Let’s Rethink the Playoffs

The 2020 playoffs were contested by the largest playoff field in MLB history. While the expanded tournament certainly felt like an oddity, in the context of a shortened season, the format was tolerable for both fans and executives. The sabermetrically inclined readily conceded that a 60-game sample was insufficient to separate contenders from pretenders, all seamheads got to enjoy a few more games in a year with too few of them, and owners made more money. In a difficult situation, an imperfect solution proved a surprisingly elegant way to give everyone something they wanted.

The question is whether that format is here to stay.

One the one hand, you can understand why the league and its owners will be tempted to chase profits and advocate for the expanded field going forward. Per Sportico, the extra games this fall netted MLB an additional $100 million – $4.5 million per contest. Collectively, owners made less money than usual in 2020 and this is not a group that suffers rainy years with any equanimity. The prospect of another fanless season has the billionaire class antsy.

But while an expanded field worked in a pandemic-riddled season, my sense is that most — though obviously not all — fans don’t really want it to stay. A September column in the Washington Post titled “If baseball keeps these grotesque expanded playoffs, it will have lost its soul” is probably overstating things but there’s a sizable number of baseball fans who are very turned off by the idea. If nothing else, the lousy ratings from the early-round games suggests that Americans are hardly banging on the table for a 16-team dance.

The reasons why are as long as they are obvious. First, an expanded field is anathema to the traditionalists. This group may not be particularly well represented in the FanGraphs readership, but it’s clear that any jolt to the sport’s format will annoy a key part of the sport’s viewership. And while inertia alone should rarely be an impediment to innovation, traditionalists have a point in this case: Jumping from 10 to 16 teams is a dramatic expansion, and the prospect of a sub-.500 team bouncing a 100-game winner in a short series is decidedly unappetizing.

Worse, as an expanded field further reduces the significance of any one regular season game, teams will have even more incentive to prioritize profits over competitiveness. Ben Clemens examined this subject in depth over the summer, persuasively arguing that clubs will eschew go-for-broke strategies in favor of ones that offer a higher probability of .500 ball in perpetuity. We’ve already seen some of this since the league shifted from eight playoff teams to 10; it’s hard to imagine the incentives reversing with an even larger bracket.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

And so, MLB again finds itself trying to balance innovation and tradition. There is no easy way out here, no approach that will fully appease both the executives clawing for every last dollar and the traditional fans opposed to even minor tinkering (or those who simply smell a cash grab).

But if all parties are okay giving a little, there’s a way to let innovation capture the spirit of tradition. As we so often must do these days, we turn to South Korea for inspiration.

In the KBO, half of the league’s 10 teams make the postseason each year, albeit with a catch: Instead of the traditional postseason bracket that American audiences are familiar with, the KBO uses a step-ladder format, where the two lowest seeds meet first, the winner faces the next lowest seed, and the bracket continues in that manner until a champion is crowned. To see how it works in practice, let’s use this season’s KBO playoffs as an example.

To start things off, fourth seed LG was given a 1-0 series lead against fifth seed Kiwoom in a best of three, with the idea being to reward the fourth seed for their superior regular season performance. LG prevailed and were thus matched against third seed Doosan in another best-of-three (this and all following matchups started 0-0). While that seems like a very short series, the quick turnaround meant that LG could not use its rotation stars, giving Doosan a significant advantage. Doosan won, and then was matched against KT in a best-of-five. My Wiz sadly bowed out at that point, and so Doosan advanced to the KBO series to play NC in a traditional best of seven; the Dinos wound up winning in six games.

The key to making it all work is that the teams with byes have more of an advantage in this format than higher seeds do in MLB’s current setup. Teams use the time off to rest up for a few days while their opponent weakens itself by using their top pitchers. In the KBO, the upshot is that the higher seed wins significantly more often, though not so much as to deprive a round of its drama.

It’s very unlike any postseason American audiences are used to. But if you think about it, the appeal extends far beyond the novelty of merely doing something different. The immediately obvious advantage is that you can expand the playoff field significantly while still rewarding the regular season’s top teams.

Regardless of how many teams you include, the lowest seeds face an absolute gauntlet to the World Series. Having an 83-win playoff team in the field may not sound particularly appealing at first, but they’ll almost certainly bow out early. And if such a team manages to successively rattle off several consecutive series wins against progressively tougher (and well-rested) competition, they’ll have proved their mettle in a far more substantial way than, say, the 2006 Cardinals did. Moreover, this handicap would make lower seeds a far more compelling Cinderella story than a Wild Card team can be in the current setup.

The format makes for great television in a number of other ways. Such a bracket all but demands that you rely on shorter series for the first few rounds, which allows for more of the win-or-go-home games that make the playoffs special. Additionally, by only playing one or two series at a time, you ensure that each matchup takes center stage.

Best of all, this format makes the regular season so much more meaningful than it already is. The importance of winning the top seed rises dramatically: In the KBO, the regular season winner takes the KBO Series approximately 75% of the time. The format incentivizes good teams to aim for greatness, and reduces the utility of aiming for .500 and hoping for a few hot weeks in October. In today’s game, it’s not uncommon for division winners to treat September like syllabus week. In the KBO’s format, you’d have a proper pennant race.

You’d also have a much better chance for crazy end-of-year shenanigans like we last saw in 2011. On the final day of that season, four teams played in separate must-win games that all concluded around the same time: Three were great games and the entire night was a spectacle unlike anything we’ve seen since.

With the KBO’s style, you have a much better chance of something approximating that kind of event. In this format, every single seed matters, so even teams that have clinched a spot will have something meaningful to play for in the season’s final days. And if you get a year like the KBO saw in 2020 — where four teams entered the final day within a half-game of each other — the stakes and intrigue throughout September will be very high indeed.

I understand that plenty of people won’t like this. For some it will feel too far afield from how MLB has structured the playoffs previously, and I can practically hear the Pittsburgh media howling about the disadvantage small teams will have in such a setup; they may have a point.

I still think it’s worth exploring. A step-ladder arrangement offers the chance to give playoff baseball to more fan bases while still rewarding the teams that played best over the long summer. You’d not only get more games, but more games with big stakes — both in the regular season and the postseason. You’ll never make everyone happy, but this seems like the rare proposal that could be worth its weight in television money without making a gimmick out of the entire enterprise. If nothing else, the novelty itself should be a draw for a national audience at a time where MLB desperately needs positive publicity.





Brendan covers prospects and the minor leagues for FanGraphs. Previously he worked as a Pro Scout for the Pittsburgh Pirates.

36 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
bluerum29
5 years ago

The advantage in winning more during the regular season is home field advantage, maybe one bye. That is fine. There is an advantage and yet it is not drastic. This makes the playoffs mostly even and provides more opportunity for lower teams to provide for upsets. I prefer seeing the top seeds get knocked off and seeing teams that weren’t expected to win it all do so.

Philip ChristyMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  bluerum29

Go watch NHL playoffs

Mahoney
5 years ago

The only concern I would have would be the number of off days for the higher-seeded teams possibly making them rusty. I remember the 2006 WS, where the Tigers had about a week off after sweeping the ALCS, and their pitchers apparently forgot the fundamentals of fielding vs. the less rusty Cardinals.

Other than that, I think the stepladder format has a lot of merit.

Curacao LL
5 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

Same.
2007 might be even more dramatic.

Including tail end of regular season, Rox won 21 of 22 heading into WS. That qualifies as hot.
Sawx beat the Indians 4-3 in ALCS.
Sawx beat Rox 4-0, 29 runs to 10.
Sawx were a good team and by no means undeserving (won 96 in regular season), but one has to think the layoff cooled the Rox.

Pwn Shop
5 years ago
Reply to  Curacao LL

Or! To think that being ‘hot’ is not a thing that predicts future performance!

Brian ReinhartMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  Mahoney

How much time off did the top seeded KBO team get this year? This format sounds like they’d have as much time off as a Super Bowl team.

Psychic... Powerless...
5 years ago

I’d think that the lousy ratings for this year’s early rounds were at least partly due to multiple games occurring simultaneously.

Connor Grey
5 years ago

And during the day. I couldn’t watch as much as I wanted to because there were always games going on before I got out of work.

carterMember since 2020
5 years ago

I would imagine the ratings had very little to do with the format, and more to do with them being during the day/at the same time. I work from home, so I could watch them, but it was always pleasant to have baseball within 30 minutes of waking up. I can understand however how that probably isn’t optimal for ratings however, ha.

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago

Would you have an AL stepladder and an NL stepladder, with the winners of each meeting in the traditional World Series, I presume? Otherwise you would have something like an 8-10 rung ladder, and the team waiting at the top wouldn’t have played for like 3-4 weeks (unless the first few rungs were single-game eliminations, which, yuck). A couple of 4-5 rung ladders with winners squaring off in the WS seems much more feasible.

Magician_531
5 years ago

When did this start being called a step ladder format and not a bowling format?

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  Magician_531

It was after Kingpin made bowling ironically cool again, but then Randy Quaid went full-blown Looney Tunes.

Antonio BananasMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Ironically? If Big Ern isn’t cool then I don’t know what is.

JohnThackerMember since 2025
5 years ago
Reply to  Magician_531

I’ve heard it as just “ladder competition” or “ladder tournament” my whole life. Never “stepladder.”

yaro
5 years ago
Reply to  JohnThacker

Some of us came from broken ladder homes John, be more sensitive.

sbf21
5 years ago
Reply to  JohnThacker

Mangled metaphors. Hate em. Like “the handwriting is on the wall.”

TrinianMember since 2025
5 years ago
Reply to  sbf21

Actually, “The Handwriting is on the wall” is not a metaphor, mangled or otherwise. It is a literary allusion to a Bible story. Read the fifth chapter of the book of Daniel.

bluerum29
5 years ago
Reply to  Trinian

That is called an Idiom.

sbf21
5 years ago
Reply to  Trinian

Thanks for the correction. You’re right.

My point is that the saying is the writing is on the wall, not the handwriting.

detroitstars
5 years ago

I like this idea but I also like a hybrid type format (I think MarketMaker first suggested something like this in the summer under the “Expanded Playoffs (Probably) Coming” article).
Something like…
8 v 5 and 7 v 6 (best of 3)
winner of 8v5 against 4 and winner of 7v6 against 3 (best of 5)
the winners of those two series play against 1 and 2 (best of 5)
LCS (best of 7)

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  detroitstars

Only potential issue may be the ~10 day layoff for the 1-2 seeds. May be a help, may be a hindrance.

(Either way keep going with the “no days off during the round” that we saw at times in 2020.)

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago

I think this could, in theory, work, with some modifications. With an 7-team field you could have 3-rounds for the 7th-4th seeds immediately (7th vs 4th, 6th vs 5th) and giving a first round bye to 1-3. Then, give the higher seed home field advantage throughout the first round so that it is done in 3 days, and then immediately ship off the winner to the next round. This gives the bottom four teams the gauntlet they need to get through and the top teams would only get 4 days off (meaning they wouldn’t be rusty), and that would be enough for them to re-set their rotations.

The Stranger
5 years ago

I like this idea in the abstract, but a downside that I haven’t seen discussed yet is that fans of the best teams won’t get to see their team play for an extended period. Which takes some of the fun out of it, I think.

Also, there’s probably no way the owners would go for it. If you go to shorter series in the early rounds (which I think you have to, because it would take too long to play sequential long series), that’s fewer total games and less revenue.

nab0610
5 years ago

You want division winners to buy in. You give them all a buy and you give them all of the home games in the next round. Teams want more postseason revenue for the gate revenue. If you want more teams reward the best teams with more revenue. However, this is against what the sport is focusing on with a competitive balance tax in some ways…

theoriolewayMember since 2026
5 years ago

I expected to hate this idea, but I’m intrigued. The thing I most love about baseball is the long season. Why play 162 games to crown your ‘champion’ in a handful of short series? This doesn’t fully fix the problem, not least because I think the owners wouldn’t go for it as it means the playoffs don’t actually expand, and if they do actually expand, do we want the best teams sitting idle for two weeks before playing? Still, a really interesting format they’ve got in South Korea.

ChadTMember since 2017
5 years ago

I like the idea of the game advantage, and was something I thought would have been great to have been implemented in this year’s best-of-three series. The better seed only has to win one game to advance, the lower seed has to win two.

Antonio BananasMember since 2026
5 years ago

Days off in baseball aren’t a great advantage. You can reward top seeds with “byes” without sacrificing days off to get rusty

How about this:

3 div winners play double round robin to seed 1-3. This round is played at the home park of the team with the highest record.

Wild cards 4-8 play their own single game round robin hosted at the top WC. Only the top team of these 5 move on.

Div1 plays WC, format is gm1 at wild card, then games 2-5 at Div1

Div 2 vs Div 3 is the traditional 2-2-1 format

LCS is 2 gms at lower seed, then 5 at higher

WS is 2-2-1-1-1

I think a part I liked this year was the fewer days off. In a typical 2-3-2, I’m not sure the Dodgers come back. But even as a Braves fan, I like that the better team won. Fewer days off means deeper teams have a better shot and it’s more similar to the regular season.

joelbarlow
5 years ago

One likely problem is that in a stepladder format or in various play-in round scenarios you are potentially providing lower seeds with more revenue opportunities than higher seeds. Can’t see the owners liking that.

sbf21
5 years ago

I don’t hate this idea. But it really would require balanced schedules to make sure the seedings are fair.

originallyRagsMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  sbf21

Exactly!

Before considering “fairness” and such in the playoffs, we really need to take a good look at fixing the regular season qualifications to the playoffs — in large part due to the very imbalanced schedule, and also due to having, perhaps, too many divisions.

Here is an example — one that might not be the *best* example, but recent (and top of mind)…

In 2018, Cleveland made the playoffs as a division winner with 91 wins. The Rays stayed home with 90 wins.

Cleveland went 49-27 against it’s division mates in the AL Central, a .644 winning percentage, but sub .500 against all other foes (and only .454 against AL teams in the East and West).

In contrast, the Rays played in a harder division, but mustered a .539 win percentage against the AL East — a harder division than Cleveland’s AL Central. The Rays went .656 against the AL Central teams (better than Cleveland did), including 4-2 against Cleveland.

Certainly there are a number of ways you can analyze this, but I think this quick look provides enough evidence to show that the existing setup of divisions and unbalanced schedules does not ensure the best teams will be the ones going to the playoffs.

My take is this: the number of playoff teams and format is worth tinkering with, but the unbalanced schedule and small division sizes is the big obstacle to ensuring the best teams are rewarded with berths (and seeded properly).

Fungo4444
5 years ago

I like it. I think also that if teams knew for certain they would have a 14 day layoff or such, they could find ways to counteract the rust that accumulates from not seeing live pitching

TonyMember since 2017
5 years ago

I’m willing to have the playoffs expanded a little, but I’d like something less than this year’s playoffs (as I think most fans would like).

ScoreboardMember since 2016
5 years ago

Very good piece, although I think your argument would benefit from a visual or hypothetical simulation or two for illustrative purposes 🙂

MattMember since 2020
5 years ago

So the fans of the champions had a postseason of six games? Is that a whole week? Yawn.

mike sixelMember since 2016
5 years ago

I’ve been suggesting something similar for a few years. EVERY team makes the second season (crown two champions…..first and second season). The worst teams have to play while the best rest. The best also get leads when they do start playing. I have this written up someplace……Great tv, and every team has a reason to try at the end of the year. Every fanbase has a reason to care at the end of the year. Right now? By August, something like half the fans or more have no reason to care about the post season or winning at all.