I ask you how many bases Maury Wills stole that year, will you tell me the 165-game answer that is part of his official record, or will you tell me you have to do some research and subtracting first before you have your answer?

[hacko]

No, it was a three-game play-in series to get into the World Series, which is why they counted as regular season games. You can rail against facts all you want - and in this case you might have a point questioning why they did what they did - but it doesn't change the facts.

Kind of weird to worship at the altar of a lazy stats site over the actual sport itself, isn't it? If I ask you how many bases Maury Wills stole that year, will you tell me the 165-game answer that is part of his official record, or will you tell me you have to do some research and subtracting first before you have your answer?

I am curious would Major league recognize if someone in the 163 game was to break a Major league record. Say HR SB for a season? I bet that would bring up some heavy Debate if it was to happen.

Some Argument we are having in our AL only league against using this game is:
1. While they may be using the Individual Stat it will not change any team standings except for those 2 teams - so it shouldn't change ours.

2. our rule states Regular 162 game season. Now when we put the Rule in we were not thinking of this game and what to call it. Some call it regular season some call it a play in game. But it definitely is game 163 not 162

[joncarlos]

I am curious would Major league recognize if someone in the 163 game was to break a Major league record. Say HR SB for a season? I bet that would bring up some heavy Debate if it was to happen.

Some Argument we are having in our AL only league against using this game is:
1. While they may be using the Individual Stat it will not change any team standings except for those 2 teams - so it shouldn't change ours.

2. our rule states Regular 162 game season. Now when we put the Rule in we were not thinking of this game and what to call it. Some call it regular season some call it a play in game. But it definitely is game 163 not 162

Technically it changes all the AL standings. Texas and TB will have 163 games played. If TEX wins they finish 4.5 back of LAA with a record of 92-71. And as far as I know, if there were any records broken, it would count. It's a regular season game.

[hacko]

Technically it changes all the AL standings. Texas and TB will have 163 games played. If TEX wins they finish 4.5 back of LAA with a record of 92-71. And as far as I know, if there were any records broken, it would count. It's a regular season game.

That is not really correct - No one else place in the standings will change because of this game - That is the argument. If I am LA ,Det,Oak I am not losing/ gaining any place in the standings because I didn't play today in an extra game. In our league some teams could change places simply because they have no players in this game.

[Hornsby]

No, it was a three-game play-in series to get into the World Series, which is why they counted as regular season games. You can rail against facts all you want - and in this case you might have a point questioning why they did what they did - but it doesn't change the facts.

Kind of weird to worship at the altar of a lazy stats site over the actual sport itself, isn't it? If I ask you how many bases Maury Wills stole that year, will you tell me the 165-game answer that is part of his official record, or will you tell me you have to do some research and subtracting first before you have your answer?

Semantics...play-in or playoff, it's the same result. As far as "worshiping at the alter of a lazy stats site", don't we always question the decisions of MLB? Wasn't there an asterisk after Roger Maris broke the Babe's record? Many people felt that he had an unfair advantage because he was able to play in 8 more games...And to echo Hacko, if somone was denied an MLB record, or perhaps lost any of the counting stat titles, there would be a rush to "make it right".

Bottom line is simple, it's a 162 game regular season, and IMO, that's what we should base our fantasy standings on.

[joncarlos]

That is not really correct - No one else place in the standings will change because of this game - That is the argument. If I am LA ,Det,Oak I am not losing/ gaining any place in the standings because I didn't play today in an extra game. In our league some teams could change places simply because they have no players in this game.

Semantics. The Angels will be +/- 0.5 games closer to the Rangers after today. They'll still be in 3rd place. So which way do you want to define "changing places in the standings?"

If you apply that to roto, teams can lose/gain points today but not change places in the standings? Doesn't really make sense.

If there was an NL team that was also 91-71 they would have their draft position changed after today. It just so happens that there isn't one.

[Hornsby]

Semantics. The Angels will be +/- 0.5 games closer to the Rangers after today. They'll still be in 3rd place. So which way do you want to define "changing places in the standings?"

If you apply that to roto, teams can lose/gain points today but not change places in the standings? Doesn't really make sense.

If there was an NL team that was also 91-71 they would have their draft position changed after today. It just so happens that there isn't one.

And how is it fair for a team to lose a spot in the draft because of a game that they're not allowed to participate in? Just another reason why this should be considered post-season and not part of the regular season.

[hacko]

WE put it up for a league vote so far 6 no count to 1 count. Sticking points seem to be the 162 game line.

[hacko]

Semantics. The Angels will be +/- 0.5 games closer to the Rangers after today. They'll still be in 3rd place. So which way do you want to define "changing places in the standings?"

If you apply that to roto, teams can lose/gain points today but not change places in the standings? Doesn't really make sense.

We have teams that are 1 pt difference and not have anyone play today. They could lose points and even gain points causing a shift in the standings even tho they are not participating today. That isn't happening in Real MLB. Imagine if you are tied but Won the Tiebreakers you set up in YOUR rules. and have No one in the game today. You draft a player on what you think he will do for 162 games not 163.

[Hornsby]

I just found out that in the RJEL, the 3 year title is currently separated by a half a point, and both teams have several players in tonight's game.

[joncarlos]

We have teams that are 1 pt difference and not have anyone play today. They could lose points and even gain points causing a shift in the standings even tho they are not participating today. That isn't happening in Real MLB. Imagine if you are tied but Won the Tiebreakers you set up in YOUR rules. and have No one in the game today. You draft a player on what you think he will do for 162 games not 163.

I draft for the regular season. Which this game is part of

[Controller Jacobs]

I am curious would Major league recognize if someone in the 163 game was to break a Major league record. Say HR SB for a season? I bet that would bring up some heavy Debate if it was to happen.

Some Argument we are having in our AL only league against using this game is:
1. While they may be using the Individual Stat it will not change any team standings except for those 2 teams - so it shouldn't change ours.

2. our rule states Regular 162 game season. Now when we put the Rule in we were not thinking of this game and what to call it. Some call it regular season some call it a play in game. But it definitely is game 163 not 162

I don't think it would be that heated if someone took the HR record in 163. Firstly, Maris got so much garbage for beating Ruth in 162 games vs 154 (including death threats). And Maris was a nice guy, not to mention he was keeping the record in the same franchise. The writers who know that history will be against player being beaten on for games played. Second, Maris' record was eclipsed by McGwire, Sosa and Bonds. So it somebody hits 74 in 163, they're probably going to be greeted with relief.