Jump to content

Since MLB won't do it, I will


osfan83

Recommended Posts

put teams in divisons based on payroll. Here are the current standings:

Obscene Spenders Division

Red Sox 25-16

Yankees 24-17

Tigers 23-16

Cubs 21-18

Mets 21-19

Big Spenders division

Dodgers 29-13

Phillies 22-17

Angeles 21-19

Mariners 19-23

Astros 18-21

Above Average division

Blue Jays 27-17

Braves 20-20

Giants 19-21

White Sox 17-23

Indians 16-26

Below Average division

Brewers 26-15

Cards 24-17

Reds 21-19

D-Backs 17-24

Rockies 16-24

Tight Wad division

Rangers 23-17

Royals 21-20

Rays 21-22

Twins 19-23

O's 16-25

Skin Flint Division

Pirates 19-22

Padres 19-22

Marlins 19-23

A's 15-23

Nationals 12-28

The O's are currently 10-9 within their division.

Notice Obscene Spenders division all teams above .500. Skin Flint division, all teams below .500!

I think this is the way I'm following the O's the rest of this year. I'ts more fair, and has to be more exciting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it be interesting if MLB aligned divisions by spending but had it variable based on the spending per year? That is, every year the divisions could change based on a particular teams offseason spending.

So if the Dodgers were in the big spenders division in 2009 and they bought 3 high-priced FAs, they would get bumped to the obscene division for 2010 while the Mets, for example, would get bumped down.

It would never happen and would create chaos for scheduling, but it sure would be interesting as GMs in the offseason would try to jockey to get into lower divisions while improving their club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it be interesting if MLB aligned divisions by spending but had it variable based on the spending per year? That is, every year the divisions could change based on a particular teams offseason spending.

So if the Dodgers were in the big spenders division in 2009 and they bought 3 high-priced FAs, they would get bumped to the obscene division for 2010 while the Mets, for example, would get bumped down.

It would never happen and would create chaos for scheduling, but it sure would be interesting as GMs in the offseason would try to jockey to get into lower divisions while improving their club.

Agreed! I think it would make following the league much more fun. But since NY, Bos and LA are happy, MLB is happy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying hard to detect sarcasm because I can't find the place to start tearing this apart.

Instead, I'll run with a different realignment suggestion based on market size, versus something as mercurial as spending.

You could divvy up the teams my market size based on mass media market ratings. But this would inexorably lead to an Premier league, 1st division, 2nd, 3rd and so forth. Like European soccer leagues are structured. Except demotion and promotion would be based on market fluctuations as opposed to performance. Still a bad idea.

If a wild restructuring takes place, it would be to move to the European soccer structure. Have 3 or 4 divisions and let 2 teams move and up and down per division based on standings. Thus, altering the entire way MLB works including Minor League Baseball, which would become the 4th and 5th divisions.

The effects of any such changes would be sweeping. The long term implications unpredictable.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what do you do, reshuffle them every season? Every five? When do you do the shuffling? The O's spent $93M in 2007 and they still sucked. This would just lead to teams manipulating the player salaries to get into the lower spending brackets, and then spending money after they're set. Teams not doing well during the season would be giving up their big-salary players to the big spenders so that thei year-end totals weren't as high.

If you don't reshuffle them, then you end up in the situation we're in now. The O's have shown that they're willing to spend the money, so once they're in the penny pincher division, they can start spending again and dominate the division. How is that any better than the situation now? Just because they're your favorite team doesn't make it right or fix the problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you aren't going to divide by geography or traditional-league structure anymore, you have to do it by performance. There is no other way worth discussing, and all this really shows is an attempt at a commentary on baseball economics which everyone knows already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Posts

    • I have no problem with the Tigers saying they want the moon and the stars.  Its a negotiating position.  The  Tigers GM and Ownership have to know that no trade has ever happen for a pitcher that is as aggressive that they are asking for.  They don't have to trade Skubal so the O's have to motive the Tigers with what that offer could be. The O's offense is #1 in baseball in Homers, Slugging and Runs per game.    They are first in the AL in OPS.  The O's don't what to damage that.  They are 11th in Average and 15th OBP.  They want to improve that. The need to keep: 1) Holliday because he will bring the high average and OBP the O's need In the future. 2) Basallo.  It's hard to find catchers that can hit and control the running game.  Him first teaming with Adley and a some point replacing Adley is a game changer. 3) Kjerstad is needed to replace Santander unless, unless, unless the O's are willing to extend him for 4/68m.   Which way will Elias and Rubinstein go with that? ------ Mayo with his incredible talent is someone that can head up a package.   Mayo is BA #25 prospect in 2024.  O's #3 prospect. (O's prospect by MLB.com) Bradfield BA #82 prospect in 2024; #4 O's prospect  and Norby BA #93 prospect,  #5 Os prospect with a 911 OPS at AAA  currently are two players the Tigers could pick between. McDermott #7 O's prospect; Povich O's #8 prospect:  and Johnson O's #9 prospect are three future starter that  Tigers could pick between. Elias could add one or two more prospects to this list.    
    • Dodgers and O's have discussed trade talks for Skubal per MLBTR. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2024/07/orioles-dodgers-have-discussed-tarik-skubal-with-tigers.html
    • Are we playing the Blue Jays soon
    • He was scratched due to neck problems 
    • I am guessing Urias could have come in and played, which means he is still on the team.  If not you would have to do Rutchman C (Mullins out of the game, pitcher at DH)... Then who knows, maybe Santander at 2B? Or put Cionel Perez there (he seems like an athletic guy)?  I have to think Urias was available in a pinch. 
    • Huh??? We didn’t sign Corbin Burnes in the offseason. We traded Joey Ortiz, DL Hall and a draft pick for him. Tyler Wells is out until late next year after having Tommy John surgery. For the next 15 years??? Huh? You get 6 full years of team control with any player. My
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...