Yet Another Bad Idea

By David Marasco

150 years after Alexander Cartwright created baseball as we know it, the owners have brought the fine game another step towards ruin. Interleague play -- it's just a bad idea. Long run damage in exchange for money up front. A New York paper had a simple headline, "E - Owners."

Baseball is baseball because it is timeless. It was once said that if you took an American from 100 years ago and brought them forwards in time, the only thing that they would recognize would be baseball. Well, I think that they would be confused by things like astroturf, the DH, closers, night baseball and integration, but you get the point. Football tweaks its rules every year. Basketball also does the same to a lesser extent. Tradition is what sells baseball. It isn't on the same level with basketball for pure athleticism, and football attracts a lot of interest because it is so easy to bet on. So why do people go to watch baseball? Because they remember when they were little their parents would take them to baseball games. Anything that puts distance between the current product and memories is a direct blow to baseball's main selling point. So now the owners want to throw away 100 years of tradition for some extra short-term cash. Stupid.

Suppose you aren't a traditionalist, and you want reasons beyond "it's not the game my parents knew." What is so evil about the proposed system? Well, it makes for bad baseball and it doesn't even live up to its promises. In the new plan, each division will play three games against a team in another division in the opposite league, that division going on a rotating basis. In the end, a team plays any given team in the other league once every three years. Every Summer, you see kid pitchers coming up from AAA and AA. They look like the second coming of Cy Young as the other team doesn't know their stuff. After a couple of starts, the scouting catches up and then the kid isn't that good anymore. Most teams probably won't scout for only three games a year. So we are going to see a lot of unprepared players playing baseball. This will just provide for a poor product. On top of scant scounting, short series also remove a layer of strategy from baseball.

What makes baseball a thinking person's game is the matchup between the pitcher and the batter. Sure you have to break down a defense in basketball and the QB has to make his reads, but that is more like a see-and-react situation; any real tactical change will be made by a coach, not a player. Baseball is paced so that in-between each pitch the pitcher and the batter have enough time to try to make a resonable guess (don't knock the word, Williams said batters should be guessing all of the time) as to what the other is expecting and then adjust accordingly. While this works in the short run, it gets really good in the long run. If I'm Hideo Nomo, and I'm down by 4 runs, do I really show Bonds my best pitch if it is early in the season? Do I take a bit off of my fast ball so that a month later I can blow it by him? It's an iterative process. Now, under the current proposal, you only face each team in the annointed division in the other league one series that year. This means you are only going to see that other team's starter once. No reason to play cat-and-mouse games for that. As a result baseball loses one of the complexities that makes it so wonderful.

Another effect of the new plan is that it disrupts one of the nice things about the way the schedule works. Under today's system, a person can just clear their calendar on Sundays for the entire Summer. If you simply go and watch the home team every Sunday that they are in town, the you will see every team in the league. Under the new plan this is not assured.

But what about the argument that under this system people in NL cities get to see AL talent (and vice versa)? Well, yes and no. Suppose I want to see Hideo Nomo and I live in Cleveland. It could take a long time. In the first year the Indians could play the NL Central, the next the NL East. Ok, in the third year they'll play the NL West. But they could play them on the road. You could wait six years to see Nomo. Over a 12 year span, you will see exactly six home games against the other team. Outside of Nolan Ryan, not a lot of players have a 12 year peak. So you may or may not see who you want to see. As you can see, the offer of seeing the best talent isn't all that it is cracked up to be. Here's a thought for you, suppose you have waited for 6 years to see Nomo, and it's not his turn in the rotation in any of the three games? Sorry, wait another six years. The way Lasorda burns out arms, you might never see Nomo.

Another argument being floated is that in the four two-team cities rivalries will be fostered. In LA, New York, the Bay Area and Chicago, the AL and NL teams play exhibition series against each other on a semi-annual basis. Ok, so now the games count in the standings. If it's really a rivalry that shouldn't matter. Will Oakland-SF or LA-California ever be 1% of the Dodgers-Giants? No, it won't. So these cities get nothing, as they could see any team in either league anyway.

And how about that DH? Currently, we'll have the DH in the AL's home park, and no DH in the NL parks. So a pitcher in the AL will come to bat in 1.5 games (15 games vs. NL w/five man rotation + 50% home/road) a year. That isn't worth batting practice, so these guys won't even be able to execute a bunt. That's going to make for some really bad baseball.

The really bothersome thing is that this isn't the final plan, but mearly a transition device. Arizona and Florida have already been awarded franchises. Most likely one will go to each league so that the owners can split the expansion money. A pair of 15 team leagues demands constant interleague play (otherwise the odd team would sit and spin). Since there's no way that the owners would convince the players to get rid of the DH, they would eventually force the NL to adopt the DH.

Here is my solution to this mess. Expand not by two teams, but by four teams. Go to 4 eight team leagues, and have the winners of each play in the post-season. Here's my alignment:

National League
St. Louis Cardinals
Chicago Cubs
Philadelphia Phillies
Pittsburgh Pirates
San Francisco Giants
Cincinatti Reds
Atlanta Braves
LA Dodgers



American League
Chicago White Sox
Minnesota Twins
Oakland A's
Detroit Tigers
Cleveland Indians
Baltime Orioles
New York Yankees
Boston Red Sox



League III
Montreal Expos
San Diego Padres
New York Mets
Houston Astros
Flordia Marlins
Colorado Rockies
Florida/Arizona
Havana Sugar Kings



League IV
California Angels
Texas Rangers
KC Royals
Milwaukee Brewers
Seattle Mariners
Toronto Blue Jays
Florida/Arizona
Washington Senators

In the NL and the AL, the DH will be banned along with Astroturf. Integration, air travel and night baseball will be retained. In leagues III and IV, you can have the DH, astroturf, high altitude home-runs, aluminum bats, neon baseballs, the two-point conversion, whatever. Real fans will watch the AL and the NL, who will meet every year in the post-season. The winner will play the winner of the other leagues. But for real fans, it will be like watching the Superbowl. Regardless of the outcome, the true champion was crowned in the NFC title game. Note that I've brought back the Washing Senators (First in war, first in peace, last in League III) and awarded a franchise to Havana. If you believe the Cuban baseball hype, the Havana franchise has a chance to dominate League III for the first several decades of its existence.

With 8 team leagues, we can go back to the 154 game schedule, play each team in your league 22 times (now that's a real way to get a rivalry) and have a true pennant race. Lord help us next year when one team wins the wildcard because it got to play its interleague games against the weak NL Central rather than a strong NL East....

In the 90's we've had a strike, expansion, interleague play and a Canadian team winning the series back-to-back. Can anything else go wrong with this game? Bart Giamatti rolls in his grave....