Floating Re-Alignment: Revolutionary Idea or Simply Revolting?
by ArchAngel_7 on Mar 10, 2010 10:44 PM PST
Email
Print
The latest topic being floated from the Commissioners select panel, to which the Angels esteemed Manager, Mike Scioscia, is a member, is the idea of allowing teams to change divisions or even leagues depending on such things as payroll and “whether or not they intend to rebuild or compete.” The idea would allow teams that are low income or rebuilding to decided if they would rather play against lesser teams, or to play against the big boys and get badly beaten in exchange for the ability to fill their stadiums with fans wanting to see the more popular franchises. The one restriction would be to limit the movement to two time zones, for instance the Angels could not join the eastern divisions and the Red Sox would be similarly bared from the West.
Here is one example by Tom Verducci of what this temporary realignment might bring about.
N.L. East: Atlanta, Baltimore, Florida, Tampa Bay, Washington.
N.L. Central: Cubs, White Sox, Houston, Kansas City, St. Louis, Texas.
N.L. West: Anaheim, Arizona, Colorado, Los Angeles, San Diego.
A.L. East: Boston, Philadelphia, Mets, Yankees, Toronto.
A.L. Central: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh.
A.L. West: Oakland, San Francisco, Seattle, Minnesota
So how would you feel about it? Would it be a fun and interesting way to mix things up, or would it just muddy the waters even more than interleague play?
This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.
108 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It's really bizarre...don't much care for it
Letting teams change divisions all the time? So would a team that “doesn’t want to compete” be allowed to move to a division as refuge for a year or two from the Yankees, but still make the playoffs if they were the best of that lesser bunch? Surely they must, otherwise you lose thousands of fans for the entire season when your team literally throws away its season by disqualifying itself from the playoffs.
And how much can a team lie? Do the Yankees get to move to whatever division they want just to pad their standings for the year?
Also, can a team “chase” you? If you move divisions, can they move, and then you move away again, only to be followed again?
I really don’t get this.
More importantly, I just dislike divisions. Teams should play each other equally, without regard to what time zone you play in. And a better record is just that: a better record. A team shouldn’t win 95 games and miss the playoffs because they have the audacity of winning those 95 in the Western Time Zone while some lesser Central Time Zone team is rewarded with the playoffs for winning 83 games. And why are Wild Card teams automatically defaulted to non-home field advantage? Remember when the 8-8 Chargers got home field over the 12-4 Colts? Or the Twins getting it over the 99 win Angels in 2002?
Hogwash, I say!
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 10, 2010 10:53 PM PST reply actions
I think the current system makes logical and logistical sense.
Rest in peace, Rory. When I think of some of the greatest moments in my Angels fandom, I hear your voice describing them. Thanks for everything you gave us.
What makes sense
about telling a team that wins, potentially MASSIVELY more games than another, that they don’t make the playoffs because their geographic locale varies greatly from that of another team…and, as an added fun little piece to the puzzle, that the geographic aligning of divisions is also heavily, frequently flawed itself?
You can call it any number of words in the English language. Logical is not one of them.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 12, 2010 1:26 PM PST up reply actions
Its really somple to even things out
Move Houston to the NL West, making the NL Central 5 teams
Move the D Backs to the AL West, making that division 5 teams.
The end.
I brought sexy back, but they only gave me store credit....
15 teams in each league
either a guaranteed interleague matchup or two teams with days off every day of the season.
by Rev Halofan on Mar 10, 2010 10:59 PM PST up reply actions
Still the days off would be better
Than having only four teams in the AL west and 6 in the NL Central. The Brewers were moved just as an ass kiss to Silig.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
by ArchAngel_7 on Mar 10, 2010 11:03 PM PST up reply actions
Including days off on Friday, Saturdays, and Sundays?
You find me a team that agrees to give up a home game on a weekend and I’ll eat my hat.
1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com
Wouldn't matter if we eliminate hitting pitchers (or the DH).
If the NL adopted AL rules, or vice versa, it wouldn’t matter so much if there was always an “interleague” game (more like football). Of course, I’m AL biased, so I’d rather see hitting pitchers eliminated. It’s really annoying seeing a good rally killed by a pathetic pitcher at the plate. I guess one little negative impact would be that some pinch hitters would lose their jobs in the NL, and a bunch of teams would have to drum up some decent DH’s really fast.
Plus, I think Selig sees interleague play as his mark in baseball history. He probably doesn’t want to undo what he’s done. Maybe the next commissioner will make eliminating hitting pitchers his (or her) hallmark decision.
P.S. If this were all to happen, we could just as easily inherit the Padres in the AL West. It has always irked me that the Rangers are a western team while the Astros are a central team.
Here's the pitch to Lofton. Fly ball, center field. Erstad says he's got it. Erstad...MAKES THE CATCH! The Anaheim Angels are the champions of baseball! - Rory Markas (1955-2010)
by Rally Manatee on Mar 11, 2010 12:19 AM PST up reply actions
Eh
personally, I prefer pitchers hitting.
It requires players to be more developed (both by making pitchers more well-rounded, and getting rid of useless immobile jackasses like David Ortiz) on both sides of the ball.
The DH is the intrusive butt-in guy that changed the game. The NL has kept it the way it should be…no pitchers too “precious” to step in a box. It also makes pitchers less cowardly…takes away the Roger Clemens complex, wherein you gun for a guy’s head because who cares, you never have to step in later yourself.
Not only that, but it increases the whole strategic element to the game: now when you’re down late and your ace is in, and you have a potential rally, what do you do? Do you pinch hit to improve your chance to score during the rally, or do you leave in the ace because he’s more capable of holding the deficit to a minimum?
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 11, 2010 12:48 AM PST up reply actions
Disagree.
I’ve never gotten the logic of games being more “strategic” just because you have a rules setup wherein one guy on each team will automatically suck. Hitting major league pitching is hard enough without having one hitter who will never play enough to get the timing down.
~Till the Halo burns out...
You may think it's less fun to watch a guy who can't hit in the lineup
and I think that’s valid enough (no matter how much I disagree), but i think it’s more of an objective fact that it requires a coach to develop more strategy for the situation when it arises, just by the simple nature of having one more man to worry about the balance of pitching and offense with. An NL coach has all the lineup/pinch-hit platoon concerns of an AL one in in-game experience, with the added need to strike the balance of when to pull and when to bat a pitcher.
I just think it’s absolute horseshit to see fat do-nothing washed-up has-beens getting a chance to take hacks for 5 extra seasons when they have no valid defensive skill left essentially. And I’m sorry to the Vlads and Matsuis of the world, but if you can’t field anymore, you shouldn’t be seeking refuge from somewhere to hide…you should be hanging it up.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 11, 2010 8:32 AM PST up reply actions
See, I think certain players have certain roles in sports and should stick to them
The QB doesn’t play defense in football because he usually sucks at it. The goalies in hockey or soccer don’t really play offense because their purpose is to defend.
The DH rule ensures there is a full line-up of at least halfway decent hitters. Pitchers don’t belong in the batter’s box generally, they belong on the mound.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 11, 2010 9:10 AM PST up reply actions
Then why did the sport start with the pitcher hitting?
the DH is the NEW standard, not the long running one. The sport stood for almost a hundred years with batting pitchers…it was recent influence that changed that. And not all pitchers can’t hit anyway. Besides, where do you draw the line? For the longest time, middle infielders were strong defensive experts who no one expected to be able to hit, so maybe a DH for them, too? Things have changed significantly by now, but guys like Pee Wee Reese and Phil Rizzuto (or even more recently Ozzie Smith) sure didn’t get on the field because of their bats.
If the standard was changed, offense would no doubt improve from pitchers.
The the goalie hockey/soccer analogy doesn’t really work because offense and defense are always occurring near-simultaneously, obviously not the case with baseball.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 11, 2010 12:25 PM PST up reply actions
The difference between DH for pitcher and DH for middle infielder...
Is that the pitcher plays 1/5 of the innings (or less) that the position players play. If you’re only playing once a week, you’re not going to develop the skills necessary to succeed. Besides, a good pitcher makes up more in defense than his bat (or lack there of) takes away from the offense…
I’m not a fan of seeing a player step into the box and fail miserably. I don’t want the strategy of a game be based on the probable failue of one particular player…
Then invent a position for the DH to play in the field or make a lineup 8 hitters
there’s no excuse for pretending the field isn’t every bit as important as the batter’s box, and giving someone a cop-out way of being a totally useless fat loser who gets to hit but never has to be held accountable for his fielding ineptitude.
I can’t STAND seeing the David Ortiz’s of the world worshipped for half a decade for their hitting prowess, when in fact they’re too immobile and worthless to play more than half the damn game. You spend a lot longer in the field than you do in the batter’s box, and he can’t do the former. It’s really just completely unacceptable.
And a pitcher is only as much a failure in the batter’s box as he chooses to be. He’ll always be ‘worse’ than the average hitter, but a pitcher becomes a hitting liability when he chooses to not focus at all on it. Straight through high school, and frequently into college, some of the best hitters on the team are your pitchers…anyone who has played knows that. It’s a matter of not letting the best pitchers walk away from pitching, or having pitchers completely give up on hitting. You’ve got four off days out of five: work on it. I don’t expect you to slug .500, but a pitcher sure doesn’t need to OPS less than that, either.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 11, 2010 1:10 PM PST up reply actions
I'm ok w/ batting only 8 players but...
even if you made that rule change, David Ortiz would still be worshipped for half a decade for his hitting prowess. You’d see him at first base in Fenway if there wasn’t a DH….
Then one of Lowell or Youk would have been left out.
for the last few years.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 11, 2010 1:36 PM PST up reply actions
That would really skew history books, huh.
With an 8 man line-up, a leadoff hitter may easily get 7 ABs a game regularly. Can you imagine someone beating Ricky Henderson’s stolen base record any other way?
Here's the pitch to Lofton. Fly ball, center field. Erstad says he's got it. Erstad...MAKES THE CATCH! The Anaheim Angels are the champions of baseball! - Rory Markas (1955-2010)
by Rally Manatee on Mar 15, 2010 12:11 AM PDT up reply actions
Well, Ichiro got to break the hits record
by playing 8 more games than Sisler. Which is every bit as bogus…and like with that case, if they made it an 8 hitter lineup, they SHOULD make them two different records. Because Ichiro only half-owns the record, and so would anyone who broke an SB record by having 8 hitter lineups.
Then again, no one is ever TOUCHING Rickey’s record, so it’s a moot point.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 16, 2010 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions
And...
The best hitting in HS baseball are often pitchers because the best athletes are pitchers at that level (and lower)… Many of those pitchers become position players if their hitting is good enough (see Ruth, Babe, 1920). Look at how many MLB position players were pitchers in HS.
That's why I said
more should be done to keep those pitchers as pitchers.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 11, 2010 1:36 PM PST up reply actions
And most good kid pitchers
played other positions when they weren’t pitching. I played 1st whenever I wasn’t pitching. Therefore, I always had 4 or 5 ABs a game.
Here's the pitch to Lofton. Fly ball, center field. Erstad says he's got it. Erstad...MAKES THE CATCH! The Anaheim Angels are the champions of baseball! - Rory Markas (1955-2010)
by Rally Manatee on Mar 15, 2010 12:07 AM PDT up reply actions
The sport started with the pitcher hitting because pitchers would play other positions on days
when they weren’t pitching. Since the sport has evolved towards 25 man rosters for 9-man teams, the rules should be adjusted in turn. Saddling both teams with a handicap for an artificial boost to “strategy” is pure baloney.
~Till the Halo burns out...
Again
everyone has this fixation on the batting side as having some kind of monopoly on importance in the game. If you can’t carry the load on both sides, you’ve no business playing. It is no more an ‘artificial handicap’ to both teams to have a pitcher bat than it is an ‘artificial padding’ to throw some random guy into a slot where his defensive liability never has to be exploited. Defense is every bit as important, but we allow our perceptions to distort this and say “it’s okay if you can only do one half your job.”
My issue is not nearly as much with the necessity of having pitchers bat as it is with this absolute horseshit excuse that a DH doesn’t have to play the field. Why the hell not? You shouldn’t get a ‘pass’ on one of your hitters not being able to hold up both ends of the game.
And of course, interestingly enough, the Angels would have likely been one of the biggest beneficiaries of this recently since we so rarely fielded real DHs (until this year and the last 2-3).
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 11, 2010 1:25 PM PST up reply actions
Good point.
I hadn’t thought of that.
Here's the pitch to Lofton. Fly ball, center field. Erstad says he's got it. Erstad...MAKES THE CATCH! The Anaheim Angels are the champions of baseball! - Rory Markas (1955-2010)
by Rally Manatee on Mar 15, 2010 12:03 AM PDT up reply actions
As Zu said, pitchers used to play other positions
Also, the fact remains that most pitchers do suck at hitting. For every CC or Zambrano who might be able to hit, there’s a dozen other pitchers who wouldn’t even approach the Mendoza Line.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 11, 2010 1:25 PM PST up reply actions
Read the post right above yours
and most pitchers suck at hitting because most pitchers never even take it up because it’s not expected of them…not because there is some magical spell cast upon them that prevents them from accomplishing hitting prowess. The 100 OPS point differential between AL and NL highlights that fact…when more is expected of them, more is accomplished. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to end up with a good handful of pitchers that could OPS near .600, even if the league average always is closer to .400.
But again, if you think pitchers hitting is retarded, whatever…that’s only one piece of the argument. The main issue is that the reverence given to hitting should also be given to fielding…and expecting someone to play half the game and not have his glovework held accountable is just detestable…it’s not baseball.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 11, 2010 1:43 PM PST up reply actions
It's because the DH is an IMPROVEMENT.
The 13 colonies started out with The Articles of Confederation. Just because something is older doesn’t mean it’s better. Americans love to improve on ideas, that’s why we have the Shamwow and the DH.
And no one is drawing a line anywhere. You have to allow a sport to evolve. The fact that middle infielders have to be able to hit now is another attestation to the inert human attribute to excel. If you’ll pardon a far less manly example, It’s the same reason why it is demanded of a male figure skater to do a triple flippy things now, and a double is for hacks. We inherently want bars to be raised, not lowered.
Here's the pitch to Lofton. Fly ball, center field. Erstad says he's got it. Erstad...MAKES THE CATCH! The Anaheim Angels are the champions of baseball! - Rory Markas (1955-2010)
by Rally Manatee on Mar 15, 2010 12:21 AM PDT up reply actions
How would this 'bar raising' logic not apply to pitchers?
are they an exception? If you raised the bar for a pitcher’s hitting performance, would he not have the “inert human attribute to excel?”
Half the reason pitchers don’t hit is because it isn’t expected of them…expect more of them, and shit likely happens.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 16, 2010 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions
It's the player's responsibility
I’m not raising any bars. It’s the players themselves who raise or lower their standard of play, not irate bloggers, suits in board meetings, or even the coaches. I bet 9 out of 10 pitchers will tell you they don’t WANT to work harder at hitting. Hell, probably even Sabathia and Zambrano don’t want to spend more time and effort on hitting, they just enjoy it when they’re in the box. I’m just speculating there, maybe I’m wrong.
Anyway, the point is that it’s guys like Cal Ripken, Ryne Sandberg, Michael Young, A-Rod, Chase Utley…who raised the standard for middle infielders to where it is no longer acceptable for them to merely play good defense. That hasn’t happened with pitchers and will not happen because there is a general consensus that the way it is now is the way it should be: hitters work on hitting, pitchers work on pitching.
Plus, I think Jietoh and others make a great point that since pitchers only play once every 5 games, they have a severe disadvantage hitting. Especially when you think about a pitcher’s routine in between starts. I don’t exactly know how it goes, but don’t they pretty much shut it down the day after start? Then, they throw a side session at some point between starts. How would it affect their workout if they were forced to take batting practice as much as the other guys? I’m guessing it would negatively impact their performance on the mound.
Here's the pitch to Lofton. Fly ball, center field. Erstad says he's got it. Erstad...MAKES THE CATCH! The Anaheim Angels are the champions of baseball! - Rory Markas (1955-2010)
by Rally Manatee on Mar 17, 2010 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Four off days is a disadvantage?
It’s not like I’m asking these guys to OPS .900…or even .800. Hell, even a high .600 would be as good as any number of current fielders. Four off days is four days in the batting cage.
Telling me a pitcher shouldn’t HAVE to work on hitting because a hitter doesn’t WANT to work on hitting isn’t a reason…it’s an excuse. An excuse the A-Rods and Utleys of the world could have, but did not, hide behind.
It doesn’t go both ways though: either both sides of the ball are important or neither, not only one. And a DH is just absolutely 100% unacceptable. If you’re too fucking horrid to be in the field, you can’t play the game. You don’t get a handicap spot given to you…you retire. Why not have some guy stand next to David Ortiz in the batter’ box and take off running for him after he makes contact, too? God forbid a guy have to run the bases, too. Hell, once he makes it to first, maybe he should get a pinch runner but continue to stay in the game regardless?
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 18, 2010 7:57 PM PDT up reply actions
A DH is absolutely 100% unacceptable?
Then stop being an Angels fan. By being an Angels fan, you are accepting the DH.
Also, I’m starting to think you never played hardball. I only played until my sophomore year and now recreationally in the summers, but it’s enough to know that daily AB’s are the best way to maintain consistency in your swing, and to keep your timing against live pitching. Not even a batting cage or BP can give you that. You need live, competitive pitching pretty much daily. That’s why Rex Hudler always said it is such a tough job to be a reserve hitter. Reserves (and NL pitchers) don’t get consistent AB’s, wich is a big reason why they don’t usually hit as well.
I'm wearing a "Markas" patch on my sleeve this season.
by Rally Manatee on Mar 19, 2010 12:46 AM PDT up reply actions
Boy that's a stretch
“you don’t like the DH,” so don’t root for a team that abides by a rule set in place by the league?
That might work if we were talking about, say, betraying a firm moral conviction that defines my faith and character, and not a simple rule in a sport I watch for fun that I cannot and do not have power to change. I’m sure you’re familiar with life prioritization.
I never said BP was the same as live-pitching. In fact, it’s rather implied that I said it’s NOT, as I said I don’t expect the same results as I do from those who face it every day. But you can be sure that four days of solid BP out of five is a lot more than most pitchers give themselves right now in the NL…and infinitely more than anyone in the AL, of course.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 19, 2010 8:54 AM PDT up reply actions
And it negatively impacts anyone's performance at anything
to dedicate time to one task over another. A fielder’s performance with the glove is impacted every minute he spends batting instead of fielding. It’s ‘opportunity cost.’ And again, it’s not an excuse.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Mar 18, 2010 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Plus AL pitchers have to be slightly more bad-ass.
NL pitchers catch a break every 9th batter, an AL pitcher usually doesn’t have such a luxury (unless he’s facing our own Jeff Mathis). Can you imagine how much different the 09 playoffs would have been if people got to pitch to Sabathia instead of Matsui? And Sabathia is supposedly a GOOD hitting pitcher.
Here's the pitch to Lofton. Fly ball, center field. Erstad says he's got it. Erstad...MAKES THE CATCH! The Anaheim Angels are the champions of baseball! - Rory Markas (1955-2010)
by Rally Manatee on Mar 15, 2010 12:00 AM PDT up reply actions
I suppose the allure
is that, if the Dodgers and the Angels for instance, were in the same division, you would get 18 sell outs each. Money always seems to be at the heart of it.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
I think
that it is an awesome idea.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
Ahh....the genesis thought....
The idea would be new and more controversial than the DH and also be totally in the face of baseball tradition….I’m loving it more by the second. Of course a hard cap would solve the problem of team inequity faster than anything else, but we all know deep down in our hearts that a cap will never happen.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
by ArchAngel_7 on Mar 10, 2010 11:30 PM PST up reply actions
Not unless or until some teams some teams show financial instability...
Look at the NHL, once it became evident that several teams couldn’t remain fincially solvent, the league stepped in and forced the hard cap on the players through a lockout.
What? My realignment and expansion idea at the bottom?
I agree! Thanks!
1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com
I like interleague play...
It mixes things up nicely. But doing this would suck. But whatever. It’s baseball. I’ll still watch.
Happy Birthday to the ground!
A solution to...
…sort out competitive balance, maintain interest for all till the end of the season (even teh average teams), address inequities in spending
1. Expand AL to 16 teams, split it into Division 1 (top 8 teams), and then into East and west – and division 2 (the shit ones) also into east and west and institute promotion and relegation.
2. At end of season bottom 2 teams get relegated, top 2 teams in div 2 get promoted
3. East and west for both divs are rejigged every year depending on who’s up and who’s down.
4. Schedule is biased towards region, then division, ensuring maintenance of regional rivalries but also ensuring more competitive games between teams playing at a similar level
5. Top two teams in div 1 E&W play off against each other, winners play for penant.
6. Do the same to the NL.
This would ensure that…
1. Nearly all teams have something to play for right up till the end of the season
2. There are more competitive games
3. Failure to spend appropriately may be punished by relegation.
4. Mid-ranked teams (top of div 2), have competitive baseball right up till season end with the carrot of promotion in their sights.
5. And most importantly, there will be fans of teams we probably hate crying at the end of the season as their team is unceremoniously jettisoned into the obscurity of division 2 (my favourite part of the English Football season every year)
I see red people
by The Limey on Mar 11, 2010 2:23 AM PST reply actions 2 recs
Brilliant!
From the standpoint of keeping teams “in the hunt” right up until the end, this is a great idea. “The obscurity of Division 2”…priceless.
The '56 LA Angels (PCL) cap logo...a classic.
by MurrietaMick on Mar 11, 2010 8:58 AM PST up reply actions
Once again, I submit that any plan which depends on expansion is DOA.
The money necessary to execute on expansion is a hurdle too high in today’s economy. The total startup costs would be well north of $500 million in out-of-pocket expenses, and the intiial total financial burden to which any owner or owner group would need to commit would be norht of $1 billion. For what? A team in Portland, Oregan?
Typing the word “expansion” is easy. About as easy “Beam me up, Scotty.” But that doesn’t make it so.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
JLP disagrees
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 11, 2010 11:17 AM PST up reply actions
100 bonus points goes to the Commander!
For identifying the bridging Star Trek references from the orginal to TNG. Well done, sirrah!!!
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
I was raised on TNG from like age 4, couldn't just let it get by quietly!
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 11, 2010 12:11 PM PST up reply actions
OK so DROP two teams, say...
Kansas City and Pittsburg. Now move one NL team to the AL so each league has 14 teams. Top 8 and bottom 6.
Those are small market clubs, true
But they also have excellent stadiums, and if they get proper management, they could turn around their low attendance. The A’s had the worst attendance in 2009. Let’s eliminate the A’s!
1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com
Glad to see that you are engaged.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
For Stirrups and you other baseball-Trekkies (I know you're here)
If you’re into PC Gaming at all, you might want to check this out:
It’s pretty good. Has some areas that could use improvement like all online games, but it’s one that doesn’t involve elves, dwarves, and trolls, like 95% of the others do.
I have some free-trial passes that I might be able to let you use. I’ll have to look at them again and figure out how though.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 12, 2010 9:10 AM PST up reply actions
Take that back.
NOT a Trekkie. Just a huge science and Sci-Fi fan.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
LOL, didn't mean "trekkie" in a bad way
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 12, 2010 10:48 AM PST up reply actions
Just figured you might be interested
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 12, 2010 10:50 AM PST up reply actions
I like this idea
but for it to work, you would probably have to do away with the AL/NL format and convert them to Div 1 and Div 2. Then you would drop the bottom 14 teams into the Div 2 and place the top 16 in Div 1. Create 4 divisions in each and eliminate the wild card. As far as the DH goes, My feeling is that the players union would shit before they would allow it to be terminated so it would likely become a fixture throughout the league.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
StupidStupidStupid StupidStupidStupidStupidStupidStupidStupidStupidStupid
I can’t say it enough.
Why are they trying to screw with our game.
Realignment seems partly aimed at the AL East. Fans are sick of the Yankees/Red Sox and the Orioles/Blue Jays and Rays cannot compete. At least that is the ostensible argument.
Realignment is just a panacea that does not solve the games real problems
**Baseball in Florida is an absolute lost cause. These teams, regardless how good they are, don’t draw fans and don’t spend money. They are saved because of their excellent player development, but that only means that they won’t get blown out of the water against the Red Sox and Yankees. Yeah, when the stars align these teams can actually compete, but then it only marginally matters, since fans don’t go to the games anyway If a tree falls in a forest and nobody hears it, does it make any noise?
As far as the AL East. . .
The Orioles consistently competed for 30 years from the late sixties to the mid-nineties, until the travesty of Peter Angelos destroyed that franchise and their fan base.
The Blue Jays likewise have been able to compete for almost half their existance. Unfortunately, this is also a franchise hamstrung by their location.
Then you have all the other mismanaged/small market teams. These teams would much rather pocket their luxury tax money than spend it. In the end, it doesn’t matter if you have beautiful stadiums, if a team can’t pull its collective heads out of its rear. Locally, you see the Dodgers and Padres as two huge examples of mismanagement. Granted the Dodgers have made the playoffs these past two years, but look at the team since the Fox era and the record isn’t so great. Moreover, the McCourts are morons, who seem more interested in using the Dodgers as their personal bling, taking out huge personal salaries (for themselves) and using it as their pawn in their divorce, than they are in the franchise itself. Given their location, and the worth of their franchise, there really is no reason why the Dodgers shouldn’t be as much as, if not more a force than the Red Sox or Yankees. (No, I’m not a Dodger fan, I’m just stating the obvious)
Having this realignment does nothing more than move around the deck chairs, without solving the aforementioned problems. However, let me also say that poor ownership is not a new problem. Ever wonder why you never heard of the Washington Senators for 30-40 years during the 20th Century. “First in War, First in Peace and Last in the American League”. Basically, terrible ownership. However, one difference between then and today is that you didn’t see the Commissioner and his cronies trying to bale those crummy teams out, by moving them to easier divisions.
I suppose if Bud was Commissioner during the 40’s and 50’s, the would have moved the Giants, Dodgers and Yankees into the same division and had the rest of the league fight it out for the opportunity to play them.
This whole issue is one of cycles. The Halos are a great example. For the past ten years, they have had among the best teams in MLB. We have almost forgotten the painful years that preceded them. Yeah, I am sick of seeing the Yankees and Red Sox every October, but I also believe that these things have a way of turning around. Moreover, for all the money they’ve spent, the Yankees and Red Sox have only won three championships over the past ten years. Yeah, in my book that’s probably three too many, but this is not anywhere near the domination that some of baseball’s earlier dynasties enjoyed.
Verducci is a moron, who writes articles like this just to get attention, because he was ignored as a child. Selig on the other hand is just an idiot, who should have been replaced years ago. People who are constantly invested in trying to build their own personal legacy are dangerous. Selig wants to rub his grubby hands all of over our beautiful game and turn it into a “Bud Selig” production. He wants to erect statues of himself, not just in Milwaukee, but at every other MLB stadium. Stop the madness.
by righteous halo on Mar 11, 2010 8:20 AM PST reply actions 2 recs
How is your manifesto
coming along?
1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com
That would be a bad interpretation of the idea.
Teams should not switch leagues.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
Retarded idea. Again, just expand the AL and the talent will balance out
Add two teams to the AL West and move the Rangers to the Central, or add one to the West, one somewhere else, and leave the Rangers where they are. There are enough US and Canadian cities that could host a team to make this happen.
Two leagues, 16 teams each, the talent will be spread out over the same amount of roster space.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
Nate rocks
mostly for agreeing with me.
1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com
Minny in the west
Stupid
FATHER OF A WONDERFUL SON VLADIMIR
Sorry not named after Guerrero...but would be cool
There was a similar idea posted by some baseball writer a couple months ago...
I love the idea of playing the dodgers 24 times a season….
Halos & Clips...must have something to do with the color red and jaded pasts...
by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Mar 11, 2010 9:53 AM PST reply actions
If the Angels were moved into the NL West I would not watch baseball any more.
I don’t like any teams in the NL, particularly the NL West. Just move the Brewers back into the AL Central, KC into the AL West (they used to be our big rivals remember) and have an interleague game every day to make up for the odd number in each league.
I am fan various years ago.
I love the floating division plan, but Verducci's interpretation is brain dead.
I haven’t read anything about floating calling for teams to be liable to jump leagues. That is simply insane.
The way I read it, only the bottom feeders would be subject to movement year to year, and traditional rivalries would be protected. And the movement between divisions would only be between adjacent divisions.
So Baltimore would NOT come to the AL West. The Angels would NOT go to the NL West. The Red Sox and Yankees would never be split up. That sort of thiing.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
Does it say how they plan to keep divisions full?
I mean, who wouldnt want to play the nl west teams? Is it like the draft where the worst teams get the best picks or what?
by Balls and Strikes on Mar 11, 2010 12:54 PM PST reply actions
i like what fred said
i floated 4×4×2 alignment a while back, but baseball doesn’t need two more teams. i lie the idea of just going 3×5×2, keep the wild card so some team in the al east has a prayer of sniffing october, and bring milwaukee back where it belongs.
R.I.P. Nick Adenhart - Always an Angel
It's one thing to try and keep some Tradition around...
…and then there’s this. Bunch of shyte and I hate it.
We've gone round and round on this subject at TSN.
Personally, I think baseball can support expansion to two more teams, and the divisions will work out from there…http://www.halosheaven.com/2010/2/2/1288552/total-fun-with-mlb-re-alignment
1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com
Expansion is estupido. It makes it easy to have these chats and solve the world problems. But that is all it does.
In the real world, it is a waste of breath. Consider the costs.
For the new owners:
1. Franchise rights x 2. Figure a minimum of $500 million each.
2. Territory reimbursements for existing franchises if you want to use most any significant population center. Times 2. This could be another $150 million each.
3. Stadium contracts for 3 years in a temporary venue while a permanent home is built. $150 million x 2.
4. New Stadium construction deal, or existing renovation or expansion. Assume local public funds. Still $125 million x 2.
5. Front office staff payroll.
6. Field and international scouting department payroll
7. Minor league affiliations, training camp construction, minor league ballpark contracts/construction.
8. Team payroll. Think $80 million per year, with a financial commitment of about $350 million over the first 4 years, just for the major league roster. Times 2.
9. Minor league contracts for 100 draftees and signees. Due immediately. Times 2.
10. Operating expenses nationwide. Plus some international expenses ongoing. Times 2.
11. And a boatload of miscellaneous expenses that will pile up. For example, advertising contracts to promote the franchise. Times 2.
For the simple act of typing “expansion of two more teams”, you make a comitment of $2 to $2.5 billion.
Oh. And each team in existence will probably lose two players off their active roster, and at least 6 decent prospects out of their minor league system. Lovely.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
Somebody ought to be able to get a measly $2.5 billion from a major bank as a loan
Considering we just gave most of them like 400 times that mount so they could start making loans and investments again.
I’m just sayin’. ;)
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 11, 2010 2:38 PM PST up reply actions
Contraction is the answer
Expansion is idiocy.
You have cities in play right now that cannot even support their franchises.
Get rid of Florida teams and increase each teams roster by two. This would probably never happen in the present. Before that happens you would probably see teams move to Vegas, New Orleans, Raleigh-Durham or dare I say, Mexico City. But that would only be putting off the inevitable. There are parts of this country that simply cannot support MLB.
Contraction doesn’t help MLB’s purported revenue problems, but face it, baseball isn’t the NFL and the potential for growth within the US is limited. Realignment probably is the tip of the iceberg as MLB tries to strain for every bit of revenue for its franchises. We will probably put other similar gimmicks in play for the future. Honestly, I believe that at some point, we’re going to have another strike. The owners will probably try to institute a salary cap, and would only be able to take this action if they broke the union. That means strike, probably in the not to distant future.
But, hey let’s not worry about that for now. Halos in 2010!
by righteous halo on Mar 11, 2010 4:52 PM PST up reply actions
Contraction is idiocy
The baseball talent pool and popularity is growing by leaps and bounds in Latin America. In the not to distant future, Cuba will begin allowing its players to come and play here as well. MLB should be looking for avenues of growth to make use of this coming talent, and find ways to exploit its popularity. The kind of thinking that you propose is tantamount to saying it’s a dying sport when that could not be further from the truth. It is changing, and the League better be ready to change with it, Contraction is, by definition, defeatist thinking.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
by ArchAngel_7 on Mar 11, 2010 10:41 PM PST up reply actions
Just because there is more talent,
doesn’t necessarily mean there will be more interest in the sport.
The problem is that there are cities, (Oak, Fla, etc) who have no business having a baseball team, because fans don’t show up to the games. No fans = no income = no money = no good players = bad team = no fans.
And there being more fans in Cuba or Asia, or anywhere but MLB cities doesn’t help the problem much.
"Precious in the sight of the Lord, is the death of His Saints." - Psalm 116:15 Rest In Peace, Nick.
Exactly the point
Archangel, unless you are suggesting that the Dominican, Cuba or Mexico can support a franchise, then your argument doesn’t hold water. Expansion won’t work, not because there are not enough players, but because there are not enough fans in key locations. And as angels4adams states, if these small market teams cannot draw fans, then they cannot draw revenue and they will forever be fighting a losing battle.
The reason why the whole realignment issue has come up is because of a supposed lack of parity. How will adding a bunch of crummy teams, that draw 5,000 fans a game help parity?
by righteous halo on Mar 12, 2010 7:19 PM PST up reply actions
The Royals
Had no problem drawing fans when they were winning. In most cases, the ones outside Florida, the reason the attendance is down is because their teams are not competitive. Solve that problem with a cap or by increasing the compensation for signing a free agent and the more level playing field will be rewarded by more fans in the seats. The league could also disallow individual team TV contracts and do what the NFL does. Sign contracts as a league and spread the money evenly. I seriously doubt you were an advocate for contracting the Angels in 2002 when MLB was last considering this possibility. The moment baseball accepts the idea that the sport is dying, that prediction will start to become true.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
Wow, you're right!
Because investment groups/corporations can’t raise that kind of scratch, right? I don’t have the money, and is possible that you don’t either, but if there are two groups of people who want to own a ballclub, then they will find a way to finance it and are completely aware of the costs.
It is amazing that 4 teams have expanded since 1993…and also that they all been to the World Series and have won 3 among them.
1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com
Go
here.
Find the two most populous places remaining in America that do not yet have a franchise. Add up the number of people in those two places. You should get a number roughly close to 4,250,000 total people. What are the odds that a bunch of extremely smart money people are going to fork over $4 – 5 billion on a business that needs to draw about 100% of the population every year in order to make money?
Or, to use your example, the Florida Marlins DID come into existence and HAVE won a pair of WS. But that has not been financially susatainable in either case. For the first win, the owner went out on a limb and spent a fortune in payroll, won the WS, and then had to immediately shed the team in the most infamous fire sale in sports history just to remain in business at all. After the second win, the team had to shed players again to remain afloat, and they still are in trouble. They rank last in attendance, are among hte worst franchises in all sports, require the lowest payroll in baseball, and are a prime target for contraction.
Meanwhile, we are in a sustained economis depression with a looking commercial real estate crisis. We may not have the financial health of hte 90’s for another 20 years. Yeah, it’s a great time to go $2 billion in debt on the crapshoot that you can talk the citizens of Portland, Oregon into spending $900 million of their money to build you a domed stadium so you can suck their money dry.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
I guarantee you could get an exec somewhere to fall for that
What’s Tom Hicks doing after he’s done with the Rangers?
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 12, 2010 9:03 AM PST up reply actions
Maybe he can buy the Doyers. THAT is another recent ownership group that is working out well.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
Both the Marlins and Rays
Have piss poor home ballparks. The Marlins are playing in a retro-fitted football stadium and aren’t even in Miami, where most of the diehard baseball fans would be located. The Rays are in a ballpark built to lure the White Sox and the Giants, and it was already 8 years old when they moved in. It is also in St. Pete, when Tampa would have been a better choice. If you build it, they will come…but having a good product will really make them come out in droves. The Marlins also have a new ballpark on the way, making them one of the LAST possibilities for contraction. Our neighbors up north in Oakland are more likely to face the ax, even as far-fetched as that would be. The Marlins have also been the victims of ownership turmoil, from Huizenga, Henry, to now Loria (another reason to be very thankful to Arte Moreno!). Plus, if they can get 87 wins from a $30M payroll, more power to them, as long as they are able to re-sign some of their top talent.
The Cubs were recently sold for nearly $1 Billion. Granted, they are the Cubs, but if a Paul Allen (NW native and owner of the Trail Blazers, Seahawks, and the Sounders) or his ilk decides that baseball is the way to go, then we’ll be adding a team without a doubt. Paul Allen also acquired the Rose Garden (home of the Trail Blazers in Portland), and this may serve as a model for future investors as tax payers have pushed back against the public funding of sports arenas. Mark Cuban was supposedly interested in buying the Cubs, and I’m pretty certain he would be at least interested if San Antonio was a possible expansion site for MLB.
1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com
This realignment plan is muy estupido
Why even keep 6 teams in the “N.L” Central? What is the friggin point? If you’re going to effectively stagger the leagues and make the AL/NL indistinguishable, why not keep interleague play year ’round, so teams could play every day of the week?
1 line siggy line because I was asked nicely. Go Angels! helpfindscottajob@gmail.com
You need to change that.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
For the sake of it.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
I only did it because you made me.
It’s who I am. I can’t change that.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
Ha, reading more closelierest on this subject
I find it funny. If the West teams couldn’t play the East teams you can basically guarantee a dramatic drop off in everything from ESPN coverage to revenue to payroll flexibility.
Like it or not the majority of baseball media coverage and money comes from the East Coast. If you realign baseball and make an entire part of the country unable to tap into that, that entire section is 500% fucked.
No thanks. I would rather play the Yankees so I can actually see coverage of this team from time to time.
I brought sexy back, but they only gave me store credit....
Yeah, I think people who feel this would be a good idea...
…mean well, but are simply mistaken.
by RedFog on Mar 11, 2010 6:45 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Dude.
Wrong.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 11, 2010 8:35 PM PST up reply actions
Oh, you definitely made it haha
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 12, 2010 9:11 AM PST up reply actions
What's your problem, dude? Seriously.
Rec’d
"Precious in the sight of the Lord, is the death of His Saints." - Psalm 116:15 Rest In Peace, Nick.
I don't believe that this kind of plan will ever happen
But I don’t hate it. Playing Texas and the rest 18 times a year, every year is kind of stale. It would be different if we had the kind of heated rivalry that Boston and New York have. At least if we were playing the Dodgers, there would be something at stake besides a game in the standings. The crowds would be huge, the smack talk would be heated and both teams would sell out 18 games that might otherwise be drawing less than full houses. Baseball would be the talk of the town all summer as the two teams battled for the division title. Imagine how exciting it would be to have the Angels, Dodgers, Oakland, San Francisco and San Diego in the same division. Seatle, Colorado, Arizona, Texas, and Houston could make up the other western division. Frankly I think it would be fantastic. Like I said though, I might as well hope for a salary cap. This is an idea that was dead on arrival. Major League Baseball is just not that daring.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
Somewhere there has to be a better idea than a salary cap.
For example, if we could key some category of expenditure to attendance, it would natural cap the differences between teams because stadium capacities are a lot closer than the differences in salary. If a team wanted to spend more they would have to build a bigger facility, and then put a better product on the field to fund it. Other teams could spend more, but they have to create a better draw to get more attendance and more funding.
Whatever. Just a random brain fart. But the desire remains. I just think that salary caps are bad. They represent an artificial method of collusion to prevent players from realizing their true market worth.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
I understand what you are saying
The problem with the current system though, is that there are enough owners willing to pay far beyond what makes sense for players with name recognition. The contracts offered by certain teams are so far beyond what could be reasonably called fair that it has thrown the entire system into an insane slide that will eventually cause disruptions on a large scale. Think about it this way, when Arte Moreno bought the Angels in 2003, he spent 125 million. That 125 million would not even cover the payroll of 5 teams today. We are getting to the point that, in order to sign a superstar like Prince Albert, a smaller market might actually be forced to offer him partial ownership. Meanwhile, a team like the Yankees is spending what 80 to 100 million a year just on the 5 infield positions! Boston is now paying almost 45 million just on their rotation! That’s approaching what some teams are paying for their entire payroll. There are only two answers, control the spending, or increase revenues across the board. That’s it. Any other course of action will lead to a major breakdown in the way the league operates.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
by ArchAngel_7 on Mar 11, 2010 11:08 PM PST up reply actions
I get all that.
The flaw in the current system is that it enables any team to access a resource independent of the competitive enterprise and leverage that resource to compete within the enterprise. This particular flaw, in the context of baseball, is access to raw money. If a team can get that money it can be plied within the system. So any team with more access to that outside resource has more ability to succeed because they can use that resource to acquire more assets than others.
My line of thinking is to find a way to block any pipeline of resources OUTSIDE the competitive enterprise so that they none can be used to warp the competitive opportunities WITHIN the enterprise.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman." - the Immortal Leo Durocher, predicting the coming of Brandon Wood...
this sounds like something that could easily get
effed up, so no.
if i had any kind of faith in the mlb brass, i might be inclined to say sure, why not? but i don’t so i rather suffer through the ok system we have now rather than risk watching it break.
"come on, eileen."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
