Jump to content

Tom Davis idea for baseball schedules. Does it make sense?

Gurgi

By Gurgi
in MLB

Recommended Posts

Gurgi Hangout Grand Counsel

Gurgi

Posted
Posted

He wants to combine the American and National Leagues into a single league.

There would be five divisions and not six as there are at present.

The way he figures it would work is you play your five division opponents 18 times a piece.

For 90 games against your own division.

Then you play each of the other teams in the whole league three times a year. For 72 games a year.

90 games against your own division. 72 against the others.

Of the 24 other teams you would play 12 series at home and 12 series on the road. The next year you reverse the teams you played at home and away to allow each team to come to your park at least every other year.

I wonder how the divisions would look after this?

North East Division

Boston

NY Yankees

NY Mets

Philadelphia

Baltimore

Washington DC

Southern Division

Atlanta

Tampa Bay

Miami

Houston

Texas

Cincinati

California Division

San Fransico

Oakland

Los Angelos Dodgers

Los Angelos Angels

San Diego

Arizona

North West Division

Seattle

Denver

Minnesota

Kansas City

Saint Louis

Milwaukee

Central Division

Toronto

Cleveland

Chicago Cubs

Chicago WhiteSox

Detroit

Pittsburgh

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skanar Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

skanar

Posted
Posted
The teams divisions is my idea

Tom suggest Seattle be in a division with all the California teams.

I'd put Colorado in the southern division so Cincinnati can be with teams who are nearby. Maybe split up the Cubs and White Sox.

This feels like an expansionless, leagueless version of the regional realignment idea I proposed in the Two-New-Ideas thread. Sounds like an interesting plan to me. Though I do prefer my own, of course. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
orayole Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

orayole

Posted
Posted

Move Arizona to the South Division, Cincinnati to the "north west" and call it the central, Seattle to the California division and call it West, and call the "central" division the North and the North East would be called East. North, south, east, west and central.

I'd probably shuffle around a few other teams in the North and central.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
getfoul High-A

getfoul

Posted
Posted

I've thought of the same format, although I don't think you can separate the Cardinals from the Cubs, or not have the Brewers in the same division as the Chicago teams.

I'm really concerned as a White Sox fan that they'll eventually do something like this. It would absolutely be nauseating to play the Cubs 18 games every year. It's stale now. It would be worse then.

My idea:

Lose divisions--you don't need divisions when 5 of 15 make the postseason.

Move the Astros back to the NL, and move the Rockies or D-backs to the AL. Both leagues equal by time zone which plays into travel---7 east, 4 central, 4 pcf/mtn

Play your old division teams 11 games over 4 series

Play your other ten league teams 10 games over 3 series

Play 18 interleague games, including at least 2 of 3 road series in same time zone.

Top 3 in each league make the playoffs based on a close-to-balanced schedule.

4 and 5 seeds play each other 1-game to get in.

It's clean. It's fair. And it still maintains league identity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted

My first thought was "well, Tom Davis came up with it, so it's probably crazy." But it's no crazier than 1000 other realignment/scheduling ideas, and everyone has a few of those. If you throw out the prerequisite of keeping sacred 113 years of AL/NL tradition it opens up a lot of possiblities. But that seems somewhat unlikely, given baseball's and baseball fans' traditionalism.

Whenever you're discussing scheduling and realignment and playoffs and the like I think the key things to focus on are: a) A setup that maximizes the enjoyment of the most fans and teams, and b) Doesn't give ridiculous disadvantages or advantages based on happenstance from 50 or 100 or 150 years ago (i.e. New York gets 20M people giving all their disposable income to the franchise which gets to use 100% of it to better the organization, while Kansas City gets 115 wheat farmers to give them the equivalent of a 15-game plan.)

With that in mind, I'd come up with ways to have multiple tiers of championships and multiple paths to meaningful games. One of my favorites is regional leagues to minimize travel expenses, while giving some heft to winning one of ~4 League Championships, on the way to the World Series, and the International Cup. And I'd even figure ways to have Club Championships between the best teams in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Mexico, the US, Indy Leagues, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • EddeeEddee
      Trevor Rogers 2024

      By EddeeEddee · Posted

      One good Bud Norris year out of Rogers would be nice.  Two would be amazing.
    • Moose Milligan
      Gunnar Henderson 2024

      By Moose Milligan · Posted

      Except he really isn't hurting the team at SS.  Again, he's an 8+ WAR player this year.  I don't know why anyone would want to argue for moving him off a position where he's performing at an MVP level.  This season is already as valuable as Ripken's '83 MVP season and more valuable than any other season Ripken had except 1984 and his monster 1991 campaign. I saw Cal play at shortstop, too.  And I think when we all think of Cal at shortstop, we think of the refined version....the guy that made 3 errors in a season (and somehow lost the Gold Glove to Ozzie f'ing Guillen) and the guy that had a whole chapter dedicated to him in George Will's "Men at Work." You neglected to respond to the idea that Gunnar can get better at the position.  There's a lot to like with him defensively already, but he's not a fully finished product and I don't think anyone here is arguing that he is.  I suspect that if you took Cal in his second season and matched that up with Gunnar, you'd see some similarities.  I also suspect that Gunnar isn't the defender that he'll be in 5 or 6 years from now, just like Ripken wasn't the best defender at SS in his early seasons. Gunnar is a 5 tool player.  There's nothing that he can't do on a baseball field and I'm sure if you put him in a "traditional power position" like a corner outfield spot, he'd be just fine. But I find it funny that you want to be called old fashioned, yet here we are discussing Cal Ripken, the guy that broke the mold for what a shortstop can be and turned it into a power position.  Ripken was ultimate anti-traditionalist of the position and responsible for the slew of power hitting shortstops that came in after him.  And quite frankly, I don't know why we're talking about power when we're debating defense.
    • EddeeEddee
      An evening spent with Scott Boras

      By EddeeEddee · Posted

      Yeah, I agree something like this might happen some day, but only if the union comes around to believing MLB is on shaky financial footing -- if and when that ever happens. I don't like the idea of voiding a players' contract then and there, but perhaps performing below a certain level would trigger some contract years in the future to automatically become option years.  Something along those lines. It's hard to imagine deals like this today, except possibly here and there for players who are known to be very inconsistent.  As long as baseball is considered financially healthy I'm sure the union would push back strongly against deals like this, especially in large numbers.
    • Uli2001
      Gunnar Henderson 2024

      By Uli2001 · Posted

      Thank you. I knew there was something bogus about that post. I saw Cal play SS. And Gunnar is no Cal at SS. Not even close. And this is coming from a big fan of Gunnar. I would like to see him play a traditional power position. Call me old fashioned. He’s hurting the team at SS. 
    • EddeeEddee
      This is the kind of thing that drives me crazy

      By EddeeEddee · Posted

      Interesting.  We live in a data obsessed world now but it's not the answer to everything.  There should be a mix.  
    • HowAboutThat
      Tracking Ex Oriole Thread

      By HowAboutThat · Posted

      Tobias Myers for the brewers tonight: 6 innings 4H -1ER 1BB 11 Ks. not bad at all!
    • EddeeEddee
      This is the kind of thing that drives me crazy

      By EddeeEddee · Posted

      I doubt solid MLB pitchers can be acquired just by trading position players the vast majority of the time.  Look at how we acquired Bradish and Povich -- by trading solid (at the time anyway) MLB level pitchers.  In those trades we were on the other end, but we forced teams to trade good young pitchers for Bundy and Lopez respectively.  Now we did acquire McDermott and Seth Johnson by trading Trey Mancini.  So it does happen that pitching can sometimes be acquired trading only a position player, but Mancini had had a strong major league career to that point.  My point is I don't think you can expect to acquire pitching only by trading position players -- but if you can it may need to be a strong veteran that is not easy to part with. Perhaps we could acquire Tarik Skubal for just Jackson Holliday -- or Holliday plus one or two other strong position prospects.  But that would be a whole other level of a blockbuster trade. Also, I'm not sure how we can say the system is bereft of homegrown minor league pitching talent and then complain that we traded Baumeister and Chace -- two homegrown minor league pitchers that everyone here seems to agree are talented.  We can criticize the trade, but clearly there was and probably still are some desirable arms in the system that we'd rather not trade.  No, none of the ones Elias drafted have made it to the bigs yet, but maybe those two would have been among the first.    

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...