Hypothetical Division

[RandomNeutral]

The MLB expands and the Tigers draw the short straw(again). You have a choice, as a Detroit fan, from two four team divisions:

 

Guardians, Yankees, Red Sox

OR

Orioles, Blue Jays, Rays (significantly weakened)

Which would you pick?

Edited April 28, 2022 by RandomNeutral

[Useful Idiot]

Why not Cubs, Brewers and Wsox?   Might as well F things up good, we're headed that way anyway.

[RandomNeutral]

5 minutes ago, Useful Idiot said:

Why not Cubs, Brewers and Wsox?   Might as well F things up good, we're headed that way anyway.

I was hoping for an answer to my question, not alternative questions to my own.

 

Obviously Tigers fans would probably want to stay in the current division but if they couldn't?

Edited April 28, 2022 by RandomNeutral

[Useful Idiot]

4 minutes ago, RandomNeutral said:

I was hoping for an answer to my question, not alternative questions to my own.

 

I often feel the same way here. Must be something in the air?

[casimir]

1 hour ago, RandomNeutral said:

The MLB expands and the Tigers draw the short straw(again). You have a choice, as a Detroit fan, from two four team divisions:

 

Guardians, Yankees, Red Sox

OR

Orioles, Blue Jays, Rays (significantly weakened)

Which would you pick?

Neither.  4 team divisions suck.

[Tiger337]

Casimir has the correct answer.  

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, RandomNeutral said:

I was hoping for an answer to my question, not alternative questions to my own.

 

 

You haven't been here long!

[RandomNeutral]

13 minutes ago, casimir said:

Neither.  4 team divisions suck.

Alright. Of those two divisions of three opponents, which would be more interesting divisional games?

I'm not asking if anybody agrees with them, I'm not asking if you want 8 team divisions instead. I'm giving you the choice of red or blue; so don't answer "green".... don't answer "square".

I'm asking for a preference, not starting a debate.

The more feedback I get, the more your voice is heard. Right now, I'm hearing "meh" so I'll put the Tigers wherever I feel is most convenient. If you folks have a preference between the two choices, I'd like to hear it. If not, I'll move on and the Guardians fans will probably decide where you end up.

[RandomNeutral]

4 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

You haven't been here long!

In all honesty guys, I'm not here to make friends. I want some input from real Tigers fans on a question I have. Your opinion matters to me on this question but if you don't want to provide a straight answer to it, that's fine too. I'll assume you're ok with anything I do.

[Tiger337]

What is the point of your question?  As stated, I feel like it doesn't make much of a difference.  

[RandomNeutral]

Realignment research for future MLB expansion.

 

Specifically, that the Rangers and possibly the Astros end up moving into the AL Central in future; which is bad news for you guys and the Guardians.

Edited April 29, 2022 by RandomNeutral

[Useful Idiot]

39 minutes ago, RandomNeutral said:

Realignment research for future MLB expansion.

 

Well,.....okay...out of all the teams you list, there are not enough to form two 4 team divisions...so where is the team you are keeping up your sleeve?

I don't think there is any way MLB  would put the yanks and bosox in different divisions, so I'd speculate that the Red sox, Yanks, Orioles, and Rays make one division     The Tigers, Jays, Guardians, and one other  make up the other one.

Where does your "research" tell you that the expansion team(s) will be located?

[Useful Idiot]

Ouhhh Ouhhh! How about the Orioles, Rays, Rangers and Astros in a new Southeast division, the Yanks, RSox, Guardians and Jays in the East......and the Tigers, Wsox, Twinks, and Royals in the new Central, leaving the Mariners, A's Angels, and the new mystery team in the West... Vegas perhaps?

Edited April 29, 2022 by Useful Idiot

[casimir]

11 hours ago, RandomNeutral said:

Alright. Of those two divisions of three opponents, which would be more interesting divisional games?

I'm not asking if anybody agrees with them, I'm not asking if you want 8 team divisions instead. I'm giving you the choice of red or blue; so don't answer "green".... don't answer "square".

I'm asking for a preference, not starting a debate.

The more feedback I get, the more your voice is heard. Right now, I'm hearing "meh" so I'll put the Tigers wherever I feel is most convenient. If you folks have a preference between the two choices, I'd like to hear it. If not, I'll move on and the Guardians fans will probably decide where you end up.

I'm giving you feedback, I just don't like scantron tests.

The smaller the pool of teams in a division, the likelier it is that a losing team wins the division and makes the playoffs.  I don't want any part of that, its an embarrassment to competitive team sports that this would be allowed.  It was going to happen in 1994 in the AL West before the strike wiped out that season.  There have been division winners finish the season with low 80s win totals.

If/when they do expand to 32 teams (which shouldn't happen until the stadium issues in Oakland and Tampa get resolved), MLB can go to 4 divisions of 8 teams each.  They can realign geographically and do away with the current AL/NL structure now that all teams both leagues finally play under the same rules.

If MLB wants to do itself any favors, they need to become more inviting to the fan base.  Stop pushing broadcast rights to multiple platforms in such a way that consumers need to acquire several subscriptions to watch their teams, and eliminate the blackout rules that prevent fans from following their favorite teams on MLB.TV.

And they have to quicken pace of play and get rid of Angel Hernandez.

Now, take this feedback, deliver it to Rob Manfred, and then kick him in his crotch and tell him that it's from casimir at MTF (he'll remember me from when he was trying to recognize me once at a Tiger game years ago).  OK, truth be told, I doubt you work in or with MLB, but its fun to think that someone could take the above, print it out, hand deliver it to Manfred, and then kick him in the crotch.

[casimir]

12 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

Casimir has the correct answer.  

I wish we still had signatures.

[Biff Mayhem]

11 hours ago, RandomNeutral said:

In all honesty guys, I'm not here to make friends.

You're on the right path!

[Useful Idiot]

1 hour ago, casimir said:

 

The smaller the pool of teams in a division, the likelier it is that a losing team wins the division and makes the playoffs.  I don't want any part of that, its an embarrassment to competitive team sports that this would be allowed. 

I guess they feel that with 4 division winners AND 4 wildcard teams, the excitement of uncertainty  can be extended deeper into the season.

[Tiger337]

9 minutes ago, Useful Idiot said:

I guess they feel that with 4 division winners AND 4 wildcard teams, the excitement of uncertainty  can be extended deeper into the season.

It's not about the regular season.  They want more playoffs because playoffs generate big TV money.   

[RatkoVarda]

best choice: Tigers - Jazz - Jaguars - Trash Pandas

[Useful Idiot]

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

It's not about the regular season.  They want more playoffs because playoffs generate big TV money.   

I don't know...I thought a big part of the wildcard pie was in keeping fans in the stands longer into the season, clinging to playoff hopes.

I'm not saying that I endorse the idea, but that's what I thought it was about. Otherwise you have so many fans that by August their team is out of the excitement of contention, etc.

  Instead with more division winners and more wildcards,... they cling to the hope of once in the playoffs, their team might roll the dice and get lucky?

[gehringer_2]

2 minutes ago, Useful Idiot said:

I don't know...I thought a big part of the wildcard pie was in keeping fans in the stands longer into the season, clinging to playoff hopes.

I'm not saying that I endorse the idea, but that's what I thought it was about. Otherwise you have so many fans that by August their team is out of the excitement of contention, etc.

  Instead with more division winners and more wildcards,... they cling to the hope of once in the playoffs, their team might roll the dice and get lucky?

sure, this was a big motivator to the initial move to divisional play. I don't see why its importance would be any less than ever. You can accomplish the same thing basically in two ways. One is smaller divisions. For example if you go to 4 team divisions 50% of all teams will always be in 1st or 2nd place. Or you add other ways for an expanded number of teams in larger divisions to compete to win something - I don't see that there is any real difference between the two.

[Useful Idiot]

Well I think a big part of it too, is with the "hope kept alive" later into the season, there is less pressure on ownership to build a dominant roster.

 

If you can  persuade your fans that "squeaking into a WC slot in September is just as good as leading your division "wire to wire"...then you might get away with an annual payroll of $140 million instead of $200+ million.

 

And yes, I believe the owners are devious enough to look at it exactly that way.

I actually agree with Casimir, the thought of 4 team divisions, just plain sucks.  But I don't believe that the integrity of championships is as high on the priority list of the owners, as it is to fans.

 

For the owners it's more a matter of show business  masquerading as a sport.

[Tiger337]

29 minutes ago, Useful Idiot said:

I don't know...I thought a big part of the wildcard pie was in keeping fans in the stands longer into the season, clinging to playoff hopes.

I'm not saying that I endorse the idea, but that's what I thought it was about. Otherwise you have so many fans that by August their team is out of the excitement of contention, etc.

  Instead with more division winners and more wildcards,... they cling to the hope of once in the playoffs, their team might roll the dice and get lucky?

That is probably part of it, although this time the owners insisted on expanding the playoffs specifically because they already had a new playoff deal lined up.  

The problem is if you have too many teams in the playoffs, all the good teams will clinch in August and can coast the final month which is not exciting for fans of good teams.  

Then the post-season in baseball is such a crap shoot that it becomes almost meaningless.  

The end result is that it's not necessary to build a great team when being pretty good can reap the same rewards which is the player's concern.  

[gehringer_2]

6 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

The end result is that it's not necessary to build a great team when being pretty good can reap the same rewards which is the player's concern.  

that becomes the interesting psychology question. Do you sell out 100% to try and get so much better than anyone for one season that you can overcome the randomizing inputs in all those short playoff series, or do you content your self on being good enough to get the playoffs consistently and whatever happens there happens? I imagine there are ownerships that will come down on either side of that calculus. But for sure the two approaches have very different impacts on star player valuations.

[Useful Idiot]

I think the teams that build the all $tar rosters have a better chance in the playoffs,  but for most owners (other than the really big market teams) the prospect of making it to the playoffs and then  being eliminated is "success enough" for them.

 

And, upsets happen just often enough to make that work for them

Edited April 29, 2022 by Useful Idiot