MLB Realignment?

[w84it]

assuming the fish left and they kept divisions, I wonder who would join the NL East/AL West?

Pirates switching from the NL Central to the NL East makes the most sense.

The AL becomes a trickier picture - you'd likely have the Blue Jays sliding over into the AL Central from the AL East and then you're left with either the Royals or the Twins making the leap to the AL West, neither of which are particularly appealing.

 

[Wake Forest]

You can't have a truly balanced schedule whether you've got 12, 13 or 14 teams in a division unless you change the total number of games, I don't think. Also, if you're a Mariners fan, do you really want a balanced schedule where you have to play the Yankees and Red Sox more and the A's less?

If you want to get rid of divisions, stay with an unbalanced schedule but do it similar to the NFL, where your schedule is in part determined by last year's standings. Gives the worse teams from the previous year a chance to get some more wins the next season.

Keep the leagues the way they are. Going 13/13 and having to have two teams playing interleague at all times is silly.

I hate the idea of expanding the playoffs further. Four teams per league works great and makes the regular season actually mean something, unlike the NBA or NHL.

I like interleague play - it's not that many games and gives fans a chance to see teams they may not normally get a chance to see.

 

[w84it]

I'd actually rather see the MLB re-align back to the system that they had from 1969-1993 with two leagues with two divisions. You could still have your rivalries and all of the fun stuff that comes with divisions without having to shift everyone all over the place. Also, it wouldn't require as much tinkering with the playoffs - you'd have each division winner make the playoffs and then the two teams with the next two best records making it as Wild Cards without expanding the playoffs (I'd also have the best record playing the worst record, regardless of this "same division" crap they have now).

Switching to two leagues with 15 teams each is just overkill and creates too many problems.

 

[GreenDeac]

or give the #1 seed a bye.

i've aways been against teams having byes when it comes down to playoff time. as far as i'm concerned, your performance throughout the year should take you as far as seeding and home field but no one should have to play more games or series to win the final title than anyone else. if you're the best team, you'd prevail without having vacations.

i mean sometimes it's necessary (see ACCT) but other times it's not (see Big East Tourney). i'd keep it at 4 teams (preferably) or expand it to 8 like the NHL.

Am I being an idiot and doing the math wrong or would that leave you with 3 teams after the first round. You'd have the winners of the first two playoff series plus the team with a bye... doesn't work.

 

[w84it]

Am I being an idiot and doing the math wrong or would that leave you with 3 teams after the first round. You'd have the winners of the first two playoff series plus the team with a bye... doesn't work.

He was responding to the idea of expanding the playoffs to 5 teams per league, so in that case there would be a bye - either the last two in play and the top three teams get a bye or the best record gets a bye. Personally I'm not in favor of either.

 

[GreenDeac]

He was responding to the idea of expanding the playoffs to 5 teams per league, so in that case there would be a bye - either the last two in play and the top three teams get a bye or the best record gets a bye. Personally I'm not in favor of either.

Right, I got that. I can see how a play in system with the bottom two teams playing each other and the other three teams getting "byes" would work. I don't see how a playoff system would work if only the top record got a bye.

So in the first round team record #1 plays no one

Team 2 plays 5

Team 3 plays 4

If the better teams win you have teams 1,2,3, still left. Its a Monday so maybe my brain isn't working the right way.

 

[w84it]

Right, I got that. I can see how a play in system with the bottom two teams playing each other and the other three teams getting "byes" would work. I don't see how a playoff system would work if only the top record got a bye.

So in the first round team record #1 plays no one

Team 2 plays 5

Team 3 plays 4

If the better teams win you have teams 1,2,3, still left. Its a Monday so maybe my brain isn't working the right way.

Now that I look at it written out I can see that you're right. I guess my brain was the one that wasn't working.

 

[ZDeac]

Yea, a play-in is the only way to do it. 3 game series between the 4 and 5 seed, I would think (wouldn't want to make everyone else wait too long with a 5 game series).

If the Marlins move to the AL you're more likely to see them get rid of division altogether, I would think. Not necessarily a bad idea.

People always talk about how only having 4 teams (or in the past, 2) in the playoffs means the regular season means something. Problem is, it means a large chunk of the regular season means nothing to a bunch of teams because they have no chance to make the playoffs. It cuts both ways.

 

[GoDeacs07GM]

How would you work the 3-game series? You'd have to go 1-1-1 alternating home and away. You then need to pretty much make days off in between for travel. That becomes a week-plus off for the better teams. In baseball, where timing is everything, I think that's just too much.

Just my opinion, though.

 

[TheReff]

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=6651634

Move one team from the NL to the AL to even up the leagues at 15 teams each instead of the current 16/14. Houston or Florida are rumored to switch leagues.

The reason I have read they have 16/14 now is because the schedule can't be done at 15/15 that will work.

But maybe go back to 154 games and 15/15 is a good possibility. The players need a day off per week and 154 could fit that

 

[ZDeac]

Yea I agree it'd be tough. you could do a 1-2 series, if you wanted.

I guess having 5 teams make the "playoffs" for one of them to only play 1 game doesn't really make sense to me.

 

[deacphan]

4 teams is fine

 

[ipitytheblue]

Right, I got that. I can see how a play in system with the bottom two teams playing each other and the other three teams getting "byes" would work. I don't see how a playoff system would work if only the top record got a bye.

So in the first round team record #1 plays no one

Team 2 plays 5

Team 3 plays 4

If the better teams win you have teams 1,2,3, still left. Its a Monday so maybe my brain isn't working the right way.

Now that I look at it written out I can see that you're right. I guess my brain was the one that wasn't working.

y'all are right. i've got the mondays. :thumbsup:

 

[w84it]

Saw this article linked from Buster Onley's column today and thought that it did pose at least one interesting bit of thought:

Such a move could have a significant impact on small media-market/medium-revenue teams such as the Reds. Under a no-divisions plan, competition for the five postseason spots in each league could wind up stacked in favor of the teams with the largest payrolls.
...
The other reason the players' union is said to favor realignment is the present revenue-sharing pipeline that runs from the deep-pocket "have" teams to the small-budget "have-nots" has not commensurately increased payroll spending by the smaller-revenue clubs.

 

[PhilliesDeacs]

Put the Phillies, Red Sox, Yankees, Rays, Cardinals, Braves, and Giants, and team X all in one division and let them play for the World Series.

All the other teams can play in a separate league for the right to be team X the following season. It works for soccer, why not baseball?

 

[deacphan]

Put the Phillies, Red Sox, Yankees, Rays, Cardinals, Braves, and Giants, and team X all in one division and let them play for the World Series.

All the other teams can play in a separate league for the right to be team X the following season. It works for soccer, why not baseball?

My fave aspect about soccer. I wish the MiLB teams were indy and were run this way.

 

[TheReff]

one division

If they did one division with 15 teams, that would help with the scheduling tremendously. You could have each team play the others 10 times and have 140 games right there. That would leave 22 games for the intra-league play.

If they just did it with no intra-league play, they could do 11 games against everybody and go back to 154 games total.

154 games would drive baseball people crazy because of all the statistics they like, but it never mattered to the NFL when they went from 14 to 16 games in the regular season. Hopefully they won't make it an 18 game regular season, but that is a whole other story.

MLB, do 10 games against each team so some wouldn't have to whine about playing an extra away game at a division leader whileone in the playoff run gets to go a nextra time to Pittsburgh or wherever. And play 22 intra-league games.

Top 3 get byes & #4 & # 5 play a 3 game play-in series to get to play #1 seed.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

HTTD and I were talking about this a month ago and we came to the interleague series a week idea but had the Brewers going to the AL West

 

[Wakeforest22890]

If they just did it with no intra-league play, they could do 11 games against everybody and go back to 154 games total.

You would have to have a team with a bye every weekend if there were odd numbers in a league with no interleague play, which is why it's 16 and 14 currently.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

Everything I've read with the 5 team playoffs is that the 4 and 5 would have a one game or a three game series to "play in" and then there would be the current format after that.