MLB made a bunch of on-field rule changes for this year.
The pitch clock, you’ve already heard about. Pitchers can’t just hold the ball forever and slow the game down. They have to get the ball and fire it off within 20 seconds. Batters have to stop adjusting their batting gloves after every pitch. The extreme infield shift is gone, bases have been replaced by old pizza boxes (apparently) and the Mets are apparently required to spend $300 million dollars every month.
Okay, maybe not the last one.
But the biggest change this year does not concern pace of play, or how an infielder has to be actually positioned on the infield (and not mid-right field), or how many times the first baseman is allowed to cup-check a baserunner.
Nope. It involves the far-reaching future of the game: and that is the eventual elimination of the American and National Leagues and the creation of a set-up closer to the NBA, NFL and NHL.
With the DH becoming permanent in both leagues last season, the rules are now the exact same in both leagues. There used to be differences besides the DH in the NL and AL. They were minor, but they existed. The strike zone was different- like from the uniform lettering to the knees instead of the chest to the knees (is the best example I can think of) and the umpires used to only work in one league or the other, meaning the subtleties of the game varied like how a Big Mac is different from a Whopper. It’s still a burger, but it’s different.
So this year, after the DH, they could move on to the next step: having to play every team every year. The NBA has always done this, and so has the NHL. (The NFL can’t because of the length of the schedule, but they go to great lengths to vary opponents by season.) MLB has never done this for several reasons.
First of all, the American League was founded as a rival league to the National League, officially becoming a "Major League” in 1903. The NFL, NHL and NBA started as one league (mostly, at least for these purposes) and gradually expanded into 30-or-so league teams under the same umbrella. MLB began as two rival leagues and nobody wanted to merge together (unlike the AFL, which almost immediately started merger talks with the NFL).
For the first several decades, the AL and the NL operated almost like Microsoft and Apple. Yeah, they ultimately made the same product and there was crossover with the World Series, but they were run as different businesses. They had separate presidents and different rules for lots of things including trades, tie-breakers and other things. This is why, before divisions began in 1969, the NL had three-game playoffs to determine end-of-season first-place ties (the 1951 Giants-Dodgers series being the most well known) while the AL had a one-game winner-take-the-pennant rule (only used once in 1948 between the Indians and Red Sox).
Not only that, but until 1934 you couldn’t trade a player to a team in the other league. Then, the rule became you had to put the player you wanted to trade on waivers in your own league (i.e., another team could claim him), and once he cleared waivers you could then make the trade. During their heyday in the 40’s and 50’s, the Yankees took advantage of this by waiting until the trade deadline passed and then offering to buy a player for straight cash. Since no NL team could make a trade for the player after the deadline, the Yankees then got the player easily. That qualification was eventually modified, but it took until 1985 for non-waiver inter-league trades to be eliminated.
Also, once the DH was brought to the AL in 1973, there was a significant strategy difference between the leagues. They also couldn’t decide what to do with the DH in the World Series. For years it was every-other-year. Then it was allowed in the AL park but not the NL park. This then was applied to inter-league play as well when it began in 1995.
So the DH in all leagues meant the next step was playing every team every year. And this means a reduction in the amount of games you play against teams in your own division. From 19 games, it goes to 13- two series at home and two on the road. This is both good and bad. As a Giants fan, things get more amped when the Dodgers come to town- which this year they will only do twice- during the very first homestand and then for the very last series of the year. And the two series in LA are in June- and then the week before the very last series of the year.
Now, that sucks. To only see the Dodgers four times total, and for that to be April, June, and the final two weeks of September isn’t fun. When the season is starting to feel like a slog, I’ll bet even for the players, nothing gets you amped like playing the same rival you’ve had since 1889. A Dodger series in June or August always revs things up.
But that’s gone. On the other hand, at times it felt like every other series was against the lowly Diamondbacks or the stumbling Rockies. So to get rid of two series each against both of those teams is not an issue in the slightest. But to replace them with home games against the Orioles, Rays, Royals and Pirates?
I mean…. I guess so?
Because the other leagues do not emphasize rivalries like baseball does, it seems like baseball thinks the way to get more popular is to play more teams as opposed to playing the same teams more often. Never mind that the NHL is clearly the least popular league and the schedule doesn’t matter, and that despite having one-fifth the number of games the NFL continues to be the most popular league no matter what.
Now that the rules are the same and you play everybody, why bother keeping the leagues separate? I mean you could, but it really seems like this move is a precursor to eliminating the idea of two separate leagues, even though for all true purposes it’s already happened and they are separate leagues in name only. And with no separate leagues, it’s a perfect time for realignment by geography.
While there are lots of different projections as to how those divisions will be split up (the through-line being Seattle will have to travel a lot no matter what), the realignment won’t happen until MLB expands to 32 teams, that part is easy to predict.
The question becomes do you follow the NFL or NHL/NBA model? The NFL model is to have a West/East/North/South division in each conference, while the NHL/NBA model is to break conferences up by West/East, and insisting that Louisiana and Tennessee are in the west to make it even.
Then it’s a matter of choosing either the NHL model of two 16-team conferences with two eight-team divisions each, or the NFL model of four four-team divisions per conference. Then there’s another decision of how many division games you want. Since I don’t think they want to go to fewer than two series at home per divisional opponent, I suggest a combo of the two models: four-team divisions with a Western/Eastern Conference split (which would mean the Dodgers and Mets or Red Sox and Angels could be World Series matchups, for example, which sounds weird but would be possible).
And I know I said “no math,” but schedule-wise it works out perfectly: 14 games per division opponent times 3 equals 42 games (7 at home and 7 away). 6 games against the other 12 conference teams equals 72 games (3 at home and 3 away). And 3 games against the other conference’s 16 teams equals 48 games (3 home or away).
42+72+48=162
Or keep it at 13 games per divisional opponent, like it got reduced to now, make the schedule 159 games and add YET ANOTHER playoff round.
That mess is another issue, for another day. For now, just keep in mind the leagues are going away, and this year is the biggest step towards that. The pitch clock seems pretty insignificant now, doesn’t it?
Thoughtful, incisive analysis--with math!! YES! Often the quietest changes end up rendering thr greatest impact. Personally, I would rather see the Dodgers or Padres than the Rays or Angels anytime. Suspect I am not alone.
Baseball may need to take a step back in its rush to remain relevant and realize rivalries have always been critical to its success.