Team Entropy 2018: Let’s Play Two!

This is the seventh and final installment of this year’s Team Entropy series, my recurring look not only at the races for the remaining playoff spots but the potential for end-of-season chaos in the form of down-to-the-wire suspense and even tiebreakers. Ideally, we want more ties than the men’s department at Macy’s. If you’re new to this, please read the introduction here. And if you’ve been following along with this series, here and on Twitter, many thanks!

Pop the champagne! Team Entropy has done it — or rather the Brewers, Cubs, Dodgers, and Rockies have done it — producing an unprecedented level of end-of-season chaos in the form of two Game 163 tiebreaker games that will be played on Monday afternoon. The 1pm ET game between the Cubs and Brewers (both 95-67) in Chicago will decide the winner of the NL Central, which will also become the top seed in the NL; the loser will host the Wild Card game on Tuesday night. The 4pm ET game between the Dodgers and Rockies (both 91-71) in Los Angeles will decide the No. 2 seed in the NL, which will face the Braves (90-72) in the Division Series, while the loser will be the road team for the Wild Card game.

Before all of that transpires, it’s worth taking a moment to appreciate what just happened. The Cubs, who have held at least a share of first place in the NL Central since July 13 and had sole position from August 1 through September 28, had a 3.5-game lead on the Brewers as of September 18, but went just 6-5 thereafter, including Sunday’s win. The Brewers, who held a share of first place in the division for all but one day from May 13 to July 13, were six back as of August 28, before winning 22 of their final 29, including nine of their last 10 — and all of their final seven — to wind up tied.

Over in the NL West, the Dodgers, who began the year 16-26, only intermittently occupied first place, with a stretch from July 12 through August 11 accounting for 27 of their 40 days either sharing or having sole possession of the catbird seat. A 7-1 surge, one that included taking three out of four from the Cardinals and sweeping the Rockies, pushed them to a season high 2.5-game lead as of September 19. While they went 6-3 from that point, the Rockies, who themselves only spent 32 days with a share of first, caught fire and won eight in a row and nine out of their last 10.

The Cubs and Brewers clinched their playoff berths last Wednesday, while the Rockies clinched theirs on Friday. On that that same day, the Cubs pushed the Cardinals, who still had hopes of winning a Wild Card spot, to the brink of elimination. Both the Central and West divisions entered Saturday with their leaders (the Cubs and Rockies) ahead by a game, and from there — for the purposes of Team Entropy — everything kept coming up Milhouse. The ties page of our playoff odds report estimated the chances of an end-of-season deadlock in the Central at 25.9%, and in the West at 34.1%, which, by my math, meant an 8.8% chance of both happening. That’s more than 10 times what it was on the previous Sunday, when the Cubs and Dodgers led their divisions by 2.5 and 1.5 games, respectively.

On Saturday, the Cubs lost 2-1 to the Cardinals, keeping the latter’s slim playoff hopes alive, but only for a few hours. Soon after, the Dodgers dashed those hopes and clinched their own playoff spot in the process, with a 10-6 win over the Giants in San Francisco. That night, the Brewers closed the gap by beating the Tigers 6-5 behind a pair of home runs by Christian Yelich (who else?), while the Rockies let the Dodgers back into a tie when they were roughed up by the Nationals, 12-2.

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.

Three of Sunday’s four relevant games — all of which were played simultaneously, starting at 3:05 pm ET, in a situation that tested the bandwidths of everybody with an MLB.TV plan — were extremely lopsided, with relatively little suspense except as it related to the bigger picture. The Dodgers plated two runs before they even made an out against Giants starter Andrew Suarez, piled up seven in the third to take a 9-0 lead, and won 15-0. With the Nationals choosing to start rookie Erick Fedde instead of Cy Young candidate Max Scherzer, the Rockies used two-run homers by Nolan Arenado and Charlie Blackmon and a three-run shot by David Dahl to build an early 7-0 lead. They ultimately won 12-0, with Arenado adding a second homer to take over the NL lead at 37 and Blackmon hitting for the cycle. The Brewers took a 2-0 lead over the Tigers in the first inning, added single runs in the fourth and sixth, and then piled on six in the seventh en route to an 11-0 win.

The Cubs, on the other hand, took the more difficult path by falling behind 2-0 in the first. Thanks to a barrage of extra-base hits by the usual suspects, they took control with a four-run third inning that chased starter Jack Flaherty, added four more in the fifth, and withstood a late challenge in which the Cardinals, though down 10-5, had the bases loaded in the seventh until Steve Cishek struck out Francisco Peña. That the Cubs needed nine pitchers, with relievers such as Brandon Kintzler and Carl Edwards Jr. looking rough while the other teams were able to rest their A-list guys, may be a factor over the next two days.

Major League Baseball hasn’t had a tiebreaker game since 2013, when the Rays downed the Rangers to claim the second AL Wild Card spot. There have been 14 tiebreakers in MLB history (15 if you count the replay of the tied game produced by Merkle’s Boner in 1908). Four of them were decided in best-of-three series that served as forerunners of the League Championship Series:

MLB Tiebreaker History
Year Title Winner Loser Score Playoffs
1946 NL pennant Cardinals Dodgers 2-0 (games) Won WS
1948 AL pennant Indians Red Sox 8–3 Won WS
1951 NL pennant Giants Dodgers 2-1 (games) Lost WS
1959 NL pennant Dodgers Braves 2-0 (games) Won WS
1962 NL pennant Giants Dodgers 2-1 (games) Lost WS
1978 AL East Yankees Red Sox 5–4 Won WS
1980 NL West Astros Dodgers 7–1 Lost NLCS
1995 AL West Mariners Angels 9–1 Lost ALCS
1998 NL Wild Card Cubs Giants 5–3 Lost NLDS
1999 NL Wild Card Mets Reds 5–0 Lost NLCS
2007 NL Wild Card Rockies Padres 9–8 (13) Lost WS
2008 AL Central White Sox Twins 1–0 Lost ALDS
2009 AL Central Twins Tigers 6–5 (12) Lost ALDS
2013 AL Wild Card Rays Rangers 5–2 Lost ALDS

There have been nine tiebreaker elimination games since the start of division play in 1969, starting with Bucky Dent and company’s victory over the Red Sox in 1978. Dent’s Yankees were the last team to win a World Series after going this route. This is the first time a tiebreaker has been played merely for the purposes of establishing seeding, with no elimination at stake. When MLB switched from the single Wild Card format to the Wild Card game in 2012, the league decided that the right to avoid playing a single-elimination playoff game was worth playing off for itself. From 1994 (had the strike not intervened) through 2011, in the event of a tie after 162 games — such as was the case involving the 95-67 Yankees and Red Sox in 2005 — the division winner and Wild Card team would be decided on the basis of head-to-head records, with the loser at no discernible disadvantage thereafter except to be the road team in their playoff series. Now, to borrow colleague Sean Dolinar’s description from our in-house Slack channel, what we have is a four-team double-elimination bracket.

It’s imperfect, particularly when one considers that the NL playoff team with the worst record, the Braves, is the one getting a bye until Thursday’s Division Series opener. What’s also imperfect is that, since the tiebreakers are regular-season games, expanded rosters will still be in effect, so if things get out of control early, we might see guys who won’t come near a playoff series soaking up innings so that nobody who might be needed on Tuesday night is taxed. If things are tight late, you’re going to see a four-hour tribute to Tony La Russa in the form of matchup-induced pitching changes galore. Your mileage may vary, but I remain on board with preferring to see these teams play for the right not to have their backs to the wall on Tuesday than to have the seeding decided by the head-to-head records.

As it stands, the Cubs are starting lefty Jose Quintana (4.09 ERA, 4.52 FIP, 1.2 WAR) while the Brewers, after waiting until around 10 AM on Monday morning to show their hand, are going with Jhoulys Chacin (3.56 ERA, 3.99 FIP, 2.6 WAR), who is both on turn and their most valuable starter in terms of WAR. With Josh Hader, Jeremy Jeffress, Corey Knebel, Joakim Soria all rested — Hader hasn’t pitched since Friday, the other three each threw spotless innings on Saturday — they could have decided to hold Chacin back for Tuesday and just bullpen the hell out of Monday. The NL West tiebreaker has the better pitching matchup, even with staff aces Kyle Freeland and Clayton Kershaw not available, as the former pitched Friday, the latter Saturday. Call it a Wild West shootout featuring a pair of young guns, with the Rockies going forth with 23-year-old German Marquez (3.76 ERA, 3.33 FIP, 4.5 WAR) and the Dodgers countering with 24-year-old Walker Buehler (2.76 ERA, 2.98 FIP, 3.2 WAR). Damn, this is going to be fun.

It’s been fun already, of course. I started this Team Entropy thing in 2011, and even with playoff berths still in question heading into the final day of the regular every year except 2017, the lack of actual tiebreaker games in the past four years had me feeling like Linus van Pelt. With two tiebreaker games in one day, at long last the Great Pumpkin has finally arrived, and with apologies to the hardworking folks inconvenienced by the extra layer of complexity in the form of logistical nightmares, contingency plans, and travel away from their loved ones, I’d like to think we collectively willed this mess into existence. So let’s enjoy the hell out of Monday!





Brooklyn-based Jay Jaffe is a senior writer for FanGraphs, the author of The Cooperstown Casebook (Thomas Dunne Books, 2017) and the creator of the JAWS (Jaffe WAR Score) metric for Hall of Fame analysis. He founded the Futility Infielder website (2001), was a columnist for Baseball Prospectus (2005-2012) and a contributing writer for Sports Illustrated (2012-2018). He has been a recurring guest on MLB Network and a member of the BBWAA since 2011, and a Hall of Fame voter since 2021. Follow him on BlueSky @jayjaffe.bsky.social.

29 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
bluestragglerMember since 2016
7 years ago

I am on Team Entropy and look forward to these games……but: the logic of today’s particular matchups is lost on me. The Cubs won the season series against the Brewers 11-8 and the Dodgers went 12-7 against the Rockies. Why isn’t that considered an adequate tiebreaker for the division crown?

Seems unfair to me that LA and Chicago have to be subject to a tiebreaker, even at home, that could banish them to the coin flip game.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
7 years ago
Reply to  bluestraggler

So win the game…

JohnThackerMember since 2025
7 years ago
Reply to  bluestraggler

Because conversely the Brewers and Rockies had a better record against everyone else.

Major League Baseball has decided, correctly IMHO, that any advantage larger than home field advantage or seeding (i.e. advantages that determine what round you enter in or whether you are in the playoffs at all) should be decided on the field. With 162 games and a game where playing one extra game is relatively easy, I think it’s great.

The current playoff system is one of the best things MLB has going for it. It’s true that the amazing 2011 season would have been slightly diminished, but that was a rare occurrence. Right now there’s a fantastic balance of excitement, opportunities to qualify, and reasons to play tiebreakers.

BipMember since 2016
7 years ago
Reply to  JohnThacker

A head-to-head record tie-breaker *could* make sense if you were concerned about a disparity in strength of schedule. If, for instance, the Dodgers and Cubs faced hypothetically harder schedules than the the Rockies and Brewers, their respective head-to-head records could be taken as mild evidence of which team is actually better.

The problem is that teams in the same division play the same schedule every year when you ignore their head-to-head games. So that doesn’t make much sense.

BUT they don’t really play the same schedule. Both the Rockies and Dodgers drew the Astros, but what if the Dodgers faced their healthy lineup and the top of their rotation, and the Rockies got them during a rash of injuries? Despite playing the same teams, the strengths of their schedules will never be exactly the same because of how teams fluctuate over the season.

So this leads me to an idea: if there was a really sophisticated way to measure SoS which included starting pitchers faced and snapshots of the opposing lineup for every individual game, then you could reward the team that managed the same record against a harder schedule. Great idea right? No, my guess is that these fluctuations probably only add up to at most one changed game outcome, not enough effect to go through the effort of measuring it. And playing one playoff game to decide the winner is not a big deal at all.

In summary, I hope you enjoyed this pointless thought exercise.

Spahn_and_Sain
7 years ago
Reply to  bluestraggler

Brewers-Cubs season head-to-head is heavily weighted by two early 4-game April series where the Cubs went 7-1.
In the other 4 series , the Brewers are up 7-4.
So why not make the tiebreaker the number of series wins? Just as arbitrary, no? Taken that way, the Brewers would get the nod (3 won – 2 lost – 1 split).

sadtromboneMember since 2020
7 years ago

This is awesome.

Also, I bet you anything the Brewers and Cubs are hoping the Rockies win against the Dodgers, because I would really not want to face the Dodgers if I don’t have to.

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Uh, the Brewers/Cubs are hoping the Dodgers win today. Because a Dodgers loss, and they’re in the Wild Card game vs Brewers/Cubs loser- with the winner going to face the Brewers/Cubs winner.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

I guess it depends on whether you win or lose! I was assuming that the winner of the game wants that. You’re thinking of the loser.

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I’m thinking both….
if you are the winner of the Cubs/Brewers game- you get the wild card winner. If the Dodgers are in the wild card game having lost, you could play the Dodgers.
If you are the loser of the Cubs/Brewers game- you would get the loser of the Dodgers/Rockies game. Which you would want Colorado obviously.

The correct statement is actually-
I bet you anything the Braves are hoping the Rockies win against the Dodgers, because I would really not want to face the Dodgers if I don’t have to.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Ah shoot, you’re right. Carry on.

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Thinking about it, in a weird way, if I’m the Cubs/Brewers- I’m hoping the Dodgers do actually lose today. I’d much rather have to beat the Dodgers only once/3 times instead of 4 times.

OddBall Herrera
7 years ago

Am I alone in not liking the tiebreaker games? It potentially affects the quality of the wild card game and even divisional round, but more importantly isn’t having a one game tiebreaker kind of nonsense when these teams have played each other 20 times already? Just take the season series winner and move on, it’s a better tiebreaker stat anyway.

Anon21Member since 2018
7 years ago

You’re not alone, but this is a bad opinion. The Rockies and Brewers shouldn’t be automatically forced into an elimination game after they tied over 162. Head-to-head matchup should never be used for anything other than determining homefield advantage.

OddBall Herrera
7 years ago
Reply to  Anon21

“Head-to-head matchup should never be used for anything other than determining homefield advantage.”

What is a tiebreaker game other than a head to head matchup? You are mostly arguing that 1 head to head matchup right now matters more than the 19 they already played this season, and if the goal is to have the better team get the higher seed, aren’t we pretty sure who that is if one of them went 12-7 against the other?

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago

Maybe don’t go 1-6 vs Cincy or 2-4 vs Miami. Just saying.

Anon21Member since 2018
7 years ago

It’s a head-to-head matchup because these are the two teams that need to settle the tie, but the number that will matter at the end is each team’s overall record.

BipMember since 2016
7 years ago

You are mostly arguing that 1 head to head matchup right now matters more than the 19 they already played this season, and if the goal is to have the better team get the higher seed, aren’t we pretty sure who that is if one of them went 12-7 against the other?

I disagree. They are not saying one h2h matchup matters more than the 19. They are saying 20 h2h matchups are better at determining the better team than 19. Or, alternately, that 163 games are better at determining the better team than 162.

The Dodgers 12-7 record against the Rox suggests the Dodgers are a better team. But the Rox’s better record against rest-of-league suggests the Rox are better. Taken together, you’re at 50-50 one way or the other. So, you add an extra data point just to increase your confidence.

OddBall Herrera
7 years ago
Reply to  Bip

“They are saying 20 h2h matchups are better at determining the better team than 19”

This would only make sense if you played the tiebreaker and THEN took the season series winner

Doug LampertMember since 2016
7 years ago

Once you play game 163 they are no longer tied and you no longer need a tiebreaker. Convenient that.

TheGarrettCooperFanClub
7 years ago

a nice little sampler of the total hell that will happen in the wild card games. i wouldnt have minded a nice little break for one day before the postseason starts but this is more fun. im excited. not feeling these 1:00 and 4:00 EST start times though.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
7 years ago

Yeah, the start times stink. Some of us have to “work”.

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago

Folks that complain about this though give MLB plenty of fodder for not having daytime playoff games.

I’m thinking seriously though, MLB has to do this so that they can logistically get folks set up for tomorrow. Especially with a team coming from LA.

TheGarrettCooperFanClub
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Yeah I know why they’re doing it but it’s not optimal for their audiences. But it’s whatever. You live with it. If it was an actual wild card game at these start times I would be pissed

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago

1 thing that’ll be interesting with both games today. Say you go down 4-0 or 5-0 pretty early. How do you manage the rest of the game? Do you fight tooth and nail? Is there a certain point where you concede in essence, and prepare for tomorrow which is do or die?

HappyFunBallMember since 2019
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

I think it’s not a big problem actually. If it’s true disaster you pull your starter early, put in a different starter (not tomorrow’s) and hope you can claw your way back into it. If it’s a slow developing wipeout you can still do almost anything you want with the bullpen. All of the involved teams won big yesterday, and should have well rested bullpens this afternoon. So with the possible exception of a couple of CHC arms, every manager shouldn’t worry too much about the threat of using someone today and then needing them again tomorrow.

stever20Member since 2017
7 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

Problem with that is that with 5 starters, there isn’t really a normally rested starter that would fit that qualification.

Dave TMember since 2025
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Setting aside an extra rested starter, teams have the full 40-man expanded September roster available for the games today.

With that large of a roster, they have some surplus pitchers who can soak up innings but won’t be realistically considered for pitching in the Wild Card game tomorrow absent an extremely long extra innings game. The question just comes down to the runs down / inning combination before a team decides to go to those low leverage arms who would be something like the 10th option out of the bullpen.

Jaydog
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Great point. I have to think there is definitely a point. Nobody would argue with say, 30-0. Where is it though? 4 to 5 runs seems about right to me for saying “it is improbable enough that it is no longer worth doing anything that might compromise my chances tomorrow”.

BipMember since 2016
7 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Compare that situation to that of going down 5-0 in an LCS game 1. If you lose game 1 of a best-of-7, it doesn’t cut your WS odds in half. If you lose this play-in game, it does cut your odds approximately in half, for having to play an extra round. So you are more incentivized to go all-out to win this play-in game than any given early LCS or WS game, given that in both cases, you will have to be concerned about burning up your roster for future games.