Should the Astros be moved to another division?

[StupidMoniker]

Since the NL Central has 6 teams and the AL West has 4, and since the Astros are the westernmost team in the NL central, should they be moved to the AL West? That way every division would have 5 teams. Just something I was pondering as I looked at the standings today.

[br0ken_shad0w]

Can't do that; something about unbalanced scheduling (forgot the reason).

[bobrek]

That means there would have to be an interleague game every day of the season or else 2 teams would be off every day of the season.

[Refman]

This was talked about when they did realignment. As I recall, McLane was hard against such a move as it would kill any rivalries we had created over the years (Braves, Mets, Reds).

I doubt they will move any more teams to different leagues again.

[Storm Surge]

going to the west coast and playing all these 9 o'clock games doesnt' sound to appealing

[weslinder]

I'm sorry, but aren't you a Yankees fan? You wouldn't understand this. If the Astros went to the Junior Circuit and started playing gimmick ball, I would find another team to root for. MLB wanted to move the Astros to the NL West, but McLane said not to because of the additional Pacific Time Zone road games.

[BigM]

AL baseball and the DH is so boring compared to the NL, so i certainly would vote against this. take that sh!t away and let all the teams play under the same rules.

[jev5555]

It wouldn't be a problem if there weren't a stupid DH rule.

[Cannonball]

As mentioned, if you had 15 teams in each league, you'd have to have at least 1 interleague series going on a time. The MLB obviously didn't want this and decided to put 16 teams in the NL and 14 in the AL. It used to be 14 in both leagues with both West divisions having 4 teams. But Tampa Bay and Arizona joined in 1998. The didn't want Tampa in the NL because Florida was already there and for some reason, they didn't want to put Arizona in the AL too, so they moved Miluakee to the NL.

[Cannonball]

Forgot: The decision was that one team from the AL Central had the choice to move to the NL Central. The first offer went to Kansas City who elected to stay in the AL. The option to switch leagues was then offered to Milwuakee who accepted. If they had refused, the move would have been offered to Minnesota.

[gunn]

AL baseball and the DH is so boring compared to the NL....

Yeah its really a blast to watch pitchers hit. Let me tell you, i've really been dying to see Wandy Rodriguez and Ian Snell square up on Ben Sheets and John Smoltz. I just get all jittery with anticipation for those match-ups.

[DOMINATOR]

Yeah its really a blast to watch pitchers hit. Let me tell you, i've really been dying to see Wandy Rodriguez and Ian Snell square up on Ben Sheets and John Smoltz. I just get all jittery with anticipation for those match-ups.
thats not really the point... its the late inning situations that make it interesting... should you take out your SP when hes doin good to put a PH in for more runs etc... its real baseball

[smeiou78]

Since the NL Central has 6 teams and the AL West has 4, and since the Astros are the westernmost team in the NL central, should they be moved to the AL West? That way every division would have 5 teams. Just something I was pondering as I looked at the standings today.

That would be more balanced, but the Rangers are already in the AL West. They're not going to put both Texas teams in the same division.

[smeiou78]

It wouldn't be a problem if there weren't a stupid DH rule.

I also like the NL because their pitchers actually have the balls to hit for themselves.

[gunn]

thats not really the point... its the late inning situations that make it interesting... should you take out your SP when hes doin good to put a PH in for more runs etc... its real baseball

Yeah, real interesting.....

[bobrek]

That would be more balanced, but the Rangers are already in the AL West. They're not going to put both Texas teams in the same division.

It would NOT be balanced unless MLB decides to drastically change the interleague format. With an odd number of teams in each league, there would have to be an interleague game every single day of the season. It is bad enough when teams don't play within their division in September. It would be doubly worse if teams don't even play within their league in September.

If they did do something that drastic, why wouldn't they put both Texas teams in the same division? California teams are in the same division.

[Nick]

You can't have an odd number of teams in a league... it doesn't work.

Having 1 interleague series for every series throughout the year would kill any sort of "nuance" that the 2 weeks of interleague play provides. As it is, its only real big in NY, Chicago, and LA (and maybe Houston-Arlington). The rest of the rivalries are blah.

[StupidMoniker]

That means there would have to be an interleague game every day of the season or else 2 teams would be off every day of the season.
I hadn't considered the problem of having an odd number of teams in each league. I guess there are just going to have to be messed up divisions until MLB either expands or contracts.

[DOMINATOR]

Yeah, real interesting.....
have fun watching old has beens and fat asses try to hit a homerun every at bat.

[Brando2101]

The Last time the MLB talked about realignment, this was the plan:

AL (3 divisions, 1 wildcard)

1
New York
Boston
Baltimore
Toronto

2
Texas
Chicago White Sox
Detroit
Kansas City
Minnesota
Clevland


3
Arizona
Oakland
LA Angels
Seattle


NL (4 divisions. No Wildcard)

1
New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington (Formerly Montreal)

2
Cincinnati
Tampa Bay
Florida
Atlanta


3
St Louis
Houston
Chicago Cubs
Milwaukee

4
San Fransisco
LA Dodgers
San Diego
Colorado


The idea was to get Texas out of the Pacific time zone. At the time, Arizona and Tampa Bay could have been moved to the opposite league without their consent but that expansion clause has expired. The plan failed though. No one liked getting rid of the Wild Card in the NL. Awful awful idea.

[WhoMikeJames]

Can someone explain to me in a simple basic way why you can't have an odd number of teams and why there would be an interleague game every day.

[msn]

Can someone explain to me in a simple basic way why you can't have an odd number of teams and why there would be an interleague game every day.
It takes two teams to play a game, right?

Well, if you have fifteen teams in the NL and fifteen in the junior circuit, you have the following on a given Friday night:<ul><li>Fourteen NL teams are playing seven games, but the fifteenth is the odd team out;</li><li>Fourteen AL teams are playing seven more games, but the fifteen is the odd team out as well;</li><li>It follows that the odd NL and AL teams will either play one another or have the night off.</li></ul>

[Nick]

Can someone explain to me in a simple basic way why you can't have an odd number of teams and why there would be an interleague game every day.

See MSN's post above.

Baseball is the only major sport where EVERY team plays on most days of the week: namely, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday.

Monday and Thursday are always travel days for at least some teams.

[SamCassell]

Not just an extra day off for the team not matched up due to the odd number, but a whole series off, because the other 14 teams would be playing each other for 3 or 4 days. 3 or 4 days off in a row, except for the allstar break, never happens in baseball. So, the suggestion that you'd have the odd teams play each other in an interleague series to even it out. But then you've got interleague games going on in the heat of a pennant chase, down the stretch in September, and nobody wants that.

[leroy420]

Also, IIRC, Arizona is the only team that can move. I think it was part of their expansion deal that MLB reserves the right to move them to the AL if necessary.

[MadMax]

No, thank you. I would vomit. Hate the DH. Can't stand the thought of so many road games starting at 9.

[weslinder]

Yeah its really a blast to watch pitchers hit. Let me tell you, i've really been dying to see Wandy Rodriguez and Ian Snell square up on Ben Sheets and John Smoltz. I just get all jittery with anticipation for those match-ups.

I'd be even more entertained if they had a trapeze act in centerfield, but that's not baseball either.

Besides, it's not the actual fact of a DH that makes the AL such bad baseball, it's what that leads to. Since good AL lineups have no holes, all hitters concerned about extending the game by any means possible. So there is no negative to the 7th or 8th hitter taking a walk with two outs and men on, and no reason to swing at mediocre pitches. Stolen bases, sac flies, and bunts lose most of their value. So fewer hitters come up trying to actually hit (and rather, just get on base), the game takes longer, and the score gets run up with very little action in the process.

[MadMax]

Besides, it's not the actual fact of a DH that makes the AL such bad baseball, it's what that leads to. Since good AL lineups have no holes, all hitters concerned about extending the game by any means possible. So there is no negative to taking a walk, and no reason to swing at mediocre pitches. Stolen bases, sac flies, and bunts lose most of their value. So fewer hitters come up trying to actually hit (and rather, just get on base), the game takes longer, and the score gets run up with very little action in the process.

and the games last for freaking ever. the consequences of changing pitchers is minimized. takes foreveeeeerrrrrrrrr....foorrrrrreeeeevvvvveeeeeerrrrrr

[msn]

The junior circuit sucks and the DH is the devil.

And *yes*, watching the pitcher come to the plate adds another element to the dynamics of the game--unless you're just another shallow chick that digs the long ball.

[smeiou78]

It would NOT be balanced unless MLB decides to drastically change the interleague format. With an odd number of teams in each league, there would have to be an interleague game every single day of the season. It is bad enough when teams don't play within their division in September. It would be doubly worse if teams don't even play within their league in September.

If they did do something that drastic, why wouldn't they put both Texas teams in the same division? California teams are in the same division.

It would be more balanced as in the number of teams in each division. If they need more interleague games, that's fine. Some people get tired of seeing the same team every other day, and it would be something new for the fans.

The only reason California teams are in the same division is because there are more than 2 California teams, so they obviously can't put just one in each league. Why do you think the 2 Chicago teams aren't in the same league? They try to split them up as much as possible.

[msn]

It would be more balanced as in the number of teams in each division. If they need more interleague games, that's fine. Some people get tired of seeing the same team every other day, and it would be something new for the fans.
No, it's not fine.

Interleague games suck.

Here's what's boring about the MLB schedule (because I'll agree some balance and change is needed).

It's *not* the division alignment (although I'd prefer to be back in the West with those (@*#& Dodgers myself).

It's this ridiculous, stupid, boring, belaboured unbalanced-schedule BS. We get six games with the Dodgers. SIX. SIX. And we get eighteen tension-filled contests with the Pirates and Brewers. Eighteen.

If I see the Brewers or Cubs one more time this season, I'm going to freaking hurl. But, that's OK--I get to see each of them eighteen more times next season, too. Meanwhile, games that used to be interesting--the Dodgers, the Giants, the Pads, the ($#@( Mets, the Phillies, the (*&#(&$ Braves, only six times a year.

The unbalanced schedule is the worst thing that has ever happened to MLB scheduling. It's boring as hell. The second worst thing that ever happened to MLB scheduling is interleague games.

[A-Train]

I hate the DH, too...I also believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days...

[smeiou78]

No, it's not fine.

Interleague games suck.

Here's what's boring about the MLB schedule (because I'll agree some balance and change is needed).

It's *not* the division alignment (although I'd prefer to be back in the West with those (@*#& Dodgers myself).

It's this ridiculous, stupid, boring, belaboured unbalanced-schedule BS. We get six games with the Dodgers. SIX. SIX. And we get eighteen tension-filled contests with the Pirates and Brewers. Eighteen.

If I see the Brewers or Cubs one more time this season, I'm going to freaking hurl. But, that's OK--I get to see each of them eighteen more times next season, too. Meanwhile, games that used to be interesting--the Dodgers, the Giants, the Pads, the ($#@( Mets, the Phillies, the (*&#(&$ Braves, only six times a year.

The unbalanced schedule is the worst thing that has ever happened to MLB scheduling. It's boring as hell. The second worst thing that ever happened to MLB scheduling is interleague games.

What is so bad about interleague games? You get to see new teams, and you WOULDN'T have to play the Pirates & Brewers 18 times a year.

[bobrek]

It would be more balanced as in the number of teams in each division. If they need more interleague games, that's fine. Some people get tired of seeing the same team every other day, and it would be something new for the fans.

The only reason California teams are in the same division is because there are more than 2 California teams, so they obviously can't put just one in each league. Why do you think the 2 Chicago teams aren't in the same league? They try to split them up as much as possible.

Please point me to the third California team in the AL. I am at a loss after Oakland and Anaheim.

Assume the Astros and Brewers are fighting it out for the division title the last weekend of the season. The Astros have to play the Cardinals, while the Brewers get the Royals. Teams should be playing within their own league during the stretch run and in their division as much as possible. Season long interleague play would make that impossible.

[JayZ750]

Not just an extra day off for the team not matched up due to the odd number, but a whole series off, because the other 14 teams would be playing each other for 3 or 4 days. 3 or 4 days off in a row, except for the allstar break, never happens in baseball. So, the suggestion that you'd have the odd teams play each other in an interleague series to even it out. But then you've got interleague games going on in the heat of a pennant chase, down the stretch in September, and nobody wants that.

I agree with all this, but these days, with some teams starting the season days below other teams, you could envision a scenario whereby there'd be enough teams playing at different parts in their series to make it work. Obviously, you need a serious computer algorithm to check it out, but it might be possible. Obviously, you'd have to stagger both the beginning of the season and the end of the season over a bunch of days (say 3 or 4). I can see how that would be a bad thing at the end of the season.

[smeiou78]

Please point me to the third California team in the AL. I am at a loss after Oakland and Anaheim.

Assume the Astros and Brewers are fighting it out for the division title the last weekend of the season. The Astros have to play the Cardinals, while the Brewers get the Royals. Teams should be playing within their own league during the stretch run and in their division as much as possible. Season long interleague play would make that impossible.

Please read carefully. Did I say there were 3 California teams in the AL? All I said was that MLB would like to keep the same-state teams separate as much as possible, which is why the White Sox are in the AL and the Cubs are in the NL, and the Yankees are in the AL and the Mets are in the NL. Since there are more than 2 California teams in all of MLB (5, if I counted correctly), it is impossible to split them up in the same way.

As far as your hypothetical situation between the Astros & Brewers, you're absolutely correct. You wouldn't want interleague play then. I haven't thought of all the problems & technicalities of moving the Astros to the AL West because it is not going to happen. I simply remarked that it would be more balanced as far as the the number of teams in each division.

[Brando2101]

Please read carefully. Did I say there were 3 California teams in the AL? All I said was that MLB would like to keep the same-state teams separate as much as possible, which is why the White Sox are in the AL and the Cubs are in the NL, and the Yankees are in the AL and the Mets are in the NL. Since there are more than 2 California teams in all of MLB (5, if I counted correctly), it is impossible to split them up in the same way.

As far as your hypothetical situation between the Astros & Brewers, you're absolutely correct. You wouldn't want interleague play then. I haven't thought of all the problems & technicalities of moving the Astros to the AL West because it is not going to happen. I simply remarked that it would be more balanced as far as the the number of teams in each division.


there was no mlb when the cubs joined the NL and the sox the AL genius. The dodgers and Giants were both from New York and the As came from Philly. They weren't placed anywhere.

You don't know jack about baseball.

[SwoLy-D]

Weren't the Brewers in the AL Central before the 2000's? I remember (R.I.P.) Kirby Puckett wreaking havoc against the NL in the "world series". :confused:

I hate the Designated Hitter rule. What kind of CRAP is that? No wonder AL pitchers who sign with National League teams can't bat worth crap. :mad:

[Akhorahil]

Yes the Brewers used to be in the AL. They came over to the NL when they expanded to three divisions in each league. I think it was 1994.

[Brando2101]

Yes the Brewers used to be in the AL. They came over to the NL when they expanded to three divisions in each league. I think it was 1994.


Yea. That only happened cuase it was was Budd's team. I think that might be the only time a team has crossed over. Up until a few years ago, the leagues still had separate umpires but it seems all signs of the AL and NL being different organizations are gone.

[msn]

What is so bad about interleague games? You get to see new teams, and you WOULDN'T have to play the Pirates & Brewers 18 times a year.
I used to be very much in favor of it. I couldn't wait to see the likes of the Yankees and Mariners in Houston.

Ten freakin' years later, I've seen the Royals and White Sox and the freaking Devil Rays; OH and the Rangers. How many times have the Yankees, Red Sox, or Mariners come to Houston? How many was that again?

Piss on it all.

In the meantime, the Interleague games eat up a part of the season where we could see more games against the Mets, Braves, and Dodgers. FAR more interesting than the freaking Royals.

I know some younger folks may not remember, but the Astros have quite a history with the Dodgers (nothing like Dodgers-Giants, of course), and that's all been cut off with this ridiculous schedule.

It sucks. It's crap. It's stupid. It's boring. It's bullcrap.

Interleague play sucks. The unbalanced schedule sucks. The DH sucks. And the American League sucks.

Thanks for asking.

[smeiou78]

I used to be very much in favor of it. I couldn't wait to see the likes of the Yankees and Mariners in Houston.

Ten freakin' years later, I've seen the Royals and White Sox and the freaking Devil Rays; OH and the Rangers. How many times have the Yankees, Red Sox, or Mariners come to Houston? How many was that again?

Piss on it all.

In the meantime, the Interleague games eat up a part of the season where we could see more games against the Mets, Braves, and Dodgers. FAR more interesting than the freaking Royals.

I know some younger folks may not remember, but the Astros have quite a history with the Dodgers (nothing like Dodgers-Giants, of course), and that's all been cut off with this ridiculous schedule.

It sucks. It's crap. It's stupid. It's boring. It's bullcrap.

Interleague play sucks. The unbalanced schedule sucks. The DH sucks. And the American League sucks.

Thanks for asking.

I have to agree with you there. The schedule sucks, causing pretty much everything else to suck. And the DH is just stupid.

[Poloshirtbandit]

I used to be very much in favor of it. I couldn't wait to see the likes of the Yankees and Mariners in Houston.

Ten freakin' years later, I've seen the Royals and White Sox and the freaking Devil Rays; OH and the Rangers. How many times have the Yankees, Red Sox, or Mariners come to Houston? How many was that again?

Piss on it all.

In the meantime, the Interleague games eat up a part of the season where we could see more games against the Mets, Braves, and Dodgers. FAR more interesting than the freaking Royals.

I know some younger folks may not remember, but the Astros have quite a history with the Dodgers (nothing like Dodgers-Giants, of course), and that's all been cut off with this ridiculous schedule.

It sucks. It's crap. It's stupid. It's boring. It's bullcrap.

Interleague play sucks. The unbalanced schedule sucks. The DH sucks. And the American League sucks.

Thanks for asking.

Agree. Interleague has served it's purpose, time to kill it.

[jopatmc]

I think they'd do fine in the Arizona league. ;)



......................you knew it was coming

[MadMax]

Agree. Interleague has served it's purpose, time to kill it.

i tend to agree.

plus...i kinda liked the idea that the AL team and the NL team had NEVER faced each other by the time they got to the WS. just something different about that.

[StupidMoniker]

Agree. Interleague has served it's purpose, time to kill it.
It's purpose is to draw a ton of fans to the games, which I believe it continues to do. As much as some people dislike it, interleague play is extremely popular.

[MadMax]

It's purpose is to draw a ton of fans to the games, which I believe it continues to do. As much as some people dislike it, interleague play is extremely popular.

In places like NY and CHI where two teams play. I doubt seriously the Astros are drawing more for the AL Central teams that come to play here than they do for the NL Central teams that play here.

[msn]

In places like NY and CHI where two teams play. I doubt seriously the Astros are drawing more for the AL Central teams that come to play here than they do for the NL Central teams that play here.
Tosh. I couldn't WAIT to catch the Royals and Rangers again this year!

[Smokey]

I don't think the Yankees and Red Sox have ever played a regular season game in Houston.

[msn]

I don't think the Yankees and Red Sox have ever played a regular season game in Houston.
DING DING DING!!!

We have a winner.

Screw Interleague play; it only benefits certain markets.

[MadMax]

I don't think the Yankees and Red Sox have ever played a regular season game in Houston.

you're right. it's POSSIBLE they might be scheduled for games here this coming season (2008). but it's not definite.

and this has been going on for what??? 10 years or so now???

[gunn]

The junior circuit sucks and the DH is the devil.

And *yes*, watching the pitcher come to the plate adds another element to the dynamics of the game--unless you're just another shallow chick that digs the long ball.

What an exciting element.....watching possibly some of the most incompetent (using the term loosely) "hitters" try and have a meaningful at bat in possibly a meaningful situation is reeeaaaalllll awesome. I mean, having David Ortiz smash balls into the stands really pales in comparison.

You people are lying to yourselves.

[MadMax]

What an exciting element.....watching possibly some of the most incompetent (using the term loosely) "hitters" try and have a meaningful at bat in possibly a meaningful situation is reeeaaaalllll awesome. I mean, having David Ortiz smash balls into the stands really pales in comparison.

You people are lying to yourselves.

david ortiz would be playing anyway.

i think you're missing his point. he's not saying he loves watching pitchers hit. i think he's saying pitchers in the lineup creates need for strategy and coaching that the AL obviates. the way the game was played for decades before they were taken out. my thought is pretty simple...if you're in the lineup, you need to be in the field as well.

[Poloshirtbandit]

It's purpose is to draw a ton of fans to the games, which I believe it continues to do. As much as some people dislike it, interleague play is extremely popular.

Yeah, because when I see KC Royals on the Astros schedule I just scream in excitement!

[msn]

david ortiz would be playing anyway.

i think you're missing his point. he's not saying he loves watching pitchers hit. i think he's saying pitchers in the lineup creates need for strategy and coaching that the AL obviates. the way the game was played for decades before they were taken out. my thought is pretty simple...if you're in the lineup, you need to be in the field as well.
Precisely. And, one more rebuttal, nay, two:
watching possibly some of the most incompetent (using the term loosely) "hitters" try and have a meaningful at bat in possibly a meaningful situation is reeeaaaalllll awesome. I mean, having David Ortiz smash balls into the stands really pales in comparison.
The entire game is what is exciting to me--all the elements, not just the sexy atbats where the slugger stands in against the great pitcher.
You people are lying to yourselves.
Thanks for the ad hominem, but just because you don't understand someone's position or preference doesn't mean he's "lying to himself." Since we're to the point of ad hominem, allow me to return the volley: you must be one of those shallow chicks who dig only the long ball.

[br0ken_shad0w]

Ugh I used to be for interleague play, but damn is it's usefulness all worned out. And after realizing what the system the MLB uses to set, yeah that really sucks. I know, let's create an Astros-Rangers rivalry even though there's almost no history between them and the only thing they have in common is the fact they are in Texas. Oh yeah we'll keep chugging out teams like the Royals for the Astros to play instead of teams people actually want to see like the Yankees and Red Sox.

And the unbalanced scheduling, there is no reason why in this wild-card era that we have to play division teams so many times. Yes, the media would love to see Yanks-Sox 16 times a year :rolleyes:, but I want to see Braves and Mets and Dodgers damnmit, teams that we have a history against as well as teams that are important in the coming playoffs.

[gunn]

david ortiz would be playing anyway.

you're probably right, but then you people, under the guise of "purists", would complain about defense.


i think you're missing his point. he's not saying he loves watching pitchers hit. i think he's saying pitchers in the lineup creates need for strategy and coaching that the AL obviates. the way the game was played for decades before they were taken out. my thought is pretty simple...if you're in the lineup, you need to be in the field as well.

I'm not missing the point. Coaching in baseball is overrated. You are just leaving room for all but two managers to overthink themselves and to make terrible decision after terrible decision. It results in bad baseball as Garner has shown us time and time again. And there is a reason they are called "managers" and not coaches. Coaches coach and managers manage talent.

As far a strategy goes, who, in your opinion, are the best strategic managers in the game?

[MadMax]

"you people" :) my son has a david ortiz red sox t-shirt...i promise you that you won't hear me complain when he's in the lineup.

good question...i'd have to think about that, honestly. i'm not sure. but i know that timing of removing pitchers isn't given a second thought in the AL. i know that games drag on like crazy. the double-switch doesn't exist. these are things that NL managers have to be thinking about. AL managers just don't. as a fan, i prefer it the NL way. every poll i've ever seen of fans across the country says the same thing. very few really like the DH.

[msn]

I'm not missing the point.
Oh, yes you are. You've got a Derrick Bell hat trick going--0-for-3 with 3 k's. You haven't even made contact.

Coaching in baseball is overrated. You are just leaving room for all but two managers to overthink themselves and to make terrible decision after terrible decision. It results in bad baseball as Garner has shown us time and time again. And there is a reason they are called "managers" and not coaches. Coaches coach and managers manage talent.

As far a strategy goes, who, in your opinion, are the best strategic managers in the game?
SWOOOSH! Swing and a miss! The quality (or lack thereof) of the manager has nothing to do with the quality of the game being played. The game is more challenging when every hitter has to play defense and every pitcher has to hit (or be pinch-hit for and removed from the game). The challenges those rules create, and how teams respond, are far more interesting than lining up a bunch of sluggers and having batting practice for nine innings.

I'm not trying to change your mind; you have your preference and I have mine. But no one here is "lying to himself", and you have certainly missed the point as to why many people much prefer NL baseball to the junior circuit.

[gunn]

Oh, yes you are. You've got a Derrick Bell hat trick going--0-for-3 with 3 k's. You haven't even made contact.

Right.


SWOOOSH! Swing and a miss! The quality (or lack thereof) of the manager has nothing to do with the quality of the game being played. The game is more challenging when every hitter has to play defense and every pitcher has to hit (or be pinch-hit for and removed from the game). The challenges those rules create, and how teams respond, are far more interesting than lining up a bunch of sluggers and having batting practice for nine innings.

I'm not trying to change your mind; you have your preference and I have mine. But no one here is "lying to himself", and you have certainly missed the point as to why many people much prefer NL baseball to the junior circuit.

Its more challenging to whom and in what aspect? Those are one sided arguments.

[bobrek]

Right.




Its more challenging to whom and in what aspect? Those are one sided arguments.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but as an aside, would you prefer a designated free throw shooter for guys like Shaq who are truly abysmal at shooting free throws?

[A-Train]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but as an aside, would you prefer a designated free throw shooter for guys like Shaq who are truly abysmal at shooting free throws?

Better yet, a designated three point shooter for Rafer...

[msn]

Better yet, a designated three point shooter for Rafer...
WhoMikeJames? :D

[Akhorahil]

Yea. That only happened cuase it was was Budd's team. I think that might be the only time a team has crossed over. Up until a few years ago, the leagues still had separate umpires but it seems all signs of the AL and NL being different organizations are gone.

The only reason I post this is because I love this kinda trivia/history stuff. It makes me feel... refined.

Actually... I don't fault you for not knowing this... as it was the 1890s. lol Yes 18... 90s. Damn trivia question is good for something. lol I had to look up the details but I remembered Baltimore also moved from league to league.

It's kind of ironic though... Since the Baltimore Orioles used to be the Milwaukee Brewers. Way back when they were a minor league team. Anyhow...

When the American Association flopped, Baltimore came over to the NL for a few seasons. Then the NL dropped them because they weren't good enough. So they went back to the AL. I don't know if you knew this or not... The AL was the minor league of the NL. :) I always remember that cuz it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Anyhow the AL didn't become a competing Major League team till the 1900s. Then, of course, later joined forces to take over the world.

I think the Detroit Tigers did the same thing. I'm not sure on that though. But yea... The Brewers are the only team I'm aware of to make the swap since the World Series was introduced into the mix.