Divisions for 32-team Expansion

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Hey, it's your fault! It was American consumers who bought all her records and made her a huge sensation. She wasn't going to be a big star based only on the Quebec (later rest of Canada) market!

Typical Canada: blame the victim.

[Kronos]

I like to create a Canadian baseball league, pair it up with the Mexican league, ignore both.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Kronos

I like to create a Canadian baseball league, pair it up with the Mexican league, ignore both.

Priceless.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by bwburke94

GMO made a schedule for that a loooong time ago.

I wouldn't doubt it. But the question of a suitable format remains, and the more divisions there are, the more it complicates the formatting.

For example, let's take interleague off the table. So we've got 162 games to parcel out for each club in the four divisions. You could have each club play its division rivals 18 times each (54 games total) and play each of the other twelve teams 9 times each (108 games). Teams thus play their division foes twice as frequently, but overall, divisional games only account for one-third of the schedule due to the large number of teams outside the division.

Or, you could have each division rival played 22 times (66 games total), play the teams in one division 12 times each (48 games), and the teams in the other two divisions 6 times each (48 games). (The division played 12 times each can be rotated over a three-year period to even it out.) Divisional games now comprise 40.7% of the overall schedule.

Or you could play each division opponent 30 times each (90 games total) and the other twelve teams 6 times each (72 games). Divisional games account for 55.6% of the overall schedule, but there are an awful lot of games against just three teams.

And so on.

The problem is that, as you increase the number of divisions, if you want divisional games to account for a sizable percentage of the schedule you necessarily reduce the number of games against the rest of the league, and reduce the variety of opponents a club will see. If you instead opt to have more games against the rest of the league, you reduce the number of divisional games, possibly to the point where it begins to make the meaningfulness of the divisions questionable.

(Personally, I think the ideal division size is 6 teams. Not too large, not too small. As Goldilocks would say, it's just right! )

[Clemente21PIT]

You could take away interleague play, (because it sucks and is confusing), have 16 teams per league, 4 divisions, and a 165 game schedule.

Each team plays their league opponents 11 times, which equals 2, four game series and a one, three game series.

OR

Each team plays division opponents 27 times (nine 3-game series), and plays everybody else in the league 8 times each, (two 4-game series)

[Clemente21PIT]

In another league, I had 32 teams, with 4 divisions in each sub league. I then paired up each team with a locational rival and then made the divisions from that. If I recall correctly, Cleveland had moved to Brooklyn while Montreal and Portland were the expansion teams. The groupings were:

East: Mets, Yankees, Brooklyn, Red Sox
North: Montreal, Toronto, Tigers, Twins
East: Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Orioles, Nationals
South: Tampa Bay, Miami, Atlanta, Kansas City
North: Reds, Brewers, Cubs, White Sox
West: Seattle, Portland, Oakland, San Francisco
South: Rangers, Astros, Diamondbacks, Cardinals
West: Dodgers, Angels, Padres, Rockies

This is what I think it was. Of course, the divisions were separated into the different leagues. I wanted Kansas City and St. Louis to be in the same division, but I was not willing to have Arizona relocate.

[The Wolf]

I have two 16 team leagues of 4 divisions each, with no interleague play.

Each team plays the other three teams in its division 18 times, for a total of 54 games.

Each team plays the other 12 teams in the league 9 times, for a total of 108 games.

Grand total: 162 games

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Clemente21PIT

You could take away interleague play, (because it sucks and is confusing), have 16 teams per league, 4 divisions, and a 165 game schedule.

Each team plays their league opponents 11 times, which equals 2, four game series and a one, three game series.

A balanced schedule such as that makes the divisions arbitrary and meaningless.

Originally Posted by Clemente21PIT

Each team plays division opponents 27 times (nine 3-game series), and plays everybody else in the league 8 times each, (two 4-game series)

Same basic issue: a lot of games against a very small number of teams. (Also, I don't think that format would work out under modern scheduling principles: too many four-game series. MLB seasons typically have either 52 or 54 series played by each club.)