TSN: Major league baseball discussing division-less realignment option

[MattFancy]

Even if you weren't close, it would still suck. Oh great, I get to see the Red Sox come to town, oh, right David Ortiz won't be playing because his position doesn't exist here. Oh great, I get to see the Phillies come to town, oh, right I have to watch a utility infielder or a 4th outfielder try to DH because they have to add that position here. They play different games, the roster composition is different. It's stupid and it's always been stupid.

I see your point. I think the novelty of it has definitely worn off. Its nice for the matchups like O's/Nats, Yanks/Mets, Sox/Phillies, Cubs/White Sox, Giants/A's. But who really wants to see an interleague series between Toronto and Colorado?

[The Evil Genius]

Then why were there more hit batters in the NL in 2010, and 2009, and 2008, and 2007, and 2006, and 2005, and 2004..?.

You have to go back to 1993 to see more hit batters in a season for the AL.

I would hope so. There are 16 teams in the NL and only 14 in the AL.

Now, if there were more hit batters per game played, since the NL plays 324 more regular season games than the AL, that would be a different stat.

edit..on an average year (including interleague games).

NL total regular season games played - 2592

AL total regular season games played - 2268

Comparing the total number of any one league stat to the other is meaningless, unless it's done per games played.

[88Comrade2000]

Simple solution; demote the lesser teams of MLB to the minor leagues. That's what they are now anyway.

Just have a 16 or 20 max teams. The only interleague game should be regional rivals ie Yankees- Mets.

You would have an east and west division and the Top 4 teams - make playoffs in each league. 2 Division Winners and 2 wild cards.

Take the 10to 14 lesser teams like the Royals and put them in the minors or fold them.

[HEavyJumbo85]

I see your point. I think the novelty of it has definitely worn off. Its nice for the matchups like O's/Nats, Yanks/Mets, Sox/Phillies, Cubs/White Sox, Giants/A's. But who really wants to see an interleague series between Toronto and Colorado?

I'd be perfectly fine if they continued interleague play, conditional on the National League adding the DH. If they're building lineups the same and playing the same baseball, they can play each other all they want. People seem reluctant to let go of the peculiarity of the National League.

[ixcuincle]

Getting rid of interleague gets rid of the rivalries you cherish so much

Ridiculous idea

The novelty has hardly worn off and the rivalry games in cities are still interesting

I've always said the 2 best things Selig did were implement interleague and implement a wild card. The game is better off with these two things. The game needs no further improvement.

[The Evil Genius]

The only reason the DH has lasted as long as it has is because of the Players Association.

[No_Pressure]

I'd like to keep divisions and add a salary cap. The only thing ruining baseball is a lack of change. Certain teams are constantly on top because they have the money to be, then every once in a while another team gets stacked with amazing young talent, disrupt the normal standings for a year or two, win a world series, and then all the players refuse to re-sign and go sign with one of the top teams, usually the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, etc.

Now of course there is a lot to be said about managing a team properly and being a good judge of talent. I'm quite sure Peter Angelos is actually somehow trying to make the Orioles suck at this point but regardless, I believe that one of the reasons the NFL has become so much more popular while MLB has steadily declined in popularity is because of the fairness you have in the NFL. If your team sucks, guess what? It might be a little unlucky, but chances are your team's leadership made it suck. The Lions can't blame playing in a tough division for being terrible, they can blame Matt Millen for drafting 3 WR's in the 1st round and being all around terrible at everything. They're finally drafting well, building a formidable defensive line, and putting together a decent offense to the point where I'd say the Lions have a legit shot at overtaking the Bears as #2 in the North. The Redskins have been bad for years, it was all our own mistakes which put us there.

I just hate the idea that a team is only beating you because they shelled out the big bucks for the future hall of famers. I would also hate the feeling that the Redskins only won the superbowl because they went out and bought all the good players in the league. I want a team to win because they drafted well, signed the right people for the right price, hired the right coaches, worked hard enough, not because they were able to spend the most money.

[thebluefood]

I'd be fine with this if they stopped playing each other in the regular season...interleague play is just awful.

Agreed. I never was much for interaleague play. I think we ought to do away with it. The best intraleague series of the year comes at the end of the season and it's called the World Series.

I think we forget that the American League and the National League are separate leagues, not conferences. They're united under the umbrella of Major League Baseball, but they're still two separate leagues and they have the right to deviate from each other on the finer points of the game.

[MattFancy]

Getting rid of interleague gets rid of the rivalries you cherish so much

Ridiculous idea

The novelty has hardly worn off and the rivalry games in cities are still interesting

I've always said the 2 best things Selig did were implement interleague and implement a wild card. The game is better off with these two things. The game needs no further improvement.

What rivalries we cherish so much? When I think of baseball rivalries I think of: Yankees/Sox, Cardinals/Cubs, Giants/Dodgers, Braves/Mets. Phillies/Braves, Reds/Cardinals. Yeah interleague has helped out the regional rivalries, but I don't think people would stop watching baseball if they couldn't see 2 series a year between the O's and Nats.

[TMK9973]

Do people really enjoy watching the pitcher come up with runners in scoring position, knowing that the rally is about to end? Especially if it's late in a close game and the pitcher is going great? I think that's what some people consider "strategy" and it's really just bull****. If you pinch hit, you're overmanaging and misusing your arms, regardless of the outcome. If you leave the pitcher in, and he makes an out, which he likely will, you're losing that opportunity.

.

Yes - I DO enjoy that...because that IS strategy. "Do I pinch hit? Do I try a squeeze play? Can my pitcher hit?". Not only that but the strategy starts with the 7th hole. Is he getting anything to hit? Should they pitch around him?"

The managers needs to think about when to send any base runners knowing that the pitcher is coming up....

[ixcuincle]

The regional rivalries have become important. Are you saying you want to get rid of LAA / LAD? The fans love it. NYY / NYM, etc, abolish it completely in the regular season?

Interleague is fine. In fact, everything in baseball is fine but instant replay.

I think too many people want to nitpick and complain about something which is pretty good as is.

[MattFancy]

The regional rivalries have become important. Are you saying you want to get rid of LAA / LAD? The fans love it. NYY / NYM, etc, abolish it completely in the regular season?

Interleague is fine. In fact, everything in baseball is fine but instant replay.

I think too many people want to nitpick and complain about something which is pretty good as is.

The regional rivalries are the only good thing about interleague. Those are nice, but it wouldn't hurt my feelings if I didn't get to see the O's/Nats play 6 games against each other. The problem with interleague is that its not balanced. It would be different if the AL East played the NL East, etc. But, since that doesn't happen, it gives some teams in the same division an easier interleague schedule.

[ixcuincle]

There really isn't issue with that

There are a few minor issues like Chien Ming Wang getting hurt running the bases against the Nationals but interleague helps business, fans, and the sport in general. Brilliant idea by Selig

[MattFancy]

There really isn't issue with that

There are a few minor issues like Chien Ming Wang getting hurt running the bases against the Nationals but interleague helps business, fans, and the sport in general. Brilliant idea by Selig

I think the schedule thing makes a difference. For instance lets look at the Brewers and Cardinals, currently tied for 1st in the NL Central.

Brewers: Red Sox, Rays, Twins, Yankees, Twins

Cardinals: Royals, Blue Jays, Orioles, Rays

Tell me there isn't an advantage there for the Cardinals. Why can't they just do what the NFL does and put one division against the other? I understand wanting the regional rivalries, but find a way for all the teams in each division to have a similar schedule.

[TimmySmith]

Why the hate on interleague? At the very least it provides a respite from 50 Red Sox/Yankees games a season.

[HEavyJumbo85]

Yes - I DO enjoy that...because that IS strategy. "Do I pinch hit? Do I try a squeeze play? Can my pitcher hit?". Not only that but the strategy starts with the 7th hole. Is he getting anything to hit? Should they pitch around him?"

The managers needs to think about when to send any base runners knowing that the pitcher is coming up....

Flawed logic. All the strategy in National league baseball revolves around not wanting the pitcher to hit...wonderful.

Nothing warms my heart more than watching a serious overmanaging job, going to the bullpen too early in order to get a bat up (not a particuarly good bat, but either a lefty or a righty exclusively based on the handedness of the pitcher...some strategy). /sarcasm

The American league has pinch hitting and pitching around guys too, only it's based on actual baseball related stuff, like matchups and baserunners.

For what it's worth, sac bunting, squeezing, and stealing bases are so overrated and provide minimal benefit over the course of a season. It's just one of those things, along with, slightly unrelated, but don't get me started on closers.

Also, I am a Nationals fan...and National League "strategy" is overblown.

[TMK9973]

Flawed logic. All the strategy in National league baseball revolves around not wanting the pitcher to hit...wonderful.

Nothing warms my heart more than watching a serious over managing job, going to the bullpen too early in order to get a bat up (not a particuarly good bat, but either a lefty or a righty exclusively based on the handedness of the pitcher...some strategy). /sarcasm

The American league has pinch hitting and pitching around guys too, only it's based on actual baseball related stuff, like matchups and baserunners.

For what it's worth, sac bunting, squeezing, and stealing bases are so overrated and provide minimal benefit over the course of a season. It's just one of those things, along with, slightly unrelated, but don't get me started on closers.

Also, I am a Nationals fan...and National League "strategy" is overblown.

That's all opinion. Not fact. Just because you say the strategy in national league is about not wanting the pitcher to hit doesn't make it flawed logic. I don't want my kicker to kick field goal in football - so is going for it on 4th down or not not real strategy?

And its not about not wanting the pitcher to hit - its also about wanting him to pitch more. By your logic, a excellent 3rd baseman who can't hit should have a pitch hitter because "Fielding and hitting are two different skills". So maybe Justin Maxwell should get a DH and another chance, after all, he is a GREAT fielder and Marquis is a better hitter then him.

By Definition it's strategy. you have a team and you have to put your best 9 guys out there to throw, catch, run, hit, and pitch. They all have to play and if you pull 1 he's gone from the whole game.

[pjfootballer]

Still have no defense for NL pitchers hitting as poorly as they do

Some of the NL's best pitchers have BA's below the Mendoza Line lol

Once you can pitch and hit then tell me the No-DH rule works

That's because pitchers in today's game are paid to pitch, not hit. I've watch AL ball my whole life and I'd rather see a guy who can mash 30 Hrs, then to watch a guy bunt or look foolish at the plate. There are SOME pitchers that can hit. But they are rare.

[HEavyJumbo85]

That's all opinion. Not fact. Just because you say the strategy in national league is about not wanting the pitcher to hit doesn't make it flawed logic. I don't want my kicker to kick field goal in football - so is going for it on 4th down or not not real strategy?

And its not about not wanting the pitcher to hit - its also about wanting him to pitch more. By your logic, a excellent 3rd baseman who can't hit should have a pitch hitter because "Fielding and hitting are two different skills". So maybe Justin Maxwell should get a DH and another chance, after all, he is a GREAT fielder and Marquis is a better hitter then him.

By Definition it's strategy. you have a team and you have to put your best 9 guys out there to throw, catch, run, hit, and pitch. They all have to play and if you pull 1 he's gone from the whole game.

This is a strange argument. I wasn't refuting your logic with my first sentence; that sentence was the inference I made based on the information you provided me in your previous post. There is very little of my post that's opinion, especially the information about sac bunting, stealing, etc. That's a statistically proven thing.

The 3rd baseman situation you're proposing misses my point ent-...(is there a word that means more than entirely?). Do scouts rate a pitcher's hit tool? Do pitchers take the same amount of BP as position players? Do pitchers hit on a regular basis in the minor leagues? Just asking, but if the answer is an emphatic yes to all three, then your scenario makes sense. The game is too specialized now. Pitchers don't get the game reps, and they just can't devote the time to BP and video study like position players. They're too far behind and it's through no fault of their own. Let them pitch, let hitters hit.

I used strategy in quotes most of the time, when I wasn't being wholly sarcastic, because it's such a weak definition of strategy. All of the "strategy" in NL baseball comes about naturally, or it's something an average fan could comprehend. So, so easy. I don't want to devote a ton of space to tired hypotheticals, but seriously.

1. Once your starting pitcher goes, you are pinch hitting for every reliever for the rest of the game. If you put in a reliever who's spot in the order is due up and you want him to stay in, you double switch...really, there isn't much strategy there, hardly a choice. You just do it, unless it just isn't possible.

2. When you pinch hit for a pitcher, you put in an opposite handed hitter if you have one (If you don't have one, it's likely the result of previous over-managing during the game, in an attempt to "strategize" by pinch hitting for a pitcher with a runner on base.) It's called playing the percentages, this is why Mr. Burns pinch hit Homer Simpson for Darryl Strawberry. It's a proven method, everybody does it. Doesn't particuarly matter whether or not the guy has a good history with the pitcher or not, he just has to hit from the other side. Mmm...strategy.

3. When the pitcher hasn't given up a hit and has thrown less than 130 pitches, the rules don't apply...yay strategy.

The only benefit to National League "strategy" is the guarantee that changes will have to be made to the batting order. If you're trying to pump that up, you're grasping at straws. We showed up to the field today...Strategy!

[pjfootballer]

Who wants to see some guy that can ONLY hit, and can't play defense?

Or a guy who can only pitch and can't hit? It works both ways. FWIW, I wish they would decide on one set of rules and go with it. I prefer the DH, but if they went back to the old rules, I'd be fine with it.

And like Doyler said, this is 2011, the age of specialization. Hardly any pitcher goes the distance anymore. We have bullpen leftys and rightys who come in to get "one" out (that really aggrevates me changing the pitcher so often).

I think ALL of the minor leagues employ the DH. Pitchers aren't getting ABs to learn to hit.

[Predicto]

The DH is stupid, dude. Can't believe its lasted as long as it has. Bottom line, if you hit, you should have to play the field. Plus there is alot more strategy involved in the NL. Can't understand why anyone would prefer the AL to the NL.

So true.

AL baseball might as well be T-Ball.

[TimmySmith]

Or a guy who can only pitch and can't hit?

Huh? Millions paid to see Roger Clemens whether he hit or not. You might find 20 people at a game who paid to see David Ortiz.

[sportjunkie07]

as an o's fan, i personally like interleague play. the orioles always get to play the nats and thats good news. i like having divisions, and i love that the orioles get to play the yankees and red sox. i dont like the salary difference between the teams, fix that and im happy with the mlb.

[pjfootballer]

Huh? Millions paid to see Roger Clemens whether he hit or not. You might find 20 people at a game who paid to see David Ortiz.

Save for a Roger Clemens who pitched once every 5 days, bats and HRs put people in the seats. Alot of baseball purists love a good pitching duel, but casual fans and non purist fans love to see runs and HRs. Unless a guy is pitching a no hitter or there's a classic duel (like the Twins/Morris and Braves/Glavine game 7 WS) in the WS, fans at regular season games want to see runs.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Save for a Roger Clemens who pitched once every 5 days, bats and HRs put people in the seats. Alot of baseball purists love a good pitching duel, but casual fans and non purist fans love to see runs and HRs. Unless a guy is pitching a no hitter or there's a classic duel (like the Twins/Morris and Braves/Glavine game 7 WS) in the WS, fans at regular season games want to see runs.

I'm not sure about that. I'm far from a purist, and I love a low-scoring pitchers duel.