General Baseball Chit-Chat Thread

[Splendid Splinter]

it says right in this rough draft "until... your body ends up completely past the base".

 

Crazy out of control slides will result in outs.

 

there will be just as many times where a guy slides to the bag, taps it with his finger, but keeps a foot in line or spins around so his hand is even with the bag as there are times where a foot pops up for a split second while a tag is on. It's not a fix.

If Javy starts making crazy spin around slides, that would be cool.

 

Fixed

[jersey cubs fan]

This maintains the one game play-in wild card situation, so I'll allow it.

[Derwood]

 

Ok.....but why go with four 8-team divisions instead of going like the NFL and do eight 4-team divisions?

[Brian707]

 

Ok.....but why go with four 8-team divisions instead of going like the NFL and do eight 4-team divisions?

 

 

Travel

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

Ok.....but why go with four 8-team divisions instead of going like the NFL and do eight 4-team divisions?

 

Presumably for the travel/scheduling benefits. It's also an easier distinction for the wild card/division winner postseason matchups.

 

There's a lot to unpack in that article. Montreal and Portland as expansion teams, 156 game schedule, 4 divisions, an 8 team wild card round, guaranteed off day each week, etc.

[Tim]

I presume getting rid of AL/NL would also bring DH for everyone.

[Bobson Dugnutt]

I presume getting rid of AL/NL would also bring DH for everyone.

 

http://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/hooray-gif-17.gif

[Banedon]

That North division is pretty screwy, geographically.

[javy knows my name]

I really like the matchups in the midwest division

[Clem Fandango]

This is all so Jeff Loria can own another baseball team.

[Andy]

Boy, I really can't overstate how much I dislike that idea.

[Cubswin11]

I’m fine with the idea outside of the expansion part. MLB doesn’t need more teams.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

also horsefeathers Montreal

[Regular Show]

I’m fine with the idea outside of the expansion part. MLB doesn’t need more teams.

 

Well, I haven't been posting much lately, but I vehemently disagree with your take and specifically the "MLB doesn't need more teams" part. That's weird on so many levels. IF and I can only assume if you've ever wondered what you'd do as the hypothetical commissioner of MLB if you were given that power... well, you certainly can't make that statement.

 

Some reporter asks you about possible expansion and your response is, "Nah. I'm good. We're good... We have enough teams and don't want to expand to new markets and potentially create new fans/TV markets. Why bother? I mean who gives a horsefeathers about expansion teams amirite?"

 

That's how I interpreted your response lol. It's idiotic and dumb because expansion happens in every sport and it's ultimately a good thing. A lot of posters on here complain about the amateur draft and the shitty rules for signing Int. FA's (I agree with some of their points about how unfair it is), but no one complains about the lack of expansion teams in MLB. Expansion teams create new jobs and opportunities for the players. It creates more competition in free agency, especially in the beginning when they have no salary commitments. The Players Union will ALWAYS be in favor of expansion and rightfully so.

 

There are other benefits too. Another trading partner for the Cubs (and for other teams too). It creates a new generation of fans who grow up rooting and supporting that team. There were NO Nationals fans going back a couple decades and obviously there are many now. More fans and increased viewership is always a good thing. It also makes realignment easier with 32 teams instead of the 30 teams we have currently.

 

Sorry about the rant, but I really hate people and posters that complain about expansion (in any sport). It's always a good thing. I don't really care where they expand as long as they do their due diligence and go to a market that will properly support the team. Montreal and Portland/Charlotte seem fine to me in that regard.

[WrigleyField 22]

 

Sorry about the rant, but I really hate people and posters that complain about expansion (in any sport). It's always a good thing. I don't really care where they expand as long as they do their due diligence and go to a market that will properly support the team. Montreal and Portland/Charlotte seem fine to me in that regard.

Well the last part is kind of a huge kicker. I think by and large, fans view expansion teams in MLB and NBA at least, and see more failure than success: Teams that don't end up financially viable, that aren't a net positive. Now, not every struggling financial team is a newer franchise, many are, and while viewership is not a zero sum game, it's also not a case where dropping in a new team only creates new fans/viewers- you are inevitably going to dilute the viewer base as a whole.

[jersey cubs fan]

Expansion always being a net positive in any sport is just patently untrue. MLB is still dealing with painfully weak FL franchises from the last round of expansion that desperately need to steal taxpayers money to stay viable.

And others sports have their own ugly stepchildren.

[squally1313]

Yeah that's a pretty ridiculous, over the top comeback at a not at all unpopular opinion. He spends the first 75% of it being like 'just expand forever! 32 teams? Why not 50?' and then at the end brings up the very obvious arguments against expansion.

 

I get that by this point talks of relocation were already underway, but look at Montreal in this table: http://www.espn.com/mlb/attendance/_/year/2001

[Hunter]

Can't say I like that playoff format. Only 4 divisional winners instead of the current 6. It seems like you would see the same teams in the playoffs just about every year. Multiple teams could win 95+ games and end up being eliminated in a 1 game wildcard playoff.

[Sammy Sofa]

There are other benefits too. Another trading partner for the Cubs (and for other teams too). It creates a new generation of fans who grow up rooting and supporting that team. There were NO Nationals fans going back a couple decades and obviously there are many now.

 

Because they moved one team to a market that had previously had a baseball team; nothing about the Nats is an argument in favor of expansion like you're trying to present it.

 

Hell, Colorado is the only one of the relatively recent expansion teams to have consistent big time attendance success. Arizona's next, though they usually barely come in just over 2 million. Expanding when Florida and Chicago both have middling teams (hell, Florida has TWO) barely drawing anything that could be moved elsewhere doesn't seem like a slam dunk.

[imb]

Im gonna be so pissed if they bring back montreal and they do some weak-ass uniforms and not those cool old school ones.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Can't say I like that playoff format. Only 4 divisional winners instead of the current 6. It seems like you would see the same teams in the playoffs just about every year. Multiple teams could win 95+ games and end up being eliminated in a 1 game wildcard playoff.

 

Assuming the expansion teams and new schedule didn't really impact the playoff picture(unlikely but we work with what we've got), here's how the playoffs would have looked like during this Cubs run.

 

2015:

 

Wild Cards: Cubs v. San Francisco, Kansas City v. Angels, Toronto v. Houston, Texas v. Yankees

Division winners: Pittsburgh, Mets, St. Louis, Dodgers

 

2016:

 

Wild Cards: Texas v. St. Louis/Seattle, Boston v. Detroit, Toronto v. San Francisco, Baltimore v. Mets

Division winners: Washington, Cleveland, Cubs, Dodgers

 

2017:

 

Wild Cards: Red Sox v. St. Louis, Arizona v. Minnesota, Cubs v. Milwaukee, Yankees v. Colorado

Division winners: Washington, Cleveland, Houston, Dodgers

[Sammy Sofa]

Im gonna be so pissed if they bring back montreal and they do some weak-ass uniforms and not those cool old school ones.

 

I'm still annoyed that the Astros going to the AL didn't use that as an excuse to bring back some of their hideous/great uniforms from the 70's and 80's.

[Hunter]

Can't say I like that playoff format. Only 4 divisional winners instead of the current 6. It seems like you would see the same teams in the playoffs just about every year. Multiple teams could win 95+ games and end up being eliminated in a 1 game wildcard playoff.

 

Assuming the expansion teams and new schedule didn't really impact the playoff picture(unlikely but we work with what we've got), here's how the playoffs would have looked like during this Cubs run.

 

2015:

 

Wild Cards: Cubs v. San Francisco, Kansas City v. Angels, Toronto v. Houston, Texas v. Yankees

Division winners: Pittsburgh, Mets, St. Louis, Dodgers

 

2016:

 

Wild Cards: Texas v. St. Louis/Seattle, Boston v. Detroit, Toronto v. San Francisco, Baltimore v. Mets

Division winners: Washington, Cleveland, Cubs, Dodgers

 

2017:

 

Wild Cards: Red Sox v. St. Louis, Arizona v. Minnesota, Cubs v. Milwaukee, Yankees v. Colorado

Division winners: Washington, Cleveland, Houston, Dodgers

 

Yeah the Cardinals are one of the teams I see stumbling their way to the playoffs every year.

[Sammys Boombox]

I love the realignment idea. It’s almost exactly what my brother and I have been wanting for a long time. The main thing I would want in a 32-team league is 8-team divisions. With 4-team divisions you’re just asking for somebody to win 100 games and get stuck in a play-in game while somebody else goes straight into the division series with a sub-.500 record.

 

2. Get rid of the NL/AL.

 

3. Increase number of games that start at 7:00 in your time zone.

 

4. Increase the percentage of teams with something to play for to decrease tanking.

 

5. Decrease number of games played while maintaining the same overall length to the season.

 

It’s really like they read my mind. I think the overall quality of play would go up with the added off days. Would make up for the diluting of talent caused by adding 2 franchises. Only thing is I’m not sold that Montreal is till a viable location for a franchise.

[jersey cubs fan]

I love the realignment idea. It’s almost exactly what my brother and I have been wanting for a long time. The main thing I would want in a 32-team league is 8-team divisions. With 4-team divisions you’re just asking for somebody to win 100 games and get stuck in a play-in game while somebody else goes straight into the division series with a sub-.500 record.

 

2. Get rid of the NL/AL.

 

3. Increase number of games that start at 7:00 in your time zone.

 

4. Increase the percentage of teams with something to play for to decrease tanking.

 

5. Decrease number of games played while maintaining the same overall length to the season.

 

It’s really like they read my mind. I think the overall quality of play would go up with the added off days. Would make up for the diluting of talent caused by adding 2 franchises. Only thing is I’m not sold that Montreal is till a viable location for a franchise.

I think Montreal is far more viable than Portland.

 

But we're still operating with 2 teams in Florida that have no local support, despite championships and recent successes. Oakland is also still a complete mess.