Division Realignment

[Grant77]

There has been a lot of talk about expansion and realignment lately, with the Blue Jays as one several teams that are seemingly 'on the bubble' with regards to a division change. I have seen scenarios where we remain in the East, move to the Central, or end up in an entirely new division centered around the Great Lakes. This could be a very consequential decision for the Blue Jays. I won't try to predict the future, but it's easy to imagine a scenario where we were in the Central for the last 30 years and had a few more playoff appearances and perhaps even another World Series title.

I thought it would be fun to take a look at the map and see if we can make some predictions about where the Jays will end up. These could be wrong, but I'm going to predict some of the criteria that will be important to MLB, based on the way they have historically done things. I'm also going to use 4 divisions of 4 teams in each league.

My criteria in order of importance are:

- Preservation of historic rivalries

- Minimal league switches for existing teams

- Same state/city teams being in different leagues (except California and Pirates/Phillies)

- One expansion team in each league

- Geography and travel schedules

I figured that the easiest way to start would be to identify some of MLB's best and most longstanding rivalries to start the divisions and here's what I came up with:

AL East:

Yankees

Red Sox

Orioles 

 

AL Great Lakes:

Tigers

Guardians

White Sox

 

AL Central:

 

AL West:

 

NL East:

Braves

Phillies

 

NL Central:

Pirates

Reds

 

NL Midwest:

Cubs

Cardinals

 

NL West:

Giants

Dodgers

               

These aren't set in stone, but you can bet that MLB would be keen to keep those rivalries intact for the most part, particularly the big ones like Yankees-Red Sox and Cubs-Cardinals. Next I'm going to look at the West Divisions, which will be painfully obvious if a team ends up in Portland (which I predict here), since there will be 8 teams on the West Coast. As per my criteria, I will prioritize league continuity for these teams. I'm also going to add the Mets to the NL East because it's just obvious.

AL East:

Yankees

Red Sox

Orioles 

 

AL Great Lakes:

Tigers

Guardians

White Sox

 

AL Central:

 

AL West:

Athletics

Angels

Mariners

Portland

 

NL East:

Braves

Phillies

Mets

 

NL Central:

Pirates

Reds

 

NL Midwest:

Cubs

Cardinals

 

NL West:

Giants

Dodgers

Padres

Diamondbacks

 

I've been through this exercise with a different thought process a few times and you always end up with the same teams that just aren't obvious fits in any division. The Blue Jays are one of those teams, but there are also the Rockies, the Texas teams, and the Florida teams. I recall back in 2013 that MLB had serious reservations about moving the Astros to the AL, given that they would be in the same league as the Rangers. This gives them an opportunity to resolve that longstanding problem. Colorado also stands out as a big problem geographically, given that the 3 closest remaining teams are all in the AL (Minnesota, Kansas City, and Texas). For that reason, I will propose my one and only league change and create a new AL Central division. This also leaves us with 2 remaining teams in the AL, the Blue Jays and the Rays, and their fit is obvious. The only other option for the Jays is to remain in the East and create some kind of southern division for the Rays, but I haven't seen anything that really makes sense.

The stickiest part of this exercise for me was what to do with the rest of the NL teams (Brewers, Astros, Marlins, Nationals, and the expansion franchise). Keeping the Braves and Phillies rivalry intact results in some wacky divisions that I couldn't resolve, but once I cracked it, everything really fell into place and made sense from a geographic standpoint, so that's what I did.

AL East:

Yankees

Red Sox

Orioles

Rays

 

AL Great Lakes:

Tigers

Guardians

White Sox

Blue Jays

 

AL Central:

Twins

Rockies

Rangers

Royals

 

AL West:

Athletics

Angels

Mariners

Portland

 

NL East:

Nationals

Phillies

Mets

Marlins

 

NL Central:

Pirates

Reds

Braves

Memphis ?

 

NL Midwest:

Cubs

Cardinals

Brewers

Astros

 

NL West:

Giants

Dodgers

Padres

Diamondbacks

 

Don't take any of this too seriously, but this is a sensible division alignment that prioritizes the criteria that I listed above. I essentially left four divisions entirely intact (minus one team) and two others with 3 of the same teams. The Al Central (with the Twins and Royals remaining) and the NL Central (with the Reds and Pirates remaining) were the only divisions that were kind of blown up, but they each make a lot of geographic sense. You could very well see something like this if the league wants to minimize disruptions.

Hopefully it leads to some good discussion. Please share what you think new divisions will be.

[jaysblue]

Geographically, having the Jays in a Great Lakes division makes a lot of sense. 

Toronto/Detroit is a nice rivalry and could grow bigger given the success of both teams over this last season. 

Cleveland is a 5-6 hour drive from Toronto, same with Pittsburgh. Even for fans, would be a great opportunity to see more Jays games out of town without having to fly anywhere. 

For sure a division should include Detroit, Toronto and Cleveland. As for a 4th team, either Minnesota or Pittsburgh. 

[jmomcc]

I like the idea of jays, detroit, cleveland, minnesota. Makes sense geographically. Those three teams would be delighted because travelling jays fans would buy tickets. Our fan base just wants to win so losing the yankees/red sox home games wouldn't hurt us. Also, we would be the big money team in division. 

Just for personal reasons too, i loved going to games in Detroit when i lived in ontario. 

[Laika]

The AL Central is funky there 

Everything else seems fine 

[Grant77]

5 minutes ago, jmomcc said:

I like the idea of jays, detroit, cleveland, minnesota. Makes sense geographically. Those three teams would be delighted because travelling jays fans would buy tickets. Our fan base just wants to win so losing the yankees/red sox home games wouldn't hurt us. Also, we would be the big money team in division. 

Just for personal reasons too, i loved going to games in Detroit when i lived in ontario. 

I looked at that, but it's really hard to see where the White Sox end up in that scenario unless they move to the NL or go to some weird south division with the Rangers and Astros.

[Grant77]

7 minutes ago, Laika said:

The AL Central is funky there 

Everything else seems fine 

If a team goes to Portland, the Rockies are in a difficult spot where they really, really don't make sense in the Western divisions that would have 8 very obvious teams. 

Minneapolis, Kansas City, and Arlington are the closest teams to Denver by a pretty significant margin, so that made some sense to me.

The only other scenario I could see for them is if you lumped in Arizona with the Texas teams and maybe the Rays, which would free up Colorado to play in the West with the Dodgers, Giants, and Padres.

[jmomcc]

9 minutes ago, Grant77 said:

I looked at that, but it's really hard to see where the White Sox end up in that scenario unless they move to the NL or go to some weird south division with the Rangers and Astros.

I think chicago is slightly closer to the teams you have in the central than minnesota, but i agree its an awkward fit either way. 

[jaysblue]

When I went to Minny back in June, there were a lot of Jays fans but mostly from Manitoba and Saskatchewan. 

Geographically, since Minneapolis isn't too far from the Canadian border, you likely will get a lot of Jays fans from the Prairies coming down for every Jays/Twins series. Either a 7-8 hour drive or short flight. 

[jmomcc]

14 minutes ago, jaysblue said:

When I went to Minny back in June, there were a lot of Jays fans but mostly from Manitoba and Saskatchewan. 

Geographically, since Minneapolis isn't too far from the Canadian border, you likely will get a lot of Jays fans from the Prairies coming down for every Jays/Twins series. Either a 7-8 hour drive or short flight. 

Yea that what i was thinking. More games in Minnesota increases access. I guess losing boston does screw people in the maritimes though. 
 

The perfect Jays fan access division is toronto, boston, minnesota, detroit, seattle. 

Seems unlikely lol. 

[glory]

I think Jays and Tigers have to be in the same division with realignment. Guardians would make sense as well. The 4th team in that scenario is harder to figure out.

[mphenhef]

One of the drivers for this change is to cut down on travel and to create more west/west matchups in the early rounds of the playoffs so I don’t think point 3 in your list of splitting same city/state teams will weigh heavily if at all if Manfred gets his way.

[Grant77]

2 hours ago, mphenhef said:

One of the drivers for this change is to cut down on travel and to create more west/west matchups in the early rounds of the playoffs so I don’t think point 3 in your list of splitting same city/state teams will weigh heavily if at all if Manfred gets his way.

To me it would really be a shame if we saw teams like the Mets/Yankees and Cubs/White Sox in the same league. I think there's something special about them being in different leagues and at least having the potential to meet in the World Series.

[Jonn]

I don’t know why Portland would get a franchise over Vancouver or even somewhere like Utah for that matter

I do believe there will be an expansion franchise in Tennessee but it will be in Nashville not Memphis. Even Bristol or Knoxville would make more sense than Memphis.

My last point would be they should absolutely put the same State and City teams in the same division. Those are easy to bake in rivalries and would be silly to ignore.

[Brownie19]

17 hours ago, Grant77 said:

To me it would really be a shame if we saw teams like the Mets/Yankees and Cubs/White Sox in the same league. I think there's something special about them being in different leagues and at least having the potential to meet in the World Series.

Agreed.

[Laika]

What is the historic reason that New York, Chicago, LA, and SF/Oakland had one AL team and one NL team? 

I am having trouble finding a thorough explanation and solid justification for why it was seen as so important, and why it remains important to split them up. 

I do understand that at some point it probably seemed to make sense, because you could attract a different market of fans and visiting fans and kind of build your own brand without directly competing with a team a few miles away.

But does all of that matter now? 

Wouldn't it be awesome to have these regular season cross-town rivalries? Why does that have to wait for the odd interleague matchup or the tiny chance at meeting in a world series? 

Or are the White Sox, Mets, and Angels owners too chicken s***? 

[Grant77]

1 hour ago, Laika said:

What is the historic reason that New York, Chicago, LA, and SF/Oakland had one AL team and one NL team? 

I am having trouble finding a thorough explanation and solid justification for why it was seen as so important, and why it remains important to split them up. 

I do understand that at some point it probably seemed to make sense, because you could attract a different market of fans and visiting fans and kind of build your own brand without directly competing with a team a few miles away.

But does all of that matter now? 

Wouldn't it be awesome to have these regular season cross-town rivalries? Why does that have to wait for the odd interleague matchup or the tiny chance at meeting in a world series? 

Or are the White Sox, Mets, and Angels owners too chicken s***? 

For quite some time in the 1800s, the National league was the only major league with current teams like the Cubs, Reds, Pirates, Dodgers, Giants, and Phillies. 

A rival league called the Western League (later the American league) sometimes had their own teams in the same city (like Chicago), as well as places like Detroit and Cleveland. In 1901 they declared themselves a major league and merged with the National League in 1903, with the first World Series played between the Pirates and a team that would later be the Red Sox.

I think people who appreciate that history would want to keep the historic teams in their own league. As is, the Chicago and New York rivalries are certainly amongst the most intense in baseball.

I can also understand fans less interested in baseball history wouldn't care and just want a ton of games between the Cubs and White Sox every year, but I think it's a bad idea.

 

 

 

[Terminator]

22 hours ago, mphenhef said:

One of the drivers for this change is to cut down on travel and to create more west/west matchups in the early rounds of the playoffs so I don’t think point 3 in your list of splitting same city/state teams will weigh heavily if at all if Manfred gets his way.

Manfred is going to get rid of the American and National League and will institute Eastern and Western instead

[Brownie19]

41 minutes ago, Terminator said:

Manfred is going to get rid of the American and National League and will institute Eastern and Western instead

Man - I hope not.  I'm a progressive guy, but I don't want to lose the history of the AL and NL.  I get that logistically, some of it may make sense and balanced schedules and interleague play have changed things - but I think the history of baseball is sacred - more so than the other major sporting leagues, so talk like this makes me uncomfortable.

[harvey16]

I wonder if we will see 4 divisions in each League or 2 Divisions. Having divisions of only 4 teams could lead to some really unbalanced divisions like we see in the NFL. I would prefer two divisions of 8 in each league like we used to have before expansion in the 90s.

[Terminator]

1 hour ago, Brownie19 said:

Man - I hope not.  I'm a progressive guy, but I don't want to lose the history of the AL and NL.  I get that logistically, some of it may make sense and balanced schedules and interleague play have changed things - but I think the history of baseball is sacred - more so than the other major sporting leagues, so talk like this makes me uncomfortable.

Reported for politics

[harvey16]

If I was Commish, I would do 4 divisions of 8 teams. (2 AL, 2 NL). Back to pre-90s expansion divisions. Play each team within division 8 times (2 x 4 games) each team in other division 6 times (2 x 3 games) each team in other league 3 or 4 times alternating home games between divisions each year like now (play 4 games vs NLE, 3 games vs NLW). This would create a more balanced schedule and make more 4 game series and less travel overall. 160 game season. Each League has 6 playoff teams (2 Division winners, 4 WC teams).4 Division winners get bye in WC round. WC and DS rounds are best of 5, AL/NL and WS best of 7. This puts more importance back on winning your division. 

AL East - Tor, Bos, NYY, Bal, TB, Det, Cle, CWS

AL West - Sea, Port (new), LAA, Tex, Hou, KC, Ath, Min

NL East - Phi, NYM, Was, Atl, Pit,Cin,Nash (new), Mia

NL West - LAD, SD, Ari, SF, Col, Mil, Stl, CHC

 

 

[jmomcc]

1 hour ago, harvey16 said:

If I was Commish, I would do 4 divisions of 8 teams. (2 AL, 2 NL). Back to pre-90s expansion divisions. Play each team within division 8 times (2 x 4 games) each team in other division 6 times (2 x 3 games) each team in other league 3 or 4 times alternating home games between divisions each year like now (play 4 games vs NLE, 3 games vs NLW). This would create a more balanced schedule and make more 4 game series and less travel overall. 160 game season. Each League has 6 playoff teams (2 Division winners, 4 WC teams).4 Division winners get bye in WC round. WC and DS rounds are best of 5, AL/NL and WS best of 7. This puts more importance back on winning your division. 

AL East - Tor, Bos, NYY, Bal, TB, Det, Cle, CWS

AL West - Sea, Port (new), LAA, Tex, Hou, KC, Ath, Min

NL East - Phi, NYM, Was, Atl, Pit,Cin,Nash (new), Mia

NL West - LAD, SD, Ari, SF, Col, Mil, Stl, CHC

 

 

The AL east is even more of a beast in this plan. As is the NL West.