AL West and NL Central: Imbalanced and Unfair
The American League West is one of three divisions in Major League Baseball's American League. The division currently has four teams, but it has had as many as seven teams before the 1994 realignment. Although its teams currently only reside along the west coast and in Texas, historically the division has had teams as far east as Chicago. It is the only division in Major League baseball to have only four teams in one division. The defending champion of the AL West Division is the Los Angeles Angels. Current members:
- Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim - Founding member (as California Angels)
- Oakland Athletics - Founding member
- Seattle Mariners - Joined in 1977 as an expansion team
- Texas Rangers - Joined in 1972; formerly of AL East (Washington Senators)
The National League Central is one of three divisions in Major League Baseball's National League. The division currently has six teams. It was created in 1994, merging teams from the NL West (Cincinnati, and Houston) and NL East (Chicago, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis) divisions of the National League. In 1998 it became the largest division in Major League Baseball, with the addition of a sixth member (Milwaukee). The defending champion of the NL Central Division is the Chicago Cubs. Current members:
- Chicago Cubs - Founding member; formerly of the NL East
- Cincinnati Reds - Founding member; formerly of the NL West
- Houston Astros - Founding member; formerly of the NL West
- Milwaukee Brewers - Joined in 1998; formerly of the AL Central
- Pittsburgh Pirates - Founding member; formerly of the NL East
- St. Louis Cardinals - Founding member; formerly of the NL East

With every division in Major League Baseball (MLB) comprised of 5 teams, with the exceptions of the AL West and NL Central, the majority of teams in the MLB have a 20% (1/5) chance of making the playoffs at the start of every baseball season.
With Bud Selig and all the bureaucrats in charge of baseball so worried about the competitive balance in Major League Baseball, why don't they start by evening out the divisions so teams in the NL Central won't be at a innate disadvantage as they have been for the past ten years, NL Central teams have a 16.6% (1/6) chance to make the playoffs when the baseball season starts. On the other hand teams in the AL West have an innate advantage every season, having a 25% (1/4) chance to make the playoffs. How the hell is that fair and why the hell aren't people in Cincinnati, Chicago, Houston, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis complaining about this problem? At least Reds and Pirates fans should start complaining, the last time they were both in the playoffs was 1990 when they met in the NLCS.
Does any NFC or AFC teams in the NFL have imbalanced divisions? No, every team, every division, the AFC and NFC South, East, North, and West, all comprised of 4 teams in each division. Every team in professional football has a 25% chance to make the playoffs at the start of every regular season.
How about the NBA? No, the Eastern Conference has 15 teams and the Western Conference has 15 teams. Every team in the NBA has a 53.3% (8/15) chance of making the playoffs each season. The NHL, the MLS, even the WNBA, all have balanced divisions. Everybody is always talking about how great those AL West teams are, well they have one less team to compete with in their division in comparison to every other team in baseball, except those in the NL Central who they have two less teams in comparison. How they hell aren't people getting pissed about this?
My remedy, lets move the Houston Astros to the NL West, then move the Arizona Diamond Backs (D'Backs) to the AL West. Why? Because the Astros original division was the NL West and their franchises home city is farther west than any other NL Central team by geographical location. To the D'Backs, well they have only been in Major League Baseball for 10 years (founded in 1998), so seniority rules therefor it's not their decision to make or argue against. Why would baseball want to give the ten year old team based in Phoenix an innate advantage over the one hundred and twenty six year old, 5 time World Champion Cincinnati Reds in the first place (founded in 1882)? This who dilemma, in my opinion, makes no sense, especially with MLB Commissioner Bud Selig coming from Milwaukee and the Brewers organization, how about help out your hometown Bud!
In the end there should never be an answer to the question "What is the largest division in major league baseball?" In my mind it is absolutely outrageous this has been accepted since 1998 by the fans of teams in the NL Central. Fans in those cities need to start voicing their anger with baseballs imbalance and unfair set up. The only other way we could fix this problem other than moving the Astros to the NL West and the D'Backs to the AL West would be to add six expansion teams to Major League Baseball which would result in every division having an even six teams in , just as the current NL Central has.
The first option is much easier and more likely than the second, so people of Phoenix better live with it and Houston, your divisional away game travel will be shorter and you don't fit in with the Midwest cities anyway. As a Reds fan, I have traveled to watch the Reds in every other city in the NL Central but yours, its just too far. If Houston and Arizona refuse the change and won't allow competitive balance by those means then simply adjust the NL Wildcard to make it automatically go to the second place team in the NL Central (rather than the team with the best record among divisional second-place teams), that would give NL Central teams a 33% chance to make the playoffs, any complaints?
*Team playoff probabilities do not account in the AL and NL Wild Card.
1 recs |
269
comments
| Add your comment
Read Related
Comments
I think
That having an odd number of teams would make scheduling much more difficult since interleague play is only for a short amount of time.
by Reddrummer9187 on
Jul 30, 2008 11:24 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
I rec this whole friggin' thing
Not cause I give a damn, but because I think I’m falling for you Brent Beck.
Dusty Baker probably likes to kick cute little puppies too.
by Pops Daniels on
Jul 30, 2008 11:32 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
disapproval abounds
So hey, umm....do you guys mind if I have this fruit roll-up?
by chandrathan on
Jul 30, 2008 11:41 AM EDT
up
reply
1 recs
seconded
please dont shit on my dreams. i dont want shit on my dreams.
by Charlie Scrabbles on
Jul 30, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
you cant have an odd number of teams in each league
scheduling nightmare. personally, i think the way of doing things is fine. if the Reds want to go to the playoffs they just need to play better.
please dont shit on my dreams. i dont want shit on my dreams.
by Charlie Scrabbles on
Jul 30, 2008 11:33 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
Scheduling Nightmare?
Who cares? There are dozens of people and computers whose only job is to come up with the mlb schedule. I think they can deal with a curveball or two. Why can’t there always be an interleague series going? Who’s gonna complain besides Bud Selig?
The argument that it makes it “too confusing” to have odd numbers of teams is based on the premise that “too confusing” = impossible.
I’ve seen secretaries do amazing things with schedules. Surely MLB can live up to that standard.
Save the Trolls! http://hetfet.org
by Obi Juan Kenobez on
Jul 31, 2008 12:19 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Meh.
That’s exactly it. As inter-league play is currently set up, all of it happens in a small window of time for all teams. If each league had 15 teams, then every day inter-league play isn’t happening, there would have to be one team in each league that wouldn’t play each day, which would make scheduling a 162 game season impossible.
It’s the same reason people are paranoid about uneven numbers for Spring Training in either Arizona or Florida, though that’s easier to get around with using split-squads.
Does it suck? Yep.
Is it unfair? Yep.
Is it necessary? Probably so.
by RedStalk on
Jul 30, 2008 11:41 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
How?
That makes no sense, screw inter-league play, Make things fair, they can easily remedy the schedules, it is not necessary by any means whatsoever!
I don’t understand that argument at all…
Brent Jonathan Beck
by Brent Beck on
Jul 30, 2008 11:49 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
No, it makes perfect sense.
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.
"My wife ain't never ran and got me no pheasant." - Fistbands
by BK on
Jul 30, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Uh
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.
It's a lousy night to be an atheist!
by Slyde on
Jul 30, 2008 11:51 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
I don't see how this is such a scheduling impossibility...
don’t most teams take a night off every week anyway?
I'm not having even a mediocre year.
by Gray on
Jul 30, 2008 11:52 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
yes, one night
but when you have a series, a team would have to take 3 nights off, wouldn’t they?
It's a lousy night to be an atheist!
by Slyde on
Jul 30, 2008 11:54 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Which is where interleague series come in...
so yes, it would require changing the way interleague play is scheduled, since now we bunch it all up at once.
I'm not having even a mediocre year.
by Gray on
Jul 30, 2008 11:56 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Moreover
you could stagger the starts of series so that you wouldn’t have anyone off for three days at a time. I don’t think it would be that hard to do, though it is slightly more complicated than having an even number of teams. Plus I guess people have gotten used to Mondays as off days for half the teams.
I'm not having even a mediocre year.
by Gray on
Jul 30, 2008 12:02 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Sure
you could stagger. Scheduling would not be impossible, but there would be some awkwardness. For instance, one team’s season would not start until at least two teams have played 3 games. Rainouts would likely really muck up the schedule since it would be less likely that two teams would have coinciding off days. Obviously that’s remedied with double headers and such, but it will still likely lead to some odd scenarios. Road trips will be harder to coordinate without common breaks because if, say, the Reds have to go to San Fran for a series, they may not be on the same rotation schedule as the Dodgers or Padres, so they may end up going all the way out to California for just one series. In fact, that could end up being a big problem since teams will only have certain opportunities to play each other as they come around in the rotation. Coordinating that would be a bitch.
In general I think scheduling will become considerably more complicated.
It's a lousy night to be an atheist!
by Slyde on
Jul 30, 2008 12:27 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Baseball is traditionally scheduled around series, typically of three games
One team would be sitting out an entire series. There’s no way to squeeze 162 games into the schedule (without maybe bringing back scheduled double-headers, but no one’s going for that) in the time allotted.
by Brendanukkah on
Jul 30, 2008 11:54 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
There have to be 16 teams in one league and 14 in the other
That means somebody gets four teams and somebody gets six.
Like Scrabbles says, if you’re a good team, it doesn’t matter how many lesser teams are in your division.
In fact, until the division improved this year, playing in the NL Central has actually been a benefit, because you get more games against crappy teams like Houston, Pittsburgh and (previously) Milwaukee.
by bengalred on
Jul 30, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
Now that it has improved...
Wouldn’t you agree its time to complain?
The 16 teams and 14 teams is the root of the problem, thats why I say seniority rules, ie. the Diamond Backs move to the American League and join the AL West.
Brent Jonathan Beck
by Brent Beck on
Jul 30, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
But the NL West wasn't the problem
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.
by Brendanukkah on
Jul 30, 2008 11:52 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Thats a coincidence and irrelevant
Brent Jonathan Beck
by Brent Beck on
Jul 30, 2008 12:07 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
This sounds like a NEW standard go to answer
my apologies to “I don’t Get it”.
So hey, umm....do you guys mind if I have this fruit roll-up?
by chandrathan on
Jul 30, 2008 12:49 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
That's racist?
It's a lousy night to be an atheist!
by Slyde on
Jul 30, 2008 12:54 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
That's a Coincidence and irrelevant!
So hey, umm....do you guys mind if I have this fruit roll-up?
by chandrathan on
Jul 30, 2008 12:59 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Yes, it's time to complain.
Complain about how the Reds suck, and nothing else. At this point, the only thing moving teams around would accomplish would be to move the Reds from sixth to fifth.
Still last place.
by bengalred on
Jul 30, 2008 11:52 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Technically, I think the Reds have a 24% chance of making the playoffs
and the AL West teams have 34% chance.
I don’t think it is the size of the divisions that are keeping the Reds out of the playoffs.
It's a lousy night to be an atheist!
by Slyde on
Jul 30, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
Yeah but its not helping us either...
We have one more rival, one more divisional opponent, get right outta town!
Brent Jonathan Beck
by Brent Beck on
Jul 30, 2008 11:51 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
What's that you say?

Not the size of the divisions keeping the Reds out of the playoffs? Pshhhaw…

"My wife ain't never ran and got me no pheasant." - Fistbands
by BK on
Jul 30, 2008 11:53 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
how can such a good looking man be so bad at getting to first base?
It's a lousy night to be an atheist!
by Slyde on
Jul 30, 2008 11:55 AM EDT
up
reply
1 recs
I have that exact quote taped above my bathroom mirror
It’s my daily affirmation, only not at all affirming.
by Brendanukkah on
Jul 30, 2008 11:56 AM EDT
up
reply
3 recs
Elaine. you don't know the first thing about first base.
“ha ha well I know something about getting to first base. And I know you’ll never be there.”
“The way I figure it I’ve already been there and I plan on rounding second tonight at around eleven o’clock. “
It's a lousy night to be an atheist!
by Slyde on
Jul 30, 2008 12:01 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
I have a new sig, thanks
sig lines are for suckas
by jch24 on
Jul 30, 2008 12:11 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
what, no chinchilla photos?
What do you mean, "blank slate"?
by boobs on
Jul 30, 2008 12:02 PM EDT
reply
0 recs
I don't get it.
I'm not having even a mediocre year.
by Gray on
Jul 30, 2008 12:02 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
As a Mariner fan who was invited to vote
I don’t really have a problem with this. The NL Central is a lasting reminder of Bud Selig’s idiocy. He missed the Milwaukee Braves, so he moved the Brewers to the NL.
I will not, however, argue that this benefits the AL West teams. While they have fewer competitors to win the division, I suspect that promotes a level of mediocrity that limits their chances at the wild card.
The fairest solution would be to scrap teh unbalanced schedule and put the top 4 teams from each league in the postseason (even though, as of yesterday, the top 4 teams in the AL were all in the AL East when measured by third-order wins)
I like using semi-colons; they make me feel smart.
by Llewdor on
Jul 30, 2008 12:33 PM EDT
reply
0 recs
At some point there will be expansion
32 teams will make it an even 16 in each league. I would like to see MLB revert to two divisions (East and West) per league. Give the WC to the two best non-division winners.
by ken on
Jul 30, 2008 12:38 PM EDT
reply
0 recs
If you're expanding it to 32
Why not have 4 divisions of 4 in each league? Winners move on. Or take 6 from each league and have two wildcards, and give the top division winners first round byes. Like the NFL, right?
"My wife ain't never ran and got me no pheasant." - Fistbands
by BK on
Jul 30, 2008 1:22 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
i don't like your first scenario
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
So hey, umm....do you guys mind if I have this fruit roll-up?
by chandrathan on
Jul 30, 2008 1:26 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Right.
I like the 6 teams in each league, NFL-style scenario better myself.
"My wife ain't never ran and got me no pheasant." - Fistbands
by BK on
Jul 30, 2008 1:37 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
yeah
i’m on board with that
So hey, umm....do you guys mind if I have this fruit roll-up?
by chandrathan on
Jul 30, 2008 1:40 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
But
The playoffs are already too long and silly with a best of five and two best of sevens. Colorado going last year was a prime example of a mediocre team getting hot and reaping the rewards of a dumb, greedy system wherein the best teams often do not make it. I know Boston won, but were the Rocks an appropriate NL representative?
Dusty Baker probably likes to kick cute little puppies too.
by Pops Daniels on
Jul 30, 2008 1:46 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Ah, sorry
forgot about the byes. Maybe it could work.
Dusty Baker probably likes to kick cute little puppies too.
by Pops Daniels on
Jul 30, 2008 1:54 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Good, because I wasn't quite sure what you were saying :-)
So hey, umm....do you guys mind if I have this fruit roll-up?
by chandrathan on
Jul 30, 2008 2:02 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Disagree:
You shouldn’t view the Rockies as a negative.
With that mentality you must have been against George Mason making the NCCA Final Four as well. So you would rather have all the #1 seeds make the Final Four ? Cinderellas are what make sports amazing, being against that, is absurd!

or

Brent Jonathan Beck
by Brent Beck on
Jul 30, 2008 2:54 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
was that meant as a reply to me?
If so, it was a Coincidence, and Irrelevant!
So hey, umm....do you guys mind if I have this fruit roll-up?
by chandrathan on
Jul 30, 2008 3:27 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
George Mason sucks
Not so much the basketball team, but the school itself, and the community in which it resides. Plus the only good bar in town closed on Sunday.
by Brendanukkah on
Jul 30, 2008 3:31 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
I know I told you that I loved you
but you don’t have to act like we’re married.
Dusty Baker probably likes to kick cute little puppies too.
by Pops Daniels on
Jul 30, 2008 3:46 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Ditto
I like two versus four divisions simply because the sports page will be easier to read. And it’s probably pre-realignment nostalgia on my part.
At first I didn’t like your 6 team idea because of the byes. But on second thought it’s not so bad. It gives the legitimately great teams a better shot at going to the WS, which is how it should be. It would never happen because MLB would be missing out on potential revenue.
by ken on
Jul 30, 2008 1:47 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Six playoff teams from each league
Would most certainly assure us of having World Series games being snowed out. Just sayin’
How can such a good looking man be so bad at getting to first base?
by jch24 on
Jul 30, 2008 3:46 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
not if we played them in warm weather stadiums!
So hey, umm....do you guys mind if I have this fruit roll-up?
by chandrathan on
Jul 30, 2008 3:53 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Can montreal have a team again?
Maybe it could be owned by someone who wouldn’t fuck it up this time.
I'm not having even a mediocre year.
by Gray on
Jul 30, 2008 1:46 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
or maybe Puerto Rico
that was cool wasnt it?
please dont shit on my dreams. i dont want shit on my dreams.
by Charlie Scrabbles on
Jul 30, 2008 2:09 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
That was Loria and the league working together.
I like using semi-colons; they make me feel smart.
by Llewdor on
Jul 30, 2008 2:51 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
What if we could clone Johnny Bench and Tony Perez?
It ain’t the schedule, or the divisions. Our team isn’t playing good enough to win games anywhere on a consistent basis. Got get them fired up or fire some of them or both.
I often think how different the world would be if Hitler had not been turned down when he applied for art school. - George Carlin
by Madville on
Jul 30, 2008 2:42 PM EDT
reply
0 recs
It would be a scheduling nightmare
And I’m opposed to most any plan that expands interleague play, as this would do by necessity.
A better way to go would be two new teams and rearranging into four divisions of four each. That would even let us shorten interleague play, since we wouldn’t have two NL teams sitting out all the time.
"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
by kishi on
Jul 30, 2008 3:23 PM EDT
reply
0 recs
Besides
Do you really think playing fewer games against the Astros and more games against the Cubs, Cardinals, and Brewers is going to increase your playoff chances?
"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
by kishi on
Jul 30, 2008 3:50 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Yes
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.
by ken on
Jul 30, 2008 4:23 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Adding two teams.
Charlotte then either Portland or Las Vegas
Throw Charlotte in the AL East and add the other to the AL West. I think either of those three cities could maintain a strong fan base. Any ideas from the crowd on cities worthy of a team?
also imo, keep baseball as far away from Montreal as possible and although it would be interesting, I doubt Puerto Rico would work
by jacob brumfield on
Jul 30, 2008 3:41 PM EDT
reply
0 recs
Not so sure about Charlotte
It used to be a place with a strong local identity, but over the last twenty-five years it has become kind of transient city - a city with a population boom to be sure - but still a bit fickle with sports teams.
The team would have to be an AL team IMO because of the strong following the Braves have in the Carolinas. But, then again, maybe not.
Kentuck Arts Festival: October 18th.
Details at Sinful Savage Tigers on MySpace.
by Man Mountain on
Jul 30, 2008 4:50 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs



