Expansion and Realignment (split from Aug 17 IGT)

[Frayed Knot]

As FK said, this is for the owners, not the players. It's a misdirect.

 

More accurately, what I was getting at* was the idea that both can be true, that realignment (depending on how it's structured of course) can be good for the players AND the owners. Yes, the owners want reduced travel costs and the potential of increased post-season revenue for their bottom line. But they also have to sell this whole idea to the players and reduced travel time is a carrot that they'll dangle out there as incentive for MLBPA to sign up.

* perhaps not too eloquently: "Is geographic alignment for the benefit of owners with reduced travel expenses or for the players with less travel time?" Yes

[Gwreck]

To some extent, the “travel costs”/travel time thing is a bit overblown. Sure, there’s some savings by reducing air mileage but it’s not that much if you have to charter the jet in the first instance — and everything else (hotels, meals) is still a cost no matter where you fly. The only road trips that don’t need a plane are the two same-city matchups, LA-SD, Chicago-Milwaukee, Cleveland-Detroit, Cleveland-Pittsburgh, Washington/Baltimore-Philly, and Philly-NY.

Reweighting the schedule is a big unknown for revenue. The owners are all very happy to have the Dodgers, Cubs, Red Sox, Yankees, and Mets visit their cities often because their revenue goes up with premium opponents visiting.

The real money is in expanding the playoffs, and in expansion fees paid by new clubs. And the real benefit for the players is that new clubs means more MLB roster spots.

[kcmets]

I'm tired of baseball being run by somebody who hates baseball.

 

This is basically where I am. Thankfully, I really don't care anymore

so it's less taxing on my soul. Twenty years ago I'd be in conniptions.

[Benjamin Grimm]

That's pretty much where I am too. Except I'd change "twenty years" to "thirty years".

[Edgy MD]

To some extent, the “travel costs”/travel time thing is a bit overblown.

 

This is probably true.

A greater benefit to having teams do as much of their traveling locally as possible is likely to get away games on TV during hours palatable to home fans, and therefore get more eyes on more screens.

[ashie62]

Travel cost?

They have no problem with the dozens of flights almost daily to shuttle relief pitchers and such around

[DocTee]

I can get behind the ATHLETIC realignment scheme better than the others that have been proposed.

But boy do I miss twilight doubleheaders, no DH, and 18 inning marathon games.

[MFS62]

I can get behind the ATHLETIC realignment scheme better than the others that have been proposed.

But boy do I miss twilight doubleheaders, no DH, and 18 inning marathon games.

 

Sigh.

Me, too.

Later

[ashie62]

There have been generational changes of many things in the last few years. This seems to fit that pattern for me

[metirish]

FPX has some thoughts

https://www.foxsports.com/stories/mlb/mlb-geographic-realignment-proposing-eight-divisions-expansion-teams-charlotte-portland

 

[TWEET]

[/TWEET]

[Frayed Knot]

The FOX grid differs from the NY Post one only in a few cases -- and not always in a good way as they split up the Dodgers & Giants -- and all these 'fixes' are great at

telling you what they improve while ignoring what they make worse. This one makes a big point of telling you how Colorado never belonged in a 'West' division as they

weren't even in the Pacific time zone while failing to note that, in their plan, Cincy is the lone EDT team in the entire western half of the bracket. Or, as they call it, the

National League.

Also, like everyone else, they go straight to four team divisions without even a discussion of any other format. At some point these are all just exercises in who can

draw the prettiest circles.

Finally, if the Mets, Phillies, Braves, Pirates, Nationals, Marlins are moved to the American League, while the White Sox, Royals, Angels, Mariners and A's are now

National League clubs, is the traditional league set-up really being 'preserved', or is keeping the names just a way of pretending that it hasn't been chucked entirely?

[Edgy MD]

Pittsburgh and Cleveland must be really curious when they became mid-Atlantic cities.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Finally, if the Mets, Phillies, Braves, Pirates, Nationals, Marlins are moved to the American League, while the White Sox, Royals, Angels, Mariners and A's are now

National League clubs, is the traditional league set-up really being 'preserved', or is keeping the names just a way of pretending that it hasn't been chucked entirely?

 

That's how I see it too. If you're going to scramble the teams that much, rename the leagues. Call them the Continental League and the Frontier League. Or Pioneer League. (I know that there are small independent leagues with those last two names, but I'm sure they'd listen to a reasonable offer.) Or as I said earlier, the Jackie Robinson League and the Roberto Clemente League. Or the Orange League and the Purple League. Or whatever! But keeping "National" and "American" after such a shakeup doesn't seem right.

[Frayed Knot]

Pittsburgh and Cleveland must be really curious when they became mid-Atlantic cities.

 

Mid-Atlantic? When do we play Bermuda?

[kcmets]

If there will be a Purple League, it really should be

the BigPurple League. Just saying.

[Edgy MD]

Finally, if the Mets, Phillies, Braves, Pirates, Nationals, Marlins are moved to the American League, while the White Sox, Royals, Angels, Mariners and A's are now

National League clubs, is the traditional league set-up really being 'preserved', or is keeping the names just a way of pretending that it hasn't been chucked entirely?

 

That's how I see it too. If you're going to scramble the teams that much, rename the leagues. Call them the Continental League and the Frontier League. Or Pioneer League. (I know that there are small independent leagues with those last two names, but I'm sure they'd listen to a reasonable offer.) Or as I said earlier, the Jackie Robinson League and the Roberto Clemente League. Or the Orange League and the Purple League. Or whatever! But keeping "National" and "American" after such a shakeup doesn't seem right.

 

You are so begging for them to become The Coca-Cola League and The Draft Kings League.

[Frayed Knot]

That's how I see it too. If you're going to scramble the teams that much, rename the leagues.

 

I don't even care if they keep the names. But if you're going to 'only' shuffle around 8 or10 teams -- as the FOX plan Irish linked does even as they boast about how

few teams they displaced to come up with their scenario -- then you're not really preserving much and so, in my mind, it becomes little different than realigning with

zero regard to what leagues/divisions teams are or were once connected to.

[Centerfield]

One of the fun things for me is taking a trip to Baltimore or Boston and being able to root for the home team without any reservations knowing that it can’t hurt the Mets. And if they’re playing a NL team, it may even help them.

Eliminating the AL and NL just so fundamentally changes the way we watch baseball. It’s just crazy. How much more revenue will actually be generated? Is that enough to destroy these traditions?

I mean. I think I know the answer. It’s yes. It’s always yes.

We didn’t stop the universal DH. We didn’t stop the extra inning runner. Naming rights to stadiums. On field advertising. Ads on the uniform.

Eventually we’ll be rooting for the CitiBank Mets. If the name Mets even survives.

[Benjamin Grimm]

You are so begging for them to become The Coca-Cola League and The Draft Kings League.

 

Yeah, I know. That's a very possible outcome.

[Frayed Knot]

Eliminating the AL and NL just so fundamentally changes the way we watch baseball. It’s just crazy. How much more revenue will actually be generated? Is that enough to destroy these traditions?

 

Well, presumably there'll still be two leagues [conferences? halves?] just maybe not with the teams in each that we're used to.

But Interleague play ("A gift to the fans" -- Bud Selig) and the universal DH effectively eliminated any remaining difference between the leagues, differences that had slowly disappearing for decades even before all that.

So if/when expansion happens it's going to mean a reshuffling of the deck, the only question is how it's going to get done. Manfred [read: the owners] certainly hinted that he/they want realignment more along geographic lines: western teams mostly in one 'league' and eastern teams in another (whatever those leagues wind up being called) in order to create less travel during the season and more regional matchups/better TV times in the early playoff rounds.

My point was that if these realignment plans are only going to sort of change things by only moving two or four (or six or eight) teams, then what are we really holding on to here?

[Frayed Knot]

So I'm doing a little numerical doodling here on what a schedule might look like with a 32 team league and either a 4x8 or 8x4 set up.

4x8 (4 divisions of 8 teams each)

- 15 'league' opponents @ 3 series each (each season would have to be one home/two away or vice versa) totaling 138 games. Since 15 x 9 (the normal size of three series) = 135 then three of those series would need to be four games on a random basis.

- then a three games series vs only half of the 16 teams in the other 'league' = 24. You'd play a series vs the other half of that league the next year.

Plusses: 85% of the games are in-league games/15% out, compared to about 70/30 in the current format

Minuses: a visit from teams in the opposite league to your town only once in a four year period

8x4 (8 divisions of 4 teams)

- 3 division opponents x 22 games* = 66

- 12 league but not division opponents x 6 games = 96

That, right there, is your 162 so no IL play in this scenario.

You could cut down to one series per non-division opponent (alternate year home/away) if you want to add IL play but that's 48 games vs them also or the same one series each and if you're playing them as much as your in-league/non-div opponents then there's no difference between in-league or out-

Minuses:

- barely 40% of games in-division which is actually slightly more than now (~56/162 = 35%) yet still a very high proportion of your sked devoted to just three teams (nearly 1/7th of your entire sked to each of the three). So it's like 22/per is both too low and too high at the same time (there's familiarity and then there's overkill).

- Then there's ~60% of the sked devoted to out of division and/or league. Is that really want we want? And the only way to reduce that is to increase the already huge number of in-division games.

Plusses: I'll let you know when I come up with one

* 22 games/yr vs each opponent was actually the number that reigned for more than a half-century [22 x 7 = 154] until the 1961/62 expansion bumped up the number of teams to 10 per/lg, but you saw everyone that amount. This would be swinging between 'these guys again?' vs 'who are these dudes?'

[Benjamin Grimm]

I've decided that the league that starts in the East should be called the Sunrise League and the one with the westernmost teams should be the Sunset League.

No further discussion is necessary.

[kcmets]

My guess is the new league names will go the highest bidders. And then

the divisional names as well. Then there will be no city teams. There will

be the DoorDash Dodgers, The Fanduel Friars and the Geico Guardians.

[Frayed Knot]

The main league that went with names (mostly founders and other long time execs) as division/conference titles was the NHL but they eventually abandoned that.

They also got away from the small division model and went with four eight-team divisions so Manfred has a model to copy from if he can see beyond the 8x4 model.

The NHL's Eastern Conference is divided into the 'Atlantic' and 'Metropolitan' divisions, the West consists of the 'MidWest' and 'Pacific'.

[roger_that]

My guess is the new league names will go the highest bidders. And then

the divisional names as well. Then there will be no city teams. There will

be the DoorDash Dodgers, The Fanduel Friars and the Geico Guardians.

 

You're not looking at the big picture.

Why go with team nicknames at all? It will be the Doordash Ikeas, and the Fanduel Toyotas, and the Geico Preparation-H's. You're so 20th Century! Who the hell are the Dodgers?

[kcmets]

Well, I don't think the owners of a team like the Dodgers, who are

worth billions of dollars, are going to part ways with their brand. No

one is going to rush out and plop down $300 for a Mookie Betts Ikea

jersey but they certainly will for the good ol' Dodger blue.

[MFS62]

IMO, MLB will have a tough decision on that from a standpoint of merchandising revenue.

Will the newly named merchandise catch on and produce repetitive sales, or will the buying be a one year fad?

Will rebranding a team turn off the fans of the existing city?

Will the lure of buying the new stuff span beyond the team city?

Will a Chevy Cubs logo turn off Ford drivers?

I'm sure MLB has market research companies compiling and digging through the data to figure all that out.

Later

[Centerfield]

If we have to do realignment, my proposal.

NL East

1. Mets

2. Phillies

3. Nationals

4. Pirates

5. Marlins

6. Braves

7. Reds

8. Cubs

NL West

1. Giants

2. Dodgers

3. Arizona

4. Colorado

5. St Louis

6. Milwaukee

7. Padres

AL East

1. Yankees

2. Red Sox

3. Orioles

4. Tampa

5. Blue Jays

6. Tigers

7. Guardians

8. White Sox

AL West

1. Mariners

2. Athletics

3. Angels

4. Twins

5. Rangers

6. Astros

7. Royals

Four Division winners. 8 Wild cards.

Wild Cards play a three game series against your own division.

NLDS/ALDS. Division winner takes on the WC from within your division.

LCS and World Series continues as is.

All WC and DS series are played within your own time zone. There are no cross-country flights until the LCS.

Edited September 24, 2025 by Centerfield

[Marshmallowmilkshake]

Did you eliminate the Tigers?

[MFS62]

CF, your idea is logical, so MLB will probably do it a different way.

You know how much they listen to the fans.

Later