2008 MLB Thread

[zell]

Hey guys,tell me what you think about this idea.

It seems to me that baseball is a little unfair as far how the divisions are lined up.You have 30 total teams in the MLB and 6 separate divisions,that would mean that you should have 5 teams per division,right? For some reason that I find just totally unfathomable, they have one division with only 4 teams and another with 6. Is this the stupidest shit ever,or what?

One division (AL West)has a really big advantage as far as teams getting into the playoffs because they only have to compete with only 3 other teams instead of 4 like all of the other divisions,except for the NL Central that has to compete with 5 other teams,which is a really big disadvantage(theoretically,because two of those teams have sucked for years and so it's kinda like really competing only with 3 other teams,but you get the point).

Case in point;during this past off season Torii Hunter was interviewed here on a local Chicago sports talk radio show and they asked him why he ended up signing with the Angels instead of the White Sox and he said that it was because he wanted to go somewhere that gave him the best chance to win.He explained that it wasn't because he didn't believe that the Sox were going to be bad this year,he just wanted to get out of the AL Central because there was too much competition and he was playing to odds by going to the Angels where,mathematically,there was less competition because there are less teams to compete against to win the division title.

What the fuck is wrong with Bud Selig?!Does he not see that moving things around a little bit can only be beneficial to the game?So here's what I would do, and it's an easy fix,you move the KC Royals to the AL West to give that division,take the Brewers out of the NL Central and put them back in the AL,going obviously to the central,and VOILA! You now magically have 5 teams in each division and the competitions is even across the board with every team having to compete against 4 teams to win a division.What the fuck is so hard about that Bud?!:thefinger

 

[ChefChiTown]

Hey guys,tell me what you think about this idea.

It seems to me that baseball is a little unfair as far how the divisions are lined up.You have 30 total teams in the MLB and 6 separate divisions,that would mean that you should have 5 teams per division,right? For some reason that I find just totally unfathomable, they have one division with only 4 teams and another with 6. Is this the stupidest shit ever,or what?

One division (AL West)has a really big advantage as far as teams getting into the playoffs because they only have to compete with only 3 other teams instead of 4 like all of the other divisions,except for the NL Central that has to compete with 5 other teams,which is a really big disadvantage(theoretically,because two of those teams have sucked for years and so it's kinda like really competing only with 3 other teams,but you get the point).

Case in point;during this past off season Torii Hunter was interviewed here on a local Chicago sports talk radio show and they asked him why he ended up signing with the Angels instead of the White Sox and he said that it was because he wanted to go somewhere that gave him the best chance to win.He explained that it wasn't because he didn't believe that the Sox were going to be bad this year,he just wanted to get out of the AL Central because there was too much competition and he was playing to odds by going to the Angels where,mathematically,there was less competition because there are less teams to compete against to win the division title.

What the fuck is wrong with Bud Selig?!Does he not see that moving things around a little bit can only be beneficial to the game?So here's what I would do, and it's an easy fix,you move the KC Royals to the AL West to give that division,take the Brewers out of the NL Central and put them back in the AL,going obviously to the central,and VOILA! You now magically have 5 teams in each division and the competitions is even across the board with every team having to compete against 4 teams to win a division.What the fuck is so hard about that Bud?!:thefinger

Here's a really simple answer to that question...

There are 4 teams in one division and 6 in another because MLB wants to add 2 more expansion teams within the next few years. By keeping a division with "only 4 teams" in it, it makes it seem like there needs to be another team, but, God forbid they move all of the divisions around (again)...they'll just add another team to the league because it's easier!!!

The division "system" in MLB used to be really whacked, and honestly, I think it's better now, even though there is a 4 team division and a 6 team division. Remember when the White Sox were in the AL WEST?!?!?! Enough said.

 

[zell]

Here's a really simple answer to that question...

There are 4 teams in one division and 6 in another because MLB wants to add 2 more expansion teams within the next few years. By keeping a division with "only 4 teams" in it, it makes it seem like there needs to be another team, but, God forbid they move all of the divisions around (again)...they'll just add another team to the league because it's easier!!!

The division "system" in MLB used to be really whacked, and honestly, I think it's better now, even though there is a 4 team division and a 6 team division. Remember when the White Sox were in the AL WEST?!?!?! Enough said.

I got to be honest with you Chef,I think that it would be a stupid idea for MLB to add any more team into the league,30 is a perfect number.And why add 2 more teams instead of just one in the AL West?

I do think that the divisions are better now as well than what they used to be,but it still doesn't make sense to not even the divisions out.

Oh,and thinking of expansion,where would even be a good place to add more teams? At with the last four teams to enter the league,3 out of the 4 markets were good places to put teams(Tampa just won the AL East and are people still not showing up to the games?).I can't think of a good market out west that would yield good attendance for a new franchise to build a good team.Remember,there is no salary cap in baseball,so it's really hard for smaller markets to do good,not impossible,but very difficult.

The one and only place on the map that I can see,and further more,am surprised that there is no professional baseball in the area,is Indianapolis.Definitely not a huge market but one that could support a baseball team,I think.What aboot another team in Canada?Maybe in Edmonton or Calgary? Vancouver is too close to Seattle to put another team but ultimately,is there even any real interest to bring another team up there?

 

[ChefChiTown]

I got to be honest with you Chef,I think that it would be a stupid idea for MLB to add any more team into the league,30 is a perfect number.And why add 2 more teams instead of just one in the AL West?

Oh, it would be a completely stupid idea to add more teams. But, it's a professional sport and "they" always think that more teams equals more money. Personally, I think that 30 teams is a perfect number too, but...greed, it's a funny thing.

Oh,and thinking of expansion,where would even be a good place to add more teams? At with the last four teams to enter the league,3 out of the 4 markets were good places to put teams(Tampa just won the AL East and are people still not showing up to the games?).I can't think of a good market out west that would yield good attendance for a new franchise to build a good team.Remember,there is no salary cap in baseball,so it's really hard for smaller markets to do good,not impossible,but very difficult.

I've heard that Puerto Rico is still in the mix (WHY? I don't know.) as well as another Canadian location. MLB is waiting to see if the popularity of the Toronto Blue Jays picks up (which it is) and if it gets to a high enough point, they will probably add another Canadian team to further their effort to make MLB a world-wide sport. Just like the NFL is "testing" the European market by holding games overseas, MLB is doing the same thing.

What aboot another team in Canada?

HA!!! Aboot!!!

 

[zell]

HA!!! Aboot!!!

Thought you'd like that.

I guess a team in PR would do good financially.

Bud is a fuckhead though and should just move the shit around like I suggested.Maybe when he's out of there(fingers crossed that it's soon),then the next guy will step in and make the right decisions for the league.I don't know if I would like a salary cap in baseball like a lot of other people would though.I get enormous pleasure out of seeing teams like the Yankees go out and spend more money than any other team in the league,then don't even make the playoffs.:1orglaugh
Or the Tigers,that were supposed to be this juggernaut that would just clean house and ship into the playoffs whistling a happy tune.:1orglaugh

That's the shit that I enjoy the most.

 

[PlasmaTwa2]

What aboot another team in Canada?Maybe in Edmonton or Calgary? Vancouver is too close to Seattle to put another team but ultimately,is there even any real interest to bring another team up there?

Calgary and Edmonton are just too small to have a team. Outside of Toronto, Montreal is the only market that could theoretically support a team, but over there there is just no interest. It is a hockey town over there.

Vancouver might possibly work, they built their stadium to try and get one, but like you said, it's close to Seattle.

 

[rodfarva]

Calgary and Edmonton are just too small to have a team. Outside of Toronto, Montreal is the only market that could theoretically support a team, but over there there is just no interest. It is a hockey town over there.

Vancouver might possibly work, they built their stadium to try and get one, but like you said, it's close to Seattle.

It's not that Edmonton and Calgary are too small. There are lots of MLB cities that are actually smaller than Edmonton or Calgary, or at least around the same size. For example, Atlanta, Baltimore, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Denver, Kansas City, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Seattle, etc. And most of those cities have pretty good fan support. I'm from Edmonton, and I definitely agree that they should NEVER get an MLB team, but not because of the size of the city, but because of the interest in baseball. I played baseball in Edmonton when I was 17 and 18 and there were only TWO teams in the whole city for that age group. My team, and one other. The Oilers and hockey are just SO big in Edmonton and the Canadiens in Montreal, and even the Flames in Calgary that the only other sport they can support is the Canadian Football League. Vancouver is the ONLY Canadian city which has any chance at all of supporting an MLB team, but if expansion is going to happen, then there are many American cities which deserve to get it first (Dallas, San Antonio, Memphis, Portland, Las Vegas, Nashville, etc.).

As for Zell's point about the structure of the league not making sense, I totally agree. Selig, the moron, moved Milwaukee to the NL for no apparent reason and screwed everything up. Look at the NHL and NFL and NBA. The NHL and NBA both have 30 teams with 15 of them in each of the two conferences, each conference with three divisions, and each division with 5 teams, makes perfect sense. The NFL has 32 teams with 16 of them in each of the two conferences, each conference with four divisions, and each division with 4 teams, makes perfect sense. Now, the MLB: 30 teams in two leagues with 16 of them in the NL and 14 of them in the AL, three divisions in each league, two in the AL with 5 teams and one with 4 teams, then in the NL two divisions with 5 teams and one with 6 teams. That's ludicrous. It is unfair to the NL Central and it gives the AL West an unfair advantage. I know you said most of this Zell, but bear with it. It's such an easy fix, just send Milwaukee back to the AL, put them in the Central, and put KC in the West, done deal. But Selig is an idiot. He should've resigned as soon as the steroids issue blew up in his face, almost any businessman in a similar situation would've done so.

And Chef made a great point about the MLB seeing expansion as a good thing. It's like any business, open more locations and that means that we're growing as a company. Not always true. Opening locations in the right place where they're going to succeed and closing ones which aren't working will ultimately be better for business.

 

[PlasmaTwa2]

It's not that Edmonton and Calgary are too small. There are lots of MLB cities that are actually smaller than Edmonton or Calgary, or at least around the same size. For example, Atlanta, Baltimore, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Denver, Kansas City, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Seattle, etc. And most of those cities have pretty good fan support.

Well, let me put it this way. All the cities that you just said, they all have metro areas of several million people, and hence they have large tv markets. Calgary and Edmonton, for the NHL, are the two smallest markets. The cities proper are bigger then, say, Seattle, but Seattle's metro area is over three times the size of Calgary's. In fact, the metro of Seattle is approximately the same as the population of Alberta.

 

[zell]

Calgary and Edmonton are just too small to have a team. Outside of Toronto, Montreal is the only market that could theoretically support a team, but over there there is just no interest. It is a hockey town over there.

Vancouver might possibly work, they built their stadium to try and get one, but like you said, it's close to Seattle.

Thanks for the info.I'm not that familiar with Canada as a whole and that's why I asked.

 

[darkwarrior3007]

Okay I'm sad now.:crying::weeping::bawling:

 

[bodie54]

Holy shit!

What are the odds of a team getting knocked out of the playoffs on closing day two years in a row?

Damn, they'd better set up a suicide watch for Mets fans :eek:

 

[rodfarva]

Well, let me put it this way. All the cities that you just said, they all have metro areas of several million people, and hence they have large tv markets. Calgary and Edmonton, for the NHL, are the two smallest markets. The cities proper are bigger then, say, Seattle, but Seattle's metro area is over three times the size of Calgary's. In fact, the metro of Seattle is approximately the same as the population of Alberta.

Fair enough, but the point I was making is simply that there's not enough interest in baseball and that's why Calgary and Edmonton shouldn't get teams. Given the amazing support of their hockey and football teams, they could both support teams despite their size, given that the interest were there, but as for baseball, it just isn't.

 

[zell]

Fair enough, but the point I was making is simply that there's not enough interest in baseball and that's why Calgary and Edmonton shouldn't get teams. Given the amazing support of their hockey and football teams, they could both support teams despite their size, given that the interest were there, but as for baseball, it just isn't.

This is more or less what I was asking about.Is there enough interest in Calgary and Edmonton to support baseball?Seems that the vast majority of Canada doesn't give a shit about baseball.

 

[Becks...poamr]

May the best team win.

And perhaps they did, depending on which team you root for. :angels:

Remember when the White Sox were in the AL WEST?!?!?!

I remember Atlanta being in the NL West. So THERE. :tongue:





Now I'm off to fulfill my pledge to pee my pants if the Brewers made the playoffs. :wave:

 

[ChefChiTown]

Now I'm off to fulfill my pledge to pee my pants if the Brewers made the playoffs. :wave:

Put those pants in a Ziploc bag and send them to:

ATTN: ChefChiTown
PO BOX 1234
Chicago, IL 60625

 

[Becks...poamr]

Put those pants in a Ziploc bag and send them to:

ATTN: ChefChiTown
PO BOX 1234
Chicago, IL 60625

Will do, but I must tell you that Senob pledged, too.

 

[ChefChiTown]

Will do, but I must tell you that Senob pledged, too.

The more...the merrier. Especially when it comes to urination soaking.

 

[Becks...poamr]

The more...the merrier. Especially when it comes to urination soaking.

Now that I know your fetish, you'll be shown no mercy.

 

[Dean Wormer]

Here's a really simple answer to that question...

There are 4 teams in one division and 6 in another because MLB wants to add 2 more expansion teams within the next few years. By keeping a division with "only 4 teams" in it, it makes it seem like there needs to be another team, but, God forbid they move all of the divisions around (again)...they'll just add another team to the league because it's easier!!!

The division "system" in MLB used to be really whacked, and honestly, I think it's better now, even though there is a 4 team division and a 6 team division. Remember when the White Sox were in the AL WEST?!?!?! Enough said.

I remember when the Milwaukee Brewers were in the American League West and were called the Seattle Pilots (1969).

The reason there is the odd configuration of divisions is because if they divided the 30 teams into two 15 team leagues with 5 teams in each division there would have to be at least one inter-league meeting every day. That's hardly a way to market the concept each year as something "special" as they currently do every May/June when it's inter-league season.

 

[Red001]

bud moved the brewers to the nl because when he grew up in Milwaukee they where the braves having relocated from Boston i believe that team moved to Atlanta in the late 60's because attendance in Milwaukee was 200k to 300k. I'm glad the brewers made the playoffs many of my former coworkers are very happy

red001