Mach does realignment again! (MLB, not MSL) (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

BD

not in hiding from the government
Joined
Jan 9, 2016
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
4,922
Also, playing the Reds would be much better than sharing a division with the Royals.


Sent from the pits of hell using Tapatalk
 

hammer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 27, 2015
Messages
21,583
Reaction score
4,407
I'm not sure there's any long term way the 4 stay together. In a 32 team 4 team division, that almost certainly includes Montreal who are likely paired with Toronto. It could be easily done in a 32 team 8 team divsion, but then the Mets are there too.
put montreal with detroit, the white sox and twins. no one gives a shit about any of those teams anyway.
 

hammer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 27, 2015
Messages
21,583
Reaction score
4,407
That makes no sense. If that happens, Toronto would be with them anyway.
it makes all the sense in a league where the only division that matters is the al east. your face makes no sense!
 

realmofotalk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2020
Messages
859
Reaction score
222
it makes all the sense in a league where the only division that matters is the al east. your face makes no sense!
In my version, you'd still have Baltimore and Tampa Bay. If TB relocates to Montreal, then flip them with another East team or expansion team.
 

BD

not in hiding from the government
Joined
Jan 9, 2016
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
4,922
put montreal with detroit, the white sox and twins. no one gives a shit about any of those teams anyway.

He is right, I am a Sox fan and give zero shits.


Sent from the pits of hell using Tapatalk
 

BD

not in hiding from the government
Joined
Jan 9, 2016
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
4,922
it makes all the sense in a league where the only division that matters is the al east. your face makes no sense!

I too find his face perplexing


Sent from the pits of hell using Tapatalk
 

Handicapper General

The Straw That Stirs The Drink
Joined
May 21, 2014
Messages
18,738
Reaction score
5,611
After screwing around with ideas of wanting to keep really long time groupings intact, I noticed something else that may be valid:
1590284031446.png

This allows both Chicago teams to be in the west while keeping the White Sox long time rivals (Twins and Royals) filling in the vagabond Rockies as team #4 and pairing the Texas teams with the Cubs and Cardinals. The Rangers aren't a natural fit anywhere except with Houston, and Houston has history with the Cubs and Cardinals (unlike the Rockies and Royals who they would otherwise be paired with).

The Brewers and Reds pair with the long time Indians and Tigers. The Brewers have history with the two of them, and the Reds have ties to the Brewers obviously, while also kind of historically being moved around.

I opted to split the "NL East" into two groups. I think they want to keep Atlanta and Washington going and the Braves don't have as long of a history with the others having been in the West just as long, and the Phillies and Mets have been together forever. As such, the Braves and Nationals take the Marlins with them along with Tampa, or if Tampa's gone, the likely Charlotte team.

In the East, the Pirates go back to their longtime rivals, and we introduce the Orioles. They're a natural fit geographically and still get a couple of big markets to bring in money. If wanted, you could swap Baltimore and Washington, but I doubt they go that way.

The Northeast remains the two Canadian teams and the Yankees/Red Sox, angering Hammer.

After deep thought, I think this one may have a lot of traction.
- You keep the big rivalries together, save Atlanta (who very much want regional rivals), while also keeping the big dual markets separate without funny business
- The geography works very well, with every new division having at least two history lines/rivals instead of something with less weight such as the Houston, Texas, Colorado, KC randomness
- Baltimore gets the best of all worlds in a sense - big markets but a fighting chance
- Pittsburgh goes home
 

HollywoodLeo

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
2,536
Reaction score
634
So, every so often I get bored and start playing around with these. I used to spend most of the time on these for hockey, but then they finally listened to me and did it corredtly. Baseball has been something I toyed with every so often, but now with the "interim" realignment and the rules (universal DH) they've adopted, I'm almost certain they'll use this as the excuse to finally permanently realign (and keep the universal DH).

So what could that look like? I'll post different scenarios.

Say, for some reason, they want to keep the 6 division format. Here's what it could look like:
View attachment 1097
You have some oddities: Seattle has no home, so they force San Diego out with a couple of other NL West folks. I don't love moving the Padres away, but placing Seattle anywhere else is difficult. @realmofotalk will lose a team he hates, but I'm certain he can hate the A's and the non-Hollywood Angels as much. You can switch Seattle to the Midwest and call it something else, push KC to the Mountain, and San Diego back to the Pacific.

You could switch the Twins and Brewers. The Twins are more north, the Brewers more east. I deferred to the White Sox/Twins rivalry.

The Orioles and Nationals being in a South division is jarring, but no other fit works. Baltimore has long wanted to be away from the Yankees and Red Sox anyway.

Another oddity is Pittsburgh in the Atlantic and the Blue Jays in the North. The Pirates have been begging and screaming to be back with the Mets and Phillies. Toronto isn't as far east as people think, though it is slightly more eastern than Pittsburgh (though Pittsburgh is more eastern than Atlanta...), and they don't have a natural rivalry anyway. Nevertheless, you could switch them and the Pirates.

In the likely event the Rays move to Montreal, you have some easy fixes:
The Reds to the South
The Expos to the North (with Toronto)
Or you can swap the two Canadian teams with the Pennsylvania teams

Overall, I'd prefer the current structure over this one. I'm not a huge fan of the "South" and the Pacific shuffle is kind of a funky mess. It also doesn't keep in mind (likely) expansion.

But this was the first of a few, and probably my second least favourite. Next up, a more familiar and nuanced idea.
Why you gonna kill the Padres - Dodgers rivalry?

Put Seattle in the Mountain and rename the Pacific division the California division.
 

BD

not in hiding from the government
Joined
Jan 9, 2016
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
4,922
At least his Central Division is all the known cheaters.
 

Handicapper General

The Straw That Stirs The Drink
Joined
May 21, 2014
Messages
18,738
Reaction score
5,611
Why you gonna kill the Padres - Dodgers rivalry?

Put Seattle in the Mountain and rename the Pacific division the California division.
I covered all that in that same post, and even said that alignment sucked.
 

Handicapper General

The Straw That Stirs The Drink
Joined
May 21, 2014
Messages
18,738
Reaction score
5,611
Why you gonna kill the Padres - Dodgers rivalry?

Put Seattle in the Mountain and rename the Pacific division the California division.
That said, Seattle makes no sense there as they are all south, if not central. And I hate naming a division after a state. What I'd likely do is just keep the West divisions as they are and figure out some names.
 

HollywoodLeo

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 13, 2015
Messages
2,536
Reaction score
634
That said, Seattle makes no sense there as they are all south, if not central. And I hate naming a division after a state. What I'd likely do is just keep the West divisions as they are and figure out some names.

None of those teams really make sense in a "Mountain" division.

At least the California teams all share something in common, even if you don't want to name it that.
 

Handicapper General

The Straw That Stirs The Drink
Joined
May 21, 2014
Messages
18,738
Reaction score
5,611
None of those teams really make sense in a "Mountain" division.

At least the California teams all share something in common, even if you don't want to name it that.
If I call it a southwest division, SD makes sense now and SEA doesn't. The name's not really crucial, save my annoyance at naming something after a state. Go nitpick the last one I posted as that one I actually care about!
 

realmofotalk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2020
Messages
859
Reaction score
222
I begrudgingly arrived at the conclusion that I wouldn't change a thing with your last proposal just because your Midwest works out well. I played around with the Central and Midwest divisions below, and while the Central is sexier, my latest Midwest is no better than the KC and Colorado randomness.

Central:
Chicago Cubs
Chicago White Sox
St. Louis
Kansas City

Midwest:
Colorado
Houston
Texas
Milwaukee

North:
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Minnesota
Detroit
 

Handicapper General

The Straw That Stirs The Drink
Joined
May 21, 2014
Messages
18,738
Reaction score
5,611
I begrudgingly arrived at the conclusion that I wouldn't change a thing with your last proposal just because your Midwest works out well. I played around with the Central and Midwest divisions below, and while the Central is sexier, my latest Midwest is no better than the KC and Colorado randomness.

Central:
Chicago Cubs
Chicago White Sox
St. Louis
Kansas City

Midwest:
Colorado
Houston
Texas
Milwaukee

North:
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Minnesota
Detroit
I looked at that option actaully, but Minny being further away, and that they've always been with the White Sox helped scuttle. Milwaukee also has history with Detroit and Cleveland, which gives Cincy a tether too (though it has a great one with Cleveland).

I also loved you separate city/division idea. Enabled it to look even better.
 

Mach Jones

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2015
Messages
12,777
Reaction score
3,588
 

Handicapper General

The Straw That Stirs The Drink
Joined
May 21, 2014
Messages
18,738
Reaction score
5,611
interesting, when did Atlanta and Pittsburgh switch? The original had them flipped.
 
Top