Baseball: Second guessing City Section seeding committee

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

There have been some nightmare experiences through the years involving City Section seeding committees, especially when coaches were involved.

Since going to a committee of noncoaches, the seedings have been mostly acceptable, but this latest seeding involving baseball raises questions.

San Fernando (29-3) was awarded the No. 1 seed over Reseda Cleveland (21-10) in the Division I playoffs, and it’s still not explainable.

These were the criteria supposedly used: league finish, a coach’s poll, the cumulative scores from a Ratings Percentage Index, head to head and common opponents. The RPI gives more weight to wins vs. City Section opponents.

Both finished first in their leagues. San Fernando had a higher RPI ranking _ .579 to .353 (geez, the weaker Valley Mission vs. the West Valley League). Cleveland was ranked higher in the coach’s poll. For common opponents, Cleveland defeated Narbonne, 7-1 and defeated Granada Hills, 5-4 and 3-1. San Fernando lost to Narbonne, 1-0, and defeated Granada Hills, 4-2.

My own judgment is that Cleveland had the better resume based on a tougher schedule and using the common opponent criteria.

Maybe this debate will be decided at Dodger Stadium on June 1, but San Fernando has a far less challenging road than Cleveland because of its No. 1 seeding, so there’s no guarantee it’s going to happen.

In conclusion, this was no lucky draw. A review of the process is needed to make sure everyone is clear how a No. 1 seed is determined.

-- Eric Sondheimer