MLB contraction that will eliminate 2 teams?

[riverside sluggers]

This is coming from http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2006/02/contraction_on_.html

http://www.all-baseball.com/cubreporter/archives/021825.html

so take it as its worth.

 

Apparently the MLB will have a 3 month window to decide if 1 or 2 teams could be eliminated from baseball for the 2007 season. The teams mainly include teams who are having stadium issues such as the Twins, Nationals & Marlins. Other teams referenced are the Devil Rays & Rockies. Just something that had caught my eye.

[jsinger121]

i dont see it.

[KeepTheFaith1229]

Here's something else for them to do...how about like moving one of the teams from the NL Central to the AL West? Eh?

[yeszir]

Elmininating the Twins/Nats would be ridiculous. Both have a loyal fan base which should be able to convince the FOs to get a stadium done if it means contraction.

[jsinger121]

that would cause MLB to have interleague play throughout the entire season....the reason they have the setup now is to avoid that.

[KeepTheFaith1229]

that would cause MLB to have interleague play throughout the entire season....the reason they have the setup now is to avoid that.

 

I like interleague play.

[jsinger121]

I like interleague play.

 

i don't mind it either but i don't want to have it for the whole year. i like it only for the month of june and early july. MLB will never go 15 and 15 for each league.

[KeepTheFaith1229]

i don't mind it either but i don't want to have it for the whole year. i like it only for the month of june and early july. MLB will never go 15 and 15 for each league.

 

True, but it can be unfair that AL West teams have less competition, and NL Central have more, regardless of the teams.

[jsinger121]

I would say the AL West is alot of tougher than the NL central when there are bottom feeders like the reds and pirates in that division

[KeepTheFaith1229]

I would say the AL West is alot of tougher than the NL central when there are bottom feeders like the reds and pirates in that division

 

I said regardless of the teams. Oh, and the West has Seattle.

[jsinger121]

ya and seattle is still a better team than either the reds or the pirates. the AL west is not that bad of a division. if i was going to rank the divisions i would rank them AL east, AL Central,

NL East, AL West, NL Central, NL West.......but i easily could switch the AL West with the NL East.

[KeepTheFaith1229]

ya and seattle is still a better team than either the reds or the pirates. the AL west is not that bad of a division. if i was going to rank the divisions i would rank them AL east, AL Central,

NL East, AL West, NL Central, NL West.......but i easily could switch the AL West with the NL East.

 

Okay? Please tell me how you have the NL Central, who has had the NL champions in back-to-back years, and probably should have back-to back to back if it wasn't for Bartman, is not as good as the AL West? I would love to know.

 

And look. I'm not talking about strength of division here. I'm just saying that teams in the NL Central have more competition to win the division than teams in the NL West, REGARDLESS OF THE TEAMS. Okay?

[jsinger121]

well lets see the angels are a solid team. the A's are title contenders this yr. and the texas rangers can hit more than most teams in the central. other than the cardinals and astros who i can see taking a step back and the brewers a step forward to a degree with the cubs being the wild card the rest of the division is completely mediocre. the astros have no offense at all. the cardinals are beginning to show some age and being on the cheap as well.

[jsinger121]

6 teams to 4. more competion in teems but the reds and pirates are not really competion. seattle is easily better than both of them. they may not be a division power but are alot better than either of those 2 teams.

[KeepTheFaith1229]

I SAID REGARDLESS OF TEAMS.

 

 

Just stoppp...

[Redguitar985]

that would cause MLB to have interleague play throughout the entire season....the reason they have the setup now is to avoid that.

 

I don't follow you. How would moving a team to the AL cause interleague play all year?

[jsinger121]

if there is 15 teams in each league then there would be a cross over every single game of the regular season. only 14 AL teams can play each other in a night while the same can be said for the NL leaving and AL team and an NL team to play interleague games throughout the season. obviously they would switch it up but its pointless to even change it to even teams in each league.

[Cityofchampions33]

yeah i get ya so thered be one team to spare and left doing nothing.

[Redguitar985]

if there is 15 teams in each league then there would be a cross over every single game of the regular season. only 14 AL teams can play each other in a night while the same can be said for the NL leaving and AL team and an NL team to play interleague games throughout the season. obviously they would switch it up but its pointless to even change it to even teams in each league.

 

Oh, ok. Well, they could just have those odd teams out have a bye series or something. That's pretty radical though.

[ORS]

Oh, ok. Well, they could just have those odd teams out have a bye series or something. That's pretty radical though.

With 15 teams on a rotating off-series (3-days), it would be next to impossible to adhere to the CBA's requirement that the players get one day off every 20 days. For example, when coming off their turn, the Sox would have to play in the next 14 straight series before they got another one off. They'd need 2 days off during that stretch to be in agreement with the CBA. So every 15 series (45-ish days), they'd need 5 days off. That gives them 20 days off for the season (6 months - 180 days), which is only 160 game days. That leaves not room for the ASB and would make it very difficult to make games up since there won't be many times when the same teams are off. That means more double-headers, which is tough on the pitching staff/bullpen coming down the stretch. Even numbers in each league are better.

[Redguitar985]

With 15 teams on a rotating off-series (3-days), it would be next to impossible to adhere to the CBA's requirement that the players get one day off every 20 days. For example, when coming off their turn, the Sox would have to play in the next 14 straight series before they got another one off. They'd need 2 days off during that stretch to be in agreement with the CBA. So every 15 series (45-ish days), they'd need 5 days off. That gives them 20 days off for the season (6 months - 180 days), which is only 160 game days. That leaves not room for the ASB and would make it very difficult to make games up since there won't be many times when the same teams are off. That means more double-headers, which is tough on the pitching staff/bullpen coming down the stretch. Even numbers in each league are better.

 

Yeah, I was gonna say maybe they could cut down the number of games in a season and incorporate the WBC somehow during the season but uh.....way too much of a pain in the ass. We'll stick with the way it is now!

[RedSoxRooter]

I like the idea of losing two teams. You can't get rid of the Twins first off, or Colorado. They have too many fans and the Twins are usually competive. If anything this may help the Twins and Nats stadiums get done.

 

If it were up to me I'd get rid of both Florida teams. Old farts in Fla don't go to games - they watch them on TV - something they can do for free with Braves broadcasts on TBS.

 

Then you'd have to realign the divisions. With that in mind, the fewer teams in the West, the better. So...

 

AL EAST

Boston

New York

Toronto

Baltimore

Detroit

 

AL Central

Chicago

Cleveland

Minnesota

Kansas City

Milwawkee

 

AL West

Los Angeles

Oakland

Texas

Seattle

 

NL East

Atlanta

Philadelphia

NY

Washington

Pittsburgh

 

NLCentral

St Louis

Houston

Chicago

Cincinati

Colorado

 

NL West

San Diego

Arizona

San Fran

Los Angeles

 

Also, the great thing about losing the two Florida teams is the amount of prospects it would pump into the rest of the league. Those teams do not have a lot of big money players on long contracts to begin with.

[Redguitar985]

I like the idea of losing two teams. You can't get rid of the Twins first off, or Colorado. They have too many fans and the Twins are usually competive. If anything this may help the Twins and Nats stadiums get done.

 

If it were up to me I'd get rid of both Florida teams. Old farts in Fla don't go to games - they watch them on TV - something they can do for free with Braves broadcasts on TBS.

 

Then you'd have to realign the divisions. With that in mind, the fewer teams in the West, the better. So...

 

AL EAST

Boston

New York

Toronto

Baltimore

Detroit

 

AL Central

Chicago

Cleveland

Minnesota

Kansas City

Milwawkee

 

AL West

Los Angeles

Oakland

Texas

Seattle

 

NL East

Atlanta

Philadelphia

NY

Washington

Pittsburgh

 

NLCentral

St Louis

Houston

Chicago

Cincinati

Colorado

 

NL West

San Diego

Arizona

San Fran

Los Angeles

 

Also, the great thing about losing the two Florida teams is the amount of prospects it would pump into the rest of the league. Those teams do not have a lot of big money players on long contracts to begin with.

 

That's a neat idea, actually. I mean, the only thing the D-Rays and Marlins do well is change their name and have fire sales.

[ORS]

I agree with you about dumping the Marlins. They have won the series twice and were in contention for most of last year, yet they still can't draw a crowd. Miami just isn't a baseball town. Tampa on the other hand, is a lot younger area (demographically) and has another city close enough to draw some fans (Orlando). They just need an owner that will spend a little coin to field a winner. Nobody comes out to see a team that wins 40% of its games. I think a team can thrive there, but not if they are dogs every year.

[RedSoxRooter]

Actually, what I'd love to see is this.

 

AL EAST

Boston

New York

Toronto

Baltimore

Detroit

Cleveland

Milwawkee

 

AL West

Los Angeles

Oakland

Chicago

Minnesota

Kansas City

Texas

Seattle

 

 

NL East

Atlanta

Philadelphia

NY

Washington

Pittsburgh

Cincinati

St Louis

 

NL West

San Diego

Arizona

Houston

Chicago

Colorado

San Fran

Los Angeles

 

You play each team roughly the same number of times (no more of this 19 times a year crap)...

 

You could have a wild card in each division so you'd still have 8 playoff teams. The division winner takes on the wildcard from their own division in the first round of the playoffs.

 

Obviously there's some major flaw in my logic here.. :dunno:

[jsinger121]

the old 7 team division like they had pre 1994......or you could have the wild cards from each divsion play the division winner from the other division.

[gosox613]

i think that if you think the twins should be eliminated you basically have no heart. marlins and d rays would be the teams for me, they have the shittiest fanbases hands down

[26 to 6]

I think Bud should just once and for all drop the contraction thing and we should leave it the way it it.

[26 to 6]

i think that if you think the twins should be eliminated you basically have no heart. marlins and d rays would be the teams for me, they have the shittiest fanbases hands down

I agree. The Twins have too much history, from the 1991 WOrld Series to the 1924 World Series.

[Redguitar985]

I agree with you about dumping the Marlins. They have won the series twice and were in contention for most of last year, yet they still can't draw a crowd. Miami just isn't a baseball town. Tampa on the other hand, is a lot younger area (demographically) and has another city close enough to draw some fans (Orlando). They just need an owner that will spend a little coin to field a winner. Nobody comes out to see a team that wins 40% of its games. I think a team can thrive there, but not if they are dogs every year.

 

So if the Marlins could just move to a town where they could thrive, maybe there wouldn't even be a contraction issue. Maybe the Marlins could lend some guys to the D-rays to show them how to win too.