Commissioner Rob Manfred caused a bit of a stir recently when he said during an ESPN telecast that expansion and realignment could be on the table soon.
That led to a number of suggestions and ideas about what baseball's league and divisional structure might look like in the future, with geography and traditional rivalries driving much of that discussion.
But there's another factor that in theory can be used to reorganize the sport: market size.
With a collective bargaining fight looming, competitive balance — and how to improve it — is likely to be a major point of contention. If owners pursue a salary cap, that could lead to particularly nasty negotiations and even the possibility of a work stoppage. But what if you could achieve greater competitive balance through realignment — by having two divisions of large-market franchises and two of small-market teams?
Consider the following proposal, which attempts to divide teams into geographic conferences, with divisions based mostly on market rankings from baseball's current collective bargaining agreement. Let's assume for the sake of this exercise that the new expansion teams would be in Nashville and Salt Lake City — and we'll start both of them in a small-market division.
EASTERN CONFERENCE
Big Market Division: Yankees, Mets, Blue Jays, Nationals, Phillies, Red Sox, Braves, Twins
Small Market Division: Rays, Tigers, Marlins, Orioles, Guardians, Cardinals, Pirates, Reds
WESTERN CONFERENCE
Big Market Division: Angels, Dodgers, Cubs, White Sox, Giants, Rangers, Astros, Mariners
Small Market Division: Athletics, Diamondbacks, Rockies, Padres, Royals, Brewers, Nashville, Salt Lake City
The top three teams in each division could make the postseason, with division champs earning byes. Now even if the Mets outspend the Marlins by a huge margin, it's still not clear which you'd rather be if the goal is to make the playoffs on a regular basis.
There would certainly be drawbacks. Wealthier teams would complain the small-market teams have it too easy. And if teams play more games within their divisions, the small-market teams might face an attendance drop if New York and Los Angeles don't come to town as often.
Also, at least on paper, this format could lead to more playoff mismatches. But we've seen enough postseason baseball to know that anything can happen in a short series — and if you're a team like Pittsburgh or Kansas City, this setup could provide a better path to contention, without a divisive push for a salary cap.
Trivia time
The last major realignment took place after the 1993 season, when baseball went from four divisions to six. That mostly involved moving teams from the East and West into the newly created Central divisions — but one club switched divisions without moving into the Central. Who was that?
Line of the week
Philadelphia's Ranger Suárez allowed three hits in seven scoreless innings and struck out a career-high 11 in a 3-2 win over Washington on Sunday. It was just what the Phillies needed after losing ace Zack Wheeler for the season because of thoracic outlet syndrome. Philadelphia leads the NL East by seven games.
Comeback of the week
Down 10-4 in the seventh inning Tuesday night, Atlanta scored five runs in that inning, then took the lead on Drake Baldwin's two-run single in the eighth and beat the Chicago White Sox 11-10. The Braves had a win probability of 1.4% at the start of the seventh according to Baseball Savant.
Trivia answer
The Braves moved from the NL West to the NL East — although it may have been more accurate geographically to leave Pittsburgh in the East and put Atlanta in the Central. Part of the reason the Pirates were willing to move to the NL Central was to be with teams of comparable market size.
___
AP MLB: https://apnews.com/hub/mlb
Noah Trister, The Associated Press