MLB realignment - I need your opinion!

[Le Grande Orange]

For a long time I've thought about writing up a schedule for an MLB alignment that had three 5 team divisions in each league. But I can't decide on which alignment of teams in each of the three divisions in each league to use, and I need to know that due to the way I want to implement interleague play.

Thus, I need your opinion!

There are three main options. Two of them were actually under consideration by MLB for the 1998 season's expansion, and the third is my own personal plan.

PLAN A

This was the simplest plan, requiring no switching of teams from the 1997 alignment. Arizona would've been added to the NL West division and Tampa Bay would've been added to the AL West division. The result would have looked like this:

           American League
East          Central       West
Baltimore     Chicago       Anaheim
Boston        Cleveland     Oakland
Detroit       Kansas City   Seattle
New York      Milwaukee     Tampa Bay
Toronto       Minnesota     Texas

           National League
East          Central       West
Atlanta       Chicago       Arizona
Florida       Cincinnati    Colorado
Montreal      Houston       Los Angeles
New York      Pittsburgh    San Diego
Philadelphia  St. Louis     San Francisco

This plan is my least favourite, since the AL West division looks very odd with Tampa Bay in there, but it at least means no teams would be shifted from their current divisions, nor would any teams have to change leagues.

PLAN B

This was MLB's second plan for three 5 team divisions in each league. Tampa Bay would be added to the AL East and Arizona to the NL West, and Detroit would be shifted from the AL East to the AL Central. Kansas City and Houston would switch leagues, with KC moving to the NL Central and Houston going into the AL West.

The result would look like this:

           American League
East          Central       West
Baltimore     Chicago       Anaheim
Boston        Cleveland     Houston
New York      Detroit       Oakland
Tampa Bay     Milwaukee     Seattle
Toronto       Minnesota     Texas

           National League
East          Central       West
Atlanta       Chicago       Arizona
Florida       Cincinnati    Colorado
Montreal      Pittsburgh    Los Angeles
New York      Kansas City   San Diego
Philadelphia  St. Louis     San Francisco

This plan is pretty good, and certainly would make my concept for interleague play easier to handle. However, two teams are switching leagues and I'm not particularly fond of that idea.

PLAN C

This plan is entirely my own idea. Tampa Bay is added to the AL East and Arizona to the NL West. Detroit shifts from the AL East to the AL Central, while Kansas City shifts from the AL Central into the AL West. No teams switch divisions in the NL, and no MLB team has to change leagues.

The result looks like this:

           American League
East          Central       West
Baltimore     Chicago       Anaheim
Boston        Cleveland     Kansas City
New York      Detroit       Oakland
Tampa Bay     Milwaukee     Seattle
Toronto       Minnesota     Texas

           National League
East          Central       West
Atlanta       Chicago       Arizona
Florida       Cincinnati    Colorado
Montreal      Houston       Los Angeles
New York      Pittsburgh    San Diego
Philadelphia  St. Louis     San Francisco

I like this plan the best, since no teams are required to switch leagues, and only two teams in the AL have to change divisions. The only drawback is that this alignment is a bit more difficult to set up the interleague games the way I want.

Anyway, those are the three plans, so vote for your favourite! I need to pick a plan to use as the basis for the schedule, so please give me some guidance!

Feel free to post any comments, or if you have a plan of your own you think is better, post that as well.

[GoldenGlove]

Colorado to AL West
Houston to NL West

...would be my choice. Colorado should be an American League team and Houston and Texas shouldn't be in the same division.

EDIT: That would be with Milwaukee in the NL Central.

[kq76]

I dunno. With C you would have the great rivalries of KC-St.L and Hou-Tex, but then you have less opportunity to see players in the other league which you would have with B. I couldn't see MLB picking C for a number of reasons. I like the idea of more regional divisions myself though so I would pick C.

[Deitrus]

I thought you needed an even amount of teams in the league (each respective leagues. ie: NL & AL).

[Tiger Fan]

Originally posted by Deitrus
I thought you needed an even amount of teams in the league (each respective leagues. ie: NL & AL).

Not if interleague is spread out so that one interleague series is always going on. As for OOTP6, it would support the odd number of teams in a league as long as a custom schedule was created.


Personally, I like plan B the best. It adds a couple of geographical rivalries and as an allignment it makes sense.

[jaymac89]

When you can import and export csv's of schedules, a very nice addition by the way, I think its going to make it easier to have two leagues with odd numbers of teams.

The main thing I don't like about odd numbers is how each week there are two teams playing interleague and that is added on top of at least one team out of a 5 team division is playing out of division. I like that last few weeks to be intradivision only.

I would be curious to see how that league works out.

[Malleus Dei]

Plan MD: Two leagues, no divisions, 8 teams per league

[Ol'Drippy]

One other thing that's always bugged me: Atlanta and Pittsburgh should be switched. Atlanta played for years in the West and would fit better in the central.

[Le Grande Orange]

Thanks for the votes, and keep 'em coming! As of this post it's 5-2 in favour of Plan C.

Originally posted by jaymac89
The main thing I don't like about odd numbers is how each week there are two teams playing interleague and that is added on top of at least one team out of a 5 team division is playing out of division. I like that last few weeks to be intradivision only.

The AL faced a similar problem back when it had two 7 team divisions. It only used a divisionally weighted schedule for two years before giving up on it as too difficult to schedule and going with a balanced schedule.

I disagree with the AL's assessment and say a divisionally weighted schedule with two 7 team divisions is not that difficult to do. I plan on writing up that one as well at some point.

As to an interleague series having to happen all the time, yes, that's true, however in most weeks it'll be only one series at a time. The same is true for interdivisional contests.

There is a way that the interleague games could be limited to just one series a week for the first few weeks of the season, rather than the expected two series per week. This can be done by a careful use of 2 game series and allowing a single instance of a team getting 2 days off in a row. I worked out the theory for this, but it remains to be seen if I can get it to work in practice.

Originally posted by Malleus Dei
Plan MD: Two leagues, no divisions, 8 teams per league

Heheh, how did I know you'd say that?

Personally, I like that classic alignment too, though my personal favourite is probably two leagues with each split into two 6 team divisions.

[rdklein]

Houston should never be in the American League! I'd sell my season tickets if I had to watch Anaheim, Oakland, and Seattle 30 times a year.

On second thought...

This is coming from a guy who payed $1200 to watch Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, and Cincinnati 30 times a year.

Don't listen to me.

[Brick]

AL East-Baltimore, Boston, New York, Tampa Bay, Toronto
AL Central-Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City, Minnesota
AL West-Anaheim, Arizona, Oakland, Seattle, Texas
NL East-Atlanta, Florida, Montreal, New York, Philadelphia
NL Central-Chicago, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, St. Louis
NL West-Colorado, Houston, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco

Milwaukee ended up changing leagues anyway. Arizona should have been in the AL West so that the two mountain teams would be in different leagues.

[swampdragon]

The real problem, of course, is that you need 10 teams in the West but only have 8 teams in the Pacific and Mountain time zones. So 2 teams in the Central or Eastern time zones have to be shoehorned into the West, and none of them want to be there. My favorite solution is to take two natural rivals and put them both in the AL West along with the 3 teams which are actually on the West Coast. Using Houston and Texas (plan B) really overloads the AL West and forces Houston to change leagues. My personal favorite:
AL East: Baltimore, Boston, Yankees, Tampa Bay, Detroit
AL Central: Cleveland, White Sox, Minnesota, Kansas City, Texas
AL West: Anaheim, Oakland, Seattle, Toronto, Montreal

NL East: Florida, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Mets, Pittsburgh
NL Central: Milwaukee, Cubs, St. Louis, Houston, Cincinnati
NL West: Los Angeles, San Diego, Arizona, Colorado, San Francisco

[rogmax11]

LGO, with the ability to edit team names, why not just build the schedule using team "A", team "B", etc. , and then entering or editing the team names after you've input the schedule?

I do have a question concerning user-input schedules with interleague play: does the game run into trouble keeping the interleague opponents correctly slotted in subsequent seasons? I know that OOTP in the past would vary the scheduled teams dependent upon previous season standings, thus imparting some variety to the schedule. But what happens with interleague play? Does the program confuse L1 teams with L2 teams in future years?

FWIW, I favor either "classic MLB" set-ups ( ala MD ), or two leagues, two divisions each, 6 teams per division. When wild cards rear their ugly heads I tend to feel nauseated, particularly with OOTPs penchant for WCs to triumph too often in post-season.

The best solution I ever found for 3-division or 3-league arrangements was to have an 8-team post-season tournament, seeding division (or league ) winners 1-3, and filling out 4-8 by W/L record. Of course, as constituted, one cannot do this with OOTP.

Of the choices offered, I vote for "B'.

[rogmax11]

Added thought: Whenever I get around to it, I intend to redo history a bit differently, and begin in 1901 with 2 leagues, 2 divs, 6 teams per div, aligned loosely around geographical proximity. None of this Tampa Bay in the West nonesense; in fact, none of Tampa Bay at all. With free-agency, drafts, etc., the team compositions will be moot for rivalry purposes, and therefore location will drive the competitive process--or so I hope. Anyway, heres what Ive settled on:

AL East: Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, Baltimore.

AL Central: Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Milwaukee.

NL West: Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix.

NL South: Houston, Dallas, New Orleans, Atlanta, Miami, TBD.

I just cant make myself type Tampa Bay.

[Gastric ReFlux]

Move Tampa Bay to Honolulu, and put them in the West.

[rogmax11]

Nah, GR, I need a city that dovetails into the Dixie fan base. I waffle around between Nashville, Memphis, Little Rock, Charlotte, and so on. Ive filled out reams of scratch pads drawing up various configs whilst awaiting the arrival of my CD. It helps to pass the time.

Edit- Just realized GR may not be responding to moi. Excuse the ego-centrism, if you please.

[Gastric ReFlux]

Originally posted by rogmax11
Nah, GR, I need a city that dovetails into the Dixie fan base. I waffle around between Nashville, Memphis, Little Rock, Charlotte, and so on. Ive filled out reams of scratch pads drawing up various configs whilst awaiting the arrival of my CD. It helps to pass the time.

Edit- Just realized GR may not be responding to moi. Excuse the ego-centrism, if you please.

How dare you suggest my suggestion wouldn't work for you!

[Eckstein 4 Prez]

Originally posted by Brick
AL East-Baltimore, Boston, New York, Tampa Bay, Toronto
AL Central-Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City, Minnesota
AL West-Anaheim, Arizona, Oakland, Seattle, Texas
NL East-Atlanta, Florida, Montreal, New York, Philadelphia
NL Central-Chicago, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, St. Louis
NL West-Colorado, Houston, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco

Milwaukee ended up changing leagues anyway. Arizona should have been in the AL West so that the two mountain teams would be in different leagues.

I actually really like this one.

[rogmax11]

Yup, Eck, me too: nothing like anticipating that legendary Tampa Bay-Toronto rivalry!

[Joe Canadian]

Anything that will move the Jays out of the East, so they don't wind up in 3rd place every single year. But out of the ones you posted Plan C, although B is a close second.