Jump to content
eddie83

Expansion/Realignment

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, mdbdotcom said:

That's an interesting idea. Made me think of this ...

Eliminate the DH and add a 26th roster spot to each team, but with a catch. Before each game, a manager would have to designate one player who could only hit; could not play the field under any circumstances. So, the team's "Designated Hitter" could only be used as a pinch-hitter, but given the way bullpens are being used, having an extra bat could make the game more interesting.

Ive been long in favor of expanding the rosters by 1.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see this happening.  This proposal essentially does away with the AL and NL, at least in terms of traditional franchises in each league.  I just don't see any possibility of the Yankees and Mets, Cubs and White Sox, A's and Giants, or Dodgers and Angels ever being in the same division.  I also don't see expansion happening anytime soon, the league is watered down as it is and good pitching is scarce.  This would mean even more bad pitchers.  More likely, I could see TB relocating to Montreal, or at least using them as leverage to get a deal done to stay in TB.  Other teams that also have bad stadium deals like Oakland could also use Portland as leverage.

Sorry, but that proposal is pie in the sky, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

I can't see that happening. I hope they go to all DH but if not, I'd like to see the rule modified to this. "DH for the first 6 innings and then the DH is removed and pitchers would then be placed into the DH spot in the lineup from the 7th inning on." This way the NL fans still get their late inning BP management strategy while we AL fans don;t have to watch the 8th batter pitched around with two out and less than the bases loaded so they can pitch to an automatic out next.

You could also modify this slightly.  You can DH for your starting pitcher.  BUT, once your starter is removed, DH is removed as well and and relief pitchers bat in the DH's spot.  that would get fun.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2017 at 4:48 PM, esmd said:

You could also modify this slightly.  You can DH for your starting pitcher.  BUT, once your starter is removed, DH is removed as well and and relief pitchers bat in the DH's spot.  that would get fun.

Not a bad idea either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be difficult, if not impossible, to get the players union to agree to the elimination of the DH rule.  Perhaps, as a compromise, they could go with an EH (extra hitter) option.  Pitchers would have to be in the batting lineup, but teams could bat either 9 or 10, with the 10th player an EH.  This would allow current AL teams that have contracts with players they primarily use at DH that are good as a hitter, but not as a position player, to use those players.  It would also satisfy the union's concern about having jobs available for these types of players going forward.  Some rec leagues, travel leagues, and tournaments play with such a rule.  Just a thought.  I'm not sure how a realignment that involves combining the two leagues would work if the teams in the two leagues and the players union can't agree on what to do about the DH rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2017 at 6:07 PM, eddie83 said:

Well what does everyone think about this? Some fairly drastic changes. I can't see MLB doing anything until the Oakland and Tampa stadium situations are taken care of. 

156 games 

12 playoff teams 

4 -8 team divisions 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/columnists/expansion-trigger-realignment-longer-postseason/?amphtml=1

This should generate some good off season - for the Orioles anyway- discussion. 

156 games - the season's been 154 games before for a long time so no issue here

12 playoff teams - with 32 teams that's ok, that's the NFL model.

Four 8-team divisions - I'm fine with this too.  The AL/NL thing is outdated.

Our division:

  • Atlanta
  • Baltimore
  • Cincinnati
  • Miami
  • Philadelphia
  • Pittsburgh
  • Tampa Bay
  • Washington

Man that looks so much nicer for us than the current situation.  It frankly sucks being stuck in a 5-team division with the Yanks and Sawx.  Even an 8-team division with the Yanks and Sawx is an improvement... but this has plenty of opportunity with rivalries against former World Series antagonists Philly and Pittsburgh, not to mention the obvious Baltimore-Washington rivalry.

We still have an unbalanced schedule, which is fine.... 12 games per in-division opponent and 3 games per out-of-division opponent.  This will hurt some with fewer Yankee and Red Sock fans swarming Camden Yards.  But that can seriously be made up with Nats and Phillies fans, who are geographically closer.

In general, I'm for it.  It could be tweaked to be better - I'd have to think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Greg Pappas said:

My stab at expansion and realignment... I've moved the divisions around a bit, but keep coming back to this one:
 

 

Right, and if it's four divisions of eight:

  1. West Coast (Seattle, Portland, Oakland, San Francisco) + Southwest (LA, Anaheim, San Diego, Arizona)
  2. Midwest (Colorado, Texas, Houston, Kansas City) + Southeast (Cincinnati, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Miami)
  3. Great Lakes (Saint Louis, Minnesota, Milwaukee, Chicago) + Rust Belt (Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh)
  4. Mid Atlantic (Washington, Baltimore, Philly, NY Mets) + Northeast (NY Yankees, Boston, Toronto, Montreal)

The only geographic issues I see is are separation of KC and Saint Louis, and the increased travel time for division 2.  I think Colorado to Miami would be the longest in-division flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 25 Nuggets said:

Right, and if it's four divisions of eight:

  1. West Coast (Seattle, Portland, Oakland, San Francisco) + Southwest (LA, Anaheim, San Diego, Arizona)
  2. Midwest (Colorado, Texas, Houston, Kansas City) + Southeast (Cincinnati, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Miami)
  3. Great Lakes (Saint Louis, Minnesota, Milwaukee, Chicago) + Rust Belt (Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh)
  4. Mid Atlantic (Washington, Baltimore, Philly, NY Mets) + Northeast (NY Yankees, Boston, Toronto, Montreal)

The only geographic issues I see is are separation of KC and Saint Louis, and the increased travel time for division 2.  I think Colorado to Miami would be the longest in-division flight.

I think you meant Cincinnati, but yeah, if they go to 8 divisions, this is one setup that works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting. BTW, there are two virtually identical threads about this topic. Here's the other> 

 

Quote

As noted, baseball has some tidying up to do. For going on two decades, MLB has wanted the Oakland Athletics and Tampa Bay Rays to wrap up new ballparks, where the expectation is attendance and revenues would increase. And while the specter of relocation is always hanging over the two franchises, Manfred has made it clear to me and others that the focus is on keeping the A’s and Rays in their markets. Until then, expansion is on the league’s mind, but not at the forefront. “While we encourage markets to look into positioning themselves for the possible opportunity to host an MLB club, we aren’t discussing expansion at this time,” Manfred said.

Still, the conversation continues to percolate. In July 2018, Manfred said on FS1’s First Things First, “Portland, Las Vegas, Charlotte, Nashville in the United States, certainly Montreal, maybe Vancouver, in Canada” could be potential expansion markets. “We think there’s places in Mexico we could go over the long haul.”

Here are the six teams that Manfred mentioned, and BaseballAmerica's breakdown of each city's draw:

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want one of the following realignment schemes:

1) Regional.  Take Greg's western-most 16 teams and that's a league. Take the eastern-most 16, that's a league.  They don't play each other except in the playoffs and All Star game.  You never have a regular season game more than two time zones away, and the eastern league never has a game more than one time zone away.  Nobody ever has a regular weekday game that starts at 10:00pm or 4:00pm back home.

2) By quality.  The top 16 teams by this year's record go into the A League.  The bottom 16 go into the B league.  Eight teams make the playoffs, six from the A league, two from the B league. The B league playoff teams get promoted to the A league next year.  The last two teams in the A league get relegated.  The A and B leagues do not play each other in the regular season.  The A league gets 25% more revenues from shared sources than the B league.  If you want to get really crazy: if you finish in the bottom 2 of the B league for three straight years you get contracted and replaced by an expansion team.

Maybe you can do both, with an 8-team A and B league in each geographic area.  The majors did just fine for 60 years with 8-team leagues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I want one of the following realignment schemes:

1) Regional.  Take Greg's western-most 16 teams and that's a league. Take the eastern-most 16, that's a league.  They don't play each other except in the playoffs and All Star game.  You never have a regular season game more than two time zones away, and the eastern league never has a game more than one time zone away.  Nobody ever has a regular weekday game that starts at 10:00pm or 4:00pm back home.

2) By quality.  The top 16 teams by this year's record go into the A League.  The bottom 16 go into the B league.  Eight teams make the playoffs, six from the A league, two from the B league. The B league playoff teams get promoted to the A league next year.  The last two teams in the A league get relegated.  The A and B leagues do not play each other in the regular season.  The A league gets 25% more revenues from shared sources than the B league.  If you want to get really crazy: if you finish in the bottom 2 of the B league for three straight years you get contracted and replaced by an expansion team.

Maybe you can do both, with an 8-team A and B league in each geographic area.  The majors did just fine for 60 years with 8-team leagues.

I like your first one. Simple, easy and balance playing schedule. Seeding for playoffs is 1-4 or 1-6. Division winners and wildcards are out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A regional alignment with NYY, RS, BJ's and "Montreal" would have less than a zero % chance of ever happening. It would almost guarantee the failure of Montreal and the eventual demise of the Jays. Put the Jays and Montreal in a Great Lakes Division Cleveland and Detroit. I think the Sox, Yanks, Mets and Phillies could go together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







×
×
  • Create New...