Spring Has Sprung 2010

[Armchair_QB]

"Cubs manager Lou Piniella said Wednesday that Xavier Nady (elbow) won't be ready for regular outfield duty until June.

Nady is slowly forging his way back from Tommy John surgery. He made his spring debut on Wednesday afternoon, but was limited to DH duties and is likely to stick to the limited role for the next few weeks. He will be used primarily as a pinch-hitter over the regular season's first few months."

Via Rotoworld.

I haven't been on the up an up on the Cubs much this Spring, so it's news to me that Nady won't be ready for "regular duty" until June.

Sounds like he's going to be really useful taking up a roster spot.

Somebody's gotta be this season's David Patton or Joey Gathwright.

Except that I would argue that Xavier Nady is actually way better at baseball than those two.  Does this mean they'll keep him on the 25-man roster and use him sparingly?  Why not let him be 50% in Iowa or something?

Nady is terrible.  The fact that he can't throw the ball in from the outfield makes him worse than terrible.  He's the Yeti of the Cubs.

He's still got a better arm than Juan Pierre.

[Powdered Toast Man]

Very interesting idea. I like it. What say YOU, Desipiots?

One example of floating realignment, according to one insider, would work this way: Cleveland, which is rebuilding with a reduced payroll, could opt to leave the AL Central to play in the AL East. The Indians would benefit from an unbalanced schedule that would give them a total of 18 lucrative home dates against the Yankees and Red Sox instead of their current eight. A small or mid-market contender, such as Tampa Bay or Baltimore, could move to the AL Central to get a better crack at postseason play instead of continually fighting against the mega-payrolls of New York and Boston.

Divisions still would loosely follow geographic lines; no team would join a division more than two time zones outside its own, largely to protect local television rights (i.e., start times of games) and travel costs.

Floating realignment also could mean changing the number of teams in a division, teams changing leagues and interleague games throughout the season, according to several sources familiar with the committee's discussions. It is important to remember that the committee's talks are very preliminary and non-binding.

Why is this necessary?  Didn't Tampa Bay make the World Series two years ago, when they were in the same division as Boston and New York?  This is just stupid.

[R-V]

Very interesting idea. I like it. What say YOU, Desipiots?

One example of floating realignment, according to one insider, would work this way: Cleveland, which is rebuilding with a reduced payroll, could opt to leave the AL Central to play in the AL East. The Indians would benefit from an unbalanced schedule that would give them a total of 18 lucrative home dates against the Yankees and Red Sox instead of their current eight. A small or mid-market contender, such as Tampa Bay or Baltimore, could move to the AL Central to get a better crack at postseason play instead of continually fighting against the mega-payrolls of New York and Boston.

Divisions still would loosely follow geographic lines; no team would join a division more than two time zones outside its own, largely to protect local television rights (i.e., start times of games) and travel costs.

Floating realignment also could mean changing the number of teams in a division, teams changing leagues and interleague games throughout the season, according to several sources familiar with the committee's discussions. It is important to remember that the committee's talks are very preliminary and non-binding.

It's stupid.  Want to realign?

15 teams per league with 3 divisions per league consisting of five teams each.  Schedule as follows:
18 games vs. each divisional opponent, 9 home and 9 away (72 games)
6 games vs. each non-divisional opponent, 3 home and 3 away (60 games)
6 games vs. each team in a single intraleague division, 3 home and 3 away (30 games).  Division played to rotate on a 3 year schedule (similar to the NFL schedule)

Total games played: 162

Just need to get an NL team back into the AL.  Milwaukee, I'm looking at you.

Is this really that different from the current schedule?

[R-V]

Very interesting idea. I like it. What say YOU, Desipiots?

One example of floating realignment, according to one insider, would work this way: Cleveland, which is rebuilding with a reduced payroll, could opt to leave the AL Central to play in the AL East. The Indians would benefit from an unbalanced schedule that would give them a total of 18 lucrative home dates against the Yankees and Red Sox instead of their current eight. A small or mid-market contender, such as Tampa Bay or Baltimore, could move to the AL Central to get a better crack at postseason play instead of continually fighting against the mega-payrolls of New York and Boston.

Divisions still would loosely follow geographic lines; no team would join a division more than two time zones outside its own, largely to protect local television rights (i.e., start times of games) and travel costs.

Floating realignment also could mean changing the number of teams in a division, teams changing leagues and interleague games throughout the season, according to several sources familiar with the committee's discussions. It is important to remember that the committee's talks are very preliminary and non-binding.

Why is this necessary?  Didn't Tampa Bay make the World Series two years ago, when they were in the same division as Boston and New York?  This is just stupid.

Tampa Bay made the World Series once, therefore the system is fine?

The real issue is fairness. Ever since the beginning of divisional play in 1969, postseason play has not necessarily been awarded to teams with the best postseason records, but rather to the teams that ended the year at the top of their division. Famously, the 103-win 1993 Giants tied the NL West, lost a one-game playoff to the Atlanta Braves, and watched the rest of the postseason from home, while the 97-win Philadelphia Phillies won the NL East and went on to win the World Series. The Wild Card was meant to allow a good team in a strong division to make it into the playoffs, but even the Wild Card can't change the fact that the Baltimore Orioles and Toronto Blue Jays are stuck in an essentially unwinnable division, with three strong teams, two of which are the richest teams in the game.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/realignment-shmealignment/

[BH]

Very interesting idea. I like it. What say YOU, Desipiots?

One example of floating realignment, according to one insider, would work this way: Cleveland, which is rebuilding with a reduced payroll, could opt to leave the AL Central to play in the AL East. The Indians would benefit from an unbalanced schedule that would give them a total of 18 lucrative home dates against the Yankees and Red Sox instead of their current eight. A small or mid-market contender, such as Tampa Bay or Baltimore, could move to the AL Central to get a better crack at postseason play instead of continually fighting against the mega-payrolls of New York and Boston.

Divisions still would loosely follow geographic lines; no team would join a division more than two time zones outside its own, largely to protect local television rights (i.e., start times of games) and travel costs.

Floating realignment also could mean changing the number of teams in a division, teams changing leagues and interleague games throughout the season, according to several sources familiar with the committee's discussions. It is important to remember that the committee's talks are very preliminary and non-binding.

Why is this necessary?  Didn't Tampa Bay make the World Series two years ago, when they were in the same division as Boston and New York?  This is just stupid.

Tampa Bay made the World Series once, therefore the system is fine?

The real issue is fairness. Ever since the beginning of divisional play in 1969, postseason play has not necessarily been awarded to teams with the best postseason records, but rather to the teams that ended the year at the top of their division. Famously, the 103-win 1993 Giants tied the NL West, lost a one-game playoff to the Atlanta Braves, and watched the rest of the postseason from home, while the 97-win Philadelphia Phillies won the NL East and went on to win the World Series. The Wild Card was meant to allow a good team in a strong division to make it into the playoffs, but even the Wild Card can't change the fact that the Baltimore Orioles and Toronto Blue Jays are stuck in an essentially unwinnable division, with three strong teams, two of which are the richest teams in the game.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/realignment-shmealignment/

It's still a stupid idea. Give it a rest.

[Powdered Toast Man]

Very interesting idea. I like it. What say YOU, Desipiots?

One example of floating realignment, according to one insider, would work this way: Cleveland, which is rebuilding with a reduced payroll, could opt to leave the AL Central to play in the AL East. The Indians would benefit from an unbalanced schedule that would give them a total of 18 lucrative home dates against the Yankees and Red Sox instead of their current eight. A small or mid-market contender, such as Tampa Bay or Baltimore, could move to the AL Central to get a better crack at postseason play instead of continually fighting against the mega-payrolls of New York and Boston.

Divisions still would loosely follow geographic lines; no team would join a division more than two time zones outside its own, largely to protect local television rights (i.e., start times of games) and travel costs.

Floating realignment also could mean changing the number of teams in a division, teams changing leagues and interleague games throughout the season, according to several sources familiar with the committee's discussions. It is important to remember that the committee's talks are very preliminary and non-binding.

Why is this necessary?  Didn't Tampa Bay make the World Series two years ago, when they were in the same division as Boston and New York?  This is just stupid.

Tampa Bay made the World Series once, therefore the system is fine?

The real issue is fairness. Ever since the beginning of divisional play in 1969, postseason play has not necessarily been awarded to teams with the best postseason records, but rather to the teams that ended the year at the top of their division. Famously, the 103-win 1993 Giants tied the NL West, lost a one-game playoff to the Atlanta Braves, and watched the rest of the postseason from home, while the 97-win Philadelphia Phillies won the NL East and went on to win the World Series. The Wild Card was meant to allow a good team in a strong division to make it into the playoffs, but even the Wild Card can't change the fact that the Baltimore Orioles and Toronto Blue Jays are stuck in an essentially unwinnable division, with three strong teams, two of which are the richest teams in the game.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/realignment-shmealignment/

I don't see a problem with it as it stands.  Why in the hell do the Blue Jays suck?  Because they have been making pretty shitty decisions.  Why do the Pirates suck?  Because they don't pay their good players.  But, really...my main question is what is the necessity?

[Chuck to Chuck]

It's stupid.  Want to realign?

15 teams per league with 3 divisions per league consisting of five teams each.  Schedule as follows:
18 games vs. each divisional opponent, 9 home and 9 away (72 games)
6 games vs. each non-divisional opponent, 3 home and 3 away (60 games)
6 games vs. each team in a single intraleague division, 3 home and 3 away (30 games).  Division played to rotate on a 3 year schedule (similar to the NFL schedule)

Total games played: 162

Just need to get an NL team back into the AL.  Milwaukee, I'm looking at you.

Is this really that different from the current schedule?

Miles.  First, there are no more annual regional rivalries where the Cards get 6 games against KC while the Cubs get 6 vs. the White Sox (who, while shitty, aren't as shitty as KC).

Second, there are no divisions with 4 teams or 6 teams.

Third, everyone plays the same schedule.  No Cubs play 18 against Houston but only 16 against Pitt as has happened in previous years.

100% Fair and Balanced.

[R-V]

Very interesting idea. I like it. What say YOU, Desipiots?

One example of floating realignment, according to one insider, would work this way: Cleveland, which is rebuilding with a reduced payroll, could opt to leave the AL Central to play in the AL East. The Indians would benefit from an unbalanced schedule that would give them a total of 18 lucrative home dates against the Yankees and Red Sox instead of their current eight. A small or mid-market contender, such as Tampa Bay or Baltimore, could move to the AL Central to get a better crack at postseason play instead of continually fighting against the mega-payrolls of New York and Boston.

Divisions still would loosely follow geographic lines; no team would join a division more than two time zones outside its own, largely to protect local television rights (i.e., start times of games) and travel costs.

Floating realignment also could mean changing the number of teams in a division, teams changing leagues and interleague games throughout the season, according to several sources familiar with the committee's discussions. It is important to remember that the committee's talks are very preliminary and non-binding.

Why is this necessary?  Didn't Tampa Bay make the World Series two years ago, when they were in the same division as Boston and New York?  This is just stupid.

Tampa Bay made the World Series once, therefore the system is fine?

The real issue is fairness. Ever since the beginning of divisional play in 1969, postseason play has not necessarily been awarded to teams with the best postseason records, but rather to the teams that ended the year at the top of their division. Famously, the 103-win 1993 Giants tied the NL West, lost a one-game playoff to the Atlanta Braves, and watched the rest of the postseason from home, while the 97-win Philadelphia Phillies won the NL East and went on to win the World Series. The Wild Card was meant to allow a good team in a strong division to make it into the playoffs, but even the Wild Card can't change the fact that the Baltimore Orioles and Toronto Blue Jays are stuck in an essentially unwinnable division, with three strong teams, two of which are the richest teams in the game.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/realignment-shmealignment/

I don't see a problem with it as it stands.  Why in the hell do the Blue Jays suck?  Because they have been making pretty shitty decisions.  Why do the Pirates suck?  Because they don't pay their good players.  But, really...my main question is what is the necessity?

To get the best teams in the playoffs. Yes, the Pirates and Blue Jays have made shitty decisions. So has every other team. The Red Sox have a solid organization. But it helps that the Red Sox can pay $18 million to Mike Lowell and Julio Lugo to not play for them and still afford to sign good replacements.

[R-V]

It's stupid.  Want to realign?

15 teams per league with 3 divisions per league consisting of five teams each.  Schedule as follows:
18 games vs. each divisional opponent, 9 home and 9 away (72 games)
6 games vs. each non-divisional opponent, 3 home and 3 away (60 games)
6 games vs. each team in a single intraleague division, 3 home and 3 away (30 games).  Division played to rotate on a 3 year schedule (similar to the NFL schedule)

Total games played: 162

Just need to get an NL team back into the AL.  Milwaukee, I'm looking at you.

Is this really that different from the current schedule?

Miles.  First, there are no more annual regional rivalries where the Cards get 6 games against KC while the Cubs get 6 vs. the White Sox (who, while shitty, aren't as shitty as KC).

Second, there are no divisions with 4 teams or 6 teams.

Third, everyone plays the same schedule.  No Cubs play 18 against Houston but only 16 against Pitt as has happened in previous years.

100% Fair and Balanced.

Ah, I overlooked that like a simple IAN. That is a significant difference.

[Brownie]

Add two teams to the Majors, put one in the AL, move the Brewers to the AL per Chuck's advice, put one new team in the NL and here's the plan:

AL East:
Yanks
Bosox
Ryas
Orioles

AL North
Indians
Tigers
Sox
Jays

AL Central
Twins
Royals
Rangers
Brewers

AL West
Mariners
A's
Angels
Las Vegas Expansion Team

NL East
Mets
Phils
Montreal Expansion Team
Nationals

NL South
Marlins
Astros
Braves
Reds

NL North
Cubs
Cardinals
Pirates
Rockies

NL West
D-bags
Padres
Dodgers
Giants

Only first place teams advance. Everyone else goes home and plays golf.

Play 22 games (11 home, 11 away) against the 3 other teams in your division: 66 games
Play 12 games (6 home, 6 away) against the other 8 teams in your league: 96 games.

Leave the interleague matchups for spring training, the once-a-year exhibition games between Cubs and Sox, the All-Star Game and the World Series.

[Brownie]

Option 2: Put the top 6 teams in the NL in "Division A" and the top 5 teams in the AL in "Division A." The next group goes into Division B, and the group after that goes into Division C.

So, going into this year, here's how the divisions look:

AL "A"
Yanks
Bosox
Halos
Rangers
Twins

AL "B"
Tigers
Rays
M's
Sux
Tor/Oak (let there be a tiebreaker to decide who)

AL "C"
Tor/Oak
Cleveland
KC
O's

NL "A"
Dodgers
Phillies
Rockies
Cardinals
Giants
Marlins

NL "B"
Braves
Cubs
Milwaukee
Reds
Padres

NL "C"
Astros
Mets
D-bags
Pirates
Nats

Schedules look like they do now (except the interleague games obviously are more pot luck than anything else). Playoffs look like this:

Wild Card is always second place team in A.

Teams in A division always have home field over B and C teams.

Teams move up and down simply based on previous year.

[R-V]

How about getting rid of leagues and divisions entirely, playing a balanced schedule,and have the 8 teams with the best record make the playoffs?

(I have no idea how this would work scheduling-wise.)

[Chuck to Chuck]

How about getting rid of leagues and divisions entirely, playing a balanced schedule,and have the 8 teams with the best record make the playoffs?

(I have no idea how this would work scheduling-wise.)

Not bad in a vacuum.  But there is still a demand for regional rivalries.  18 games vs. St. Louis and Chicago is far better for baseball than 6 or 8.

Short of contraction (which I am all for), there doesn't seem to be a simple system outside of the one I outlined.  Mine is patterned after the most successful league, the NFL. If the Pats and Giants can play in Week 17 and 5 weeks later in the Superbowl, then interleague is good for MLB as well.

The NFL allows each team to face nearly every other team in the entire league every four years.  That's good for the fans.  It would be good for the MLB as well.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Just need to get an NL team back into the AL.  Milwaukee, I'm looking at you.

Regardless of the plan, I like that idea.

As much as I hate the Brewers, I vote to ditch the Astros instead. The Brewers don't belong in the West and, anyways, I think I still hate the Astros far more.

And, really, Houston's the geographic anomaly in the division. Plus, their bullshit ballpark would be a perfect match for that novelty sport they play in the AL.

Okay... But maybe MLB doesn't want two AL teams in Texas. In that case, send Houston to the NL West and switch the Padres to the AL.

Because, fuck those guys, too.

[Brownie]

How about getting rid of leagues and divisions entirely, playing a balanced schedule,and have the 8 teams with the best record make the playoffs?

(I have no idea how this would work scheduling-wise.)

If you were to have each team play each other 6 times, it would be a 174-game season. If they played each other 5 times, it would be 145 games.

In my opinion, the importance of divisions is that it provides for larger sample size against the teams competing against each other. Obviously, an unbalanced schedule is important. But there is value in it.

When there were 8 teams in each league, each team played each other 22 times.
When the leagues expanded to 10 teams, it changed to 18 times each. Still a good sample size.

When divisional play was introduced in 1969, teams played division rivals 18 times each and the teams in the other division 12 times each. Again, 18 games seems sufficient.

In 1977, the AL added Toronto and Seattle and went with an "almost" balanced schedule in which they'd play division rivals 13 times and teams from the other division 12 times. (They also tried to continue the tradition of only intradivsion games after Labor Day, with a team being designated as the "swing team" and spending September playing the other division).

This sucked.

It sucked when the NL went with a balanced schedule in 1993 with the addition of Florida and Colorado.

Now, with Interleague play, teams play wildly different schedules, are unable to develop any familiarity with any team outside their division anyway, yet have to rely on the results of an odd game against teams from the other league to decide their fate.