Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm curious. Would the new schedule have each team playing every team in the other league one 3 game series per season? That would require 45 inter-league games for all clubs and I could live with that. What I don't particularly care for is a one game playoff for two wild card teams. The other option would be a first round bye for the team with the best record. I'm not sure how I would feel about that either, baseball being an everyday game and all. A five team playoff structure seems a bit awkward.
Otherwise, I have no problem with the Astros in the AL. But they're not my team.
So what is your problem with the DH? I like the idea, it removes a plate appearance from someone who isn't a good enough hitter to hold a ML job as a hitter and replaces him with someone who is.
Pitchers are notoriously bad fielders, too, and fans should not need to endure watching pitchers field their position incompetently, when it would be so sensible to have another fielder standing behind the mound, to handle the defensive duties of the center-infielder when the ball it put in play.
And we need to employ courtesy runners, too, for players who are not very fast. It is an indignity, to watch catchers chugging around the bases. We need to remove a base-running appearance from someone who isn't a good enough runner to hold a ML job as a runner and replace him with someone who is.
When such principles are so manifestly Good For Baseball, they ought to be instituted immediately, without further discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
Getting back to the thread topic Astros, it'll be interesting to see how they approach this season. They will need a DH next year.
They will also need eight position players and a pitching rotation. I wonder how they will go about acquiring them.
I predict a win in the All Star game for the NL. It will be the AL, not the NL that will be obliged to fill a roster spot with an Astro.
Just another divison for them to finish at the bottom.
They're not going to finish at the bottom this time because they have a new owner willing to spend more money, and they have only 4 other teams in that division in lieu of 5.
I'm curious. Would the new schedule have each team playing every team in the other league one 3 game series per season? That would require 45 inter-league games for all clubs and I could live with that. What I don't particularly care for is a one game playoff for two wild card teams. The other option would be a first round bye for the team with the best record. I'm not sure how I would feel about that either, baseball being an everyday game and all. A five team playoff structure seems a bit awkward.
Otherwise, I have no problem with the Astros in the AL. But they're not my team.
Your point is duly noted. However, I was born and raised in Houston, so that comes with the package regarding my disposition.
They're not going to finish at the bottom this time because they have a new owner willing to spend more money, and they have only 4 other teams in that division in lieu of 5.
This is what you think. New owner doesn't always translate into a guy willing to spend money on prime free agents. You also have to sell Houston to that player. Just because you offer the most money also doesn't mean you get that free agent. Simple question now...would most guys rather sign for similiar money for a constant contender or take a chance on a new team willing to spend, kind of like what the National did? I think that should answer it for you. Houston will have to significantly outbid teams otherwise most top notch free agents will probably go elsewhere but giving a blank check to a guy like Pujols might be a good start for them. Otherwise I stand by my comments and see them (at the bottom) as either last or next to last in their new division.
Instead of there being a National and American League, I think they should revise the divisions altogether and make the MLB have an Eastern and Western Conference like they do in the NBA. They'd save a ton of money traveling, and they wouldn't have late games coming on all the time on the East Coast. The players would perform better because they wouldn't be jetlagged, either. Here's what I had in mind.
EASTERN BASEBALL CONFERENCE
Atlantic Division
Boston Red Sox
New York Mets
New York Yankees
Philadelphia Phillies
Toronto Blue Jays
Central Division
Cincinnati Reds
Cleveland Indians
Detroit Tigers
Milwaukee Brewers
Pittsburgh Pirates
Southeast Division
Atlanta Braves
Baltimore Orioles
Florida Marlins
Tampa Bay Rays
Washington Nationals
WESTERN BASEBALL CONFERENCE
Midwest Division
Chicago Cubs
Chicago White Sox
Kansas City Royals
Minnesota Twins
Saint Louis Cardinals
Pacific Division
Los Angeles Angels
Los Angeles Dodgers
Oakland Athletics
San Francisco Giants
Seattle Mariners
Southwest Division
Arizona Diamondbacks
Colorado Rockies
Houston Astros
San Diego Padres
Texas Rangers
Last edited by Mephistopheles; 11-21-2011 at 10:10 AM..
This way they can have the Subway Series, Crosstown Classics, and Freeway Series year-round in New York, Chicago, and L.A. and make the games that much more entertaining and sprucing up the local rivalries. I guarantee you every game in those three locales would be a sellout if it were between the home teams and the other franchise from the same city. Let's not forget about the Battle of the Bay between San Francisco and Oakland or the Beltway Series between the Orioles and Nationals, too.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.