If each team has 15 teams, and interleague play isn’t going on, then there would be 7 games in each league, leaving one team in each league to not have a game.

15 teams does not divide by 2 and you need two teams to play a game. Therefore, someone will always be off unless they play an interleague game every night.

Sorry, I hate to bring math into such an emotional topic.

Unless you’re saying we shift Houston the NL West, and then I’m down. Also, it’s interesting to note that since the divisions were realigned, the AL West has won just as many World Series as the NL Central.

because then your guarenteeing each division a playoff spot when they may not deserve it. the NL West would get a team when there are much better teams that will finish second or third in other divisions

that was cool wasnt it?

1. It’s one less team that can win the division.

2. All teams in the division would lose the same number of games against Houston.

3. Houston is bad right now, but since realignment they’ve been one of the best teams in the NL. Who knows which teams will be weak or strong in another five or ten years.

...in comparison to Phoenix, a bunch of new folks from all over with a new team to call their own. And absolutely the team would have to be AL. The Braves have a monopoly on the SouthEast, and the only way to crack it, would be with an AL club. Plus attendance would benefit by having Boston and NYC in their division.

I’ve heard that the area (NN, Norfolk) wouldn’t be a bad market. I don’t know if it has the population but the area does have a long tradition as a good minor league market.

if we came up with the same response but you posted it first.

we are just being kind to others.

And I’m really sorry if that came off as trollish or anything. But, from 2004-2006, the Astros and Cardinals (twice) made the WS, with the Cards winning once. In the grand scheme of things, it seems as though you’ve got bigger things to worry about. I’ve got more pity for Toronto, Baltimore and Tampa Bay for being stuck in the same division as the Wankees and Red Sux.

would be like making out with your cousin. Yeah, its better than making out with your sister, but not that much better.

But I always had a bit of a fondness for being in the NL West.

using only the last 10 years as your time frame in this argument is just not a big enough sample size. the Reds, Pirates, and Brewers have all been historically bad in that time span, and the Cubs havent really been great shakes neither. conversely, as you stated, the AL west has fielded some decent teams in that timespan. so yes, west teams have played tougher division opponents and central teams have played some weak division opponents, but that is not a function of the size of the division. it only means that when the divisions were realigned they didnt do it very well from a competitive balance standpoint.

and my pic is better than your pic.

To take your side as the devil’s advocate for a bit, statistically, yes, all else being equal, if you have 10 teams, all of roughly equivalent ability, and you separate them into a 6 team division and a 4 team division, the teams in the 4 team division have a better probability of winning the division and making the playoffs. (Nevermind, for a bit, the wildcard, which already equalizes disparity between the divisions)

But baseball isn’t played like that. It isn’t a game where every team has 8 starting players (or 9, if you want to call the DH a “player”) with an OPS+ of 100 and 5 starting pitchers with an ERA+ of 100. Major League Baseball isn’t a borderline socialist system like the NFL. The results have NOT happened like that - there are haves, and there are have-nots. For the sake of comparison, let’s look at the two divisions - the disputed AL West and NL Central, since 1995.

Since the NL Central was created, your Reds won once, in 1995. Since then, the Astros have won 4x (including 2001), the Cubs have won twice, and the Cardinals have won 7x (including 2001). The Pirates and Brewers haven’t won anything. Not including the shortened 1995 season, NL Central division winners have included teams that put up 83, 84, and 85 win seasons, and two teams that won 88. In 2006, the Cardinals won the division with 83 wins. 83! You went 80-82 and ended up at 3rd in the Central. Now, in 2006, the winner of the AL West were the A’s, who went 93-69. You came much closer in your unfair 6 team division than you would have in the AL West. The NL Central has produced 4 wildcard winners, 3 World Series participants, and 1 World Champ during that time. The wildcard winners won between 89 and 93 games.

Since the 1995 season, the Rangers, Angels and Mariners have won the division 3x, and the A’s have won 4x. On the face, this parity would seem to support your argument. The West has produced 3 wildcards but only 1 World Series participant, the 2002 Angels, who won. However, only won division winner has won fewer than 90 games—the 88-win Rangers, in ‘98. The wildcard team with the lowest wins won 89, and the other two teams had to win 99 and 102 games. The only two times in which the Reds would have won the 4-team AL West was in 1995, when they won the NL Central, and 1999. When stacking up the rest of the two divisions against each other, in 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2004, and 2005, the winner of the NL Central won more games than the winner of the AL West. In the other 7 years, the AL West winner would have triumphed over the NL Central. If the chance to win were strictly about %s, rather than falling behind 6-7, you’d expect the 6-team NL Central to produce AL West-NL Central division winners than the 4-team AL West, but that just hasn’t shaken out.

Looking at the grand scheme, since the current divisions were put into place, the Reds have actually had a BETTER shot of making the postseason in that 6 team division than they would have in the 4 team AL West. It doesn’t seem so much that the AL West produces more chances to make the playoffs than the NL Central produces FEWER chances to make the playoffs for EVERYONE but the Cardinals, much like the Yankees in the AL East. Rather than worrying about the size of their division, the Reds should just worry about beating the Cards.

Due to scheduling, the only real way this supposed “injustice” will ever be solved, ignoring the OP’s idea of moving the ‘Stros to the NL West and the Dbacks to the AL, (which, as a Dbacks fan, I believe is completely asinine) is by expansion to 32 teams in 8 4-team divisions, like the NFL.

Carrying his own groceries.

don’t worry, I was definitely an anti-popped collar partisan.

And no, I live in Tucson now. But DO tell the story, since I’m a native Washingtonian. (Well, technically, born in Fairfax)