Purifying the Schedule
Purists all have their pet gripes. For some, the DH is still abomination number one. Others find the whole concept of expansion distasteful. Look hard enough and I’m sure there’s some grizzled guy in a fedora squatting in the corner booth at your local bar griping about the mound height. Me? I despise realignment.
Not the idea. Moving baseball into six divisions was necessary as it jumped to 28, and then 30, teams, and I’d be a fool to argue with the results of more exciting division play and postseason action. It’s not the fact of realignment that really scratches my hide. It’s the way Bud Selig & Co. executed it. How is it that all sorts of tradition could be thrown out the window during the late 1990s, not to mention a loooong work stoppage during which plans could be made, yet nobody came up with a better plan than the scheduling chaos of the last decade?
While no perfect simulator for rewriting baseball’s past has been invented yet (and won’t it be great for the Negro League stars when it is?), realignment is recent enough history that I feel comfortable using split-win percentages to “predict” the outcomes of a more perfect order for the past 11 seasons.
Okay, Smarty, how would you align it?
Much the same, except for three glaring errors.
1) The Milwaukee Brewers should never have switched leagues. Can anyone, including Bud, give me a rational excuse for this? Creating a six-team logjam in the NL Central certainly makes no sense. Dropping a depth charge on your own organization—quick, reconfigure your personnel for new ballparks and the DH!—certainly seems unwise, especially given the team’s record in the aftermath. And divorcing the Brewers from their natural rivals in Minneapolis and Detroit had to hurt attendance. Stupid, stupid, stupid. They stay in the AL Central.
2) The Kansas City Royals should have been (and should still be) in the American League West, to create a geographic rival for the outlying Texas Rangers. The Royals had no specific rivalries to preserve in the Central (if anything, their traditional arch enemies are the Yankees), and Kansas City is certainly far enough west of the big river in the middle to earn the designation of, well, west. Also, this would leave room for the Brewers to stay in the AL Central without bloating it.
3) The AL East should have been a 4-team division until the expansion Devil Rays arrived. There was no reason to jerk Detroit around by shifting them east for three seasons only to drag them back to the rest of the Great Lakes region after the stupid, stupid, stupid Brewers defection. What would the problem be with an AL East of New York, Boston, Baltimore and Toronto? Wouldn’t that mean more Yankees vs. Red Sox games per year?
What about the schedule?
I think the only wise decision MLB has made as far as scheduling goes since the 1994 strike is the recent move to unbalanced scheduling. With historically (for baseball) small divisions, it makes sense to create as much mobility within those divisions as possible and preserve tight races to ensure “deserving” playoff teams. After all, without the large number of division games scheduled, can you imagine what the NL West would have looked like last year? (I bear no responsibility for the psychological help necessary after such imaginings.)
In my fantasy land, I scheduled all the years from 1995 to 2005 the same:
1) I threw away interleague baseball, for reasons of extreme statistical insignificance with winning percentages (the metric I based my fabricated results on). Purists rejoice!
2) I scheduled division rivals to play each other twice as often as other league opponents. Thus, after the 1998 expansion, division rivals met 18 times a year, with 9 games against the rest of their leagues (18 x 4 + 9 x 10 = 162 … neat, huh?). In the brief 28-team sport, league opponents played one extra time per year (18 x 4 + 10 x 9), and four-team divisions enjoyed an extra three-game series against each rival, give or take a game on a rotating basis to make it all work (20or21 x 3 + 10 x 10).
3) I plugged existing winning percentages for each matchup into the new amount of games and came up with revised standings for a new and more purist baseball. Obviously the figures were close to meaningless for the Brewers, whose figures I cobbled together based on an average of overall winning percentages and a little bit of guessing in the .500 direction. Luckily, the Brewers haven’t been spectacularly good (or dismally bad, for that matter) since the strike, so guessing in the realm of .400 to .500 is at least good enough to make me a qualified postseason major league umpire.
Results, please!
The biggest surprise in this exercise was that the most earth-shattering differences all occurred in the one division I left completely as MLB made it: the NL East. Here are the fake standings for 2000 and 2001:
2000 NL East x-New York Mets 93 69 y-Atlanta Braves 92 70 Florida Marlins 82 80 Montreal Expos 67 95 Philadelphia Phillies 63 99 2001 NL East x-Philadelphia Phillies 90 72 Atlanta Braves 89 73 New York Mets 76 86 Montreal Expos 71 91 Florida Marlins 71 91
The streak is broke. If you look closely at the Atlanta breakdowns for those two seasons, you’ll see that merely adequate division play was masked by excellent interleague play. In an NL-only context, with the Braves having to play their tough division rivals more often, the eventual NL Champ Mets and very deserving ’01 Phillies rise, just barely, to the top. The Braves don’t even make the playoffs in 2001, as I have the Astros (90-72) capturing the Wild Card that year.
But wait, there’s more! The only NL East team to actually win a World Series since the strike is, of course, the two-time expansion wonders in apathetic Miami. How do they fare in this balanced universe? They don’t even make the playoffs either year.
1997 NL East x-Atlanta Braves 101 61 y-New York Mets 90 72 Florida Marlins 86 76 Montreal Expos 71 91 Philadelphia Phillies 71 91 2003 NL East x-Atlanta Braves 102 60 y-Philadelphia Phillies 88 74 Florida Marlins 85 77 Montreal Expos 80 82 New York Mets 70 92
They don’t just fall a game short, as the Braves do in ’00-’01. They fall way short. Nothing could warm the cockles of a purist’s heart more than to find out the fluky Fish who stole glory from the Indians and yet more history from the Yankees were the product, at least partially, of bungled scheduling and interleague play. Or, to be less egregious in my statements, it’s certainly safe to say that the Marlins played the league well but had a tough time against very good division opponents, at least in their first championship season. That’s what I think, anyway. My relatives in Cleveland happen to agree.
Other interesting findings include:
1) The Rockies squeeze out a division title instead of the Wild Card in 1995, setting up a match against the vulnerable Reds instead of the juggernaut Braves.
2) The ’98 Yankees win 113 games. The ’01 Mariners? 115.
3) The number of wins shifts about a bit, but the exact same playoff matchups result in 2004 and 2005, proving that both Sox were, in this estimation, completely deserving of their crowns.
So did any franchise get screwed?
I’ll wrap things up with six teams that should rue the day MLB screwed up realignment, and six teams that should kiss Bud’s ring for the bizarre scheduling decisions since 1995.
Bud’s Six Big-Time Losers
PHILADELPHIA Phillies
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 69-75(78-84) -4 5th not 3rd
1996 67-95 +3 T4th not 5th
1997 68-94 +3 T4th not 5th
1998 75-87 -2 same (3rd)
1999 77-85 -2 same (3rd)
2000 65-97 -2 same (5th)
2001 86-76 +4 1st not 2nd
2002 80-81 -3 same (3rd)
2003 86-76 +2 2nd (WC) not 3rd
2004 86-76 0 same (2nd)
2005 88-74 +1 same (2nd)
Total same wins +1 DIV/playoff (’01) +WC (’03)
The Phillies would have gained two playoff appearances and a division crown without having to win a single extra game over the past 11 seasons.
NEW YORK Mets
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 69-75(78-84) +1 same (2nd)
1996 71-91 -1 same (4th)
1997 88-74 +2 2nd (WC) not 3rd
1998 88-74 -5 same (2nd)
1999 97-66 -5 same (2nd WC)
2000 94-68 -1 1st not 2nd (WC)
2001 82-80 -6 same (3rd)
2002 75-86 -2 same (5th)
2003 66-95 +4 same (5th)
2004 71-91 -4 5th not 4th
2005 83-79 +4 same (3rd)
Total - 13 wins +1 DIV (’00) +1 playoff (’97)
The Mets, in addition to breaking Atlanta’s division title streak on their way to a pennant in 2000, would have snatched the Wild Card in 1997 if it weren’t for interleague play and a balanced NL schedule.
CINCINNATI Reds
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 85-59(96-66) +3 same (1st)
1996 81-81 0 T2nd not 3rd
1997 76-86 -2 same (3rd)
1998 77-85 -1 same (4th)
1999 96-67 +4 1st not 2nd
2000 85-77 +4 same (2nd)
2001 66-96 +4 4th not 5th
2002 78-84 -2 same (3rd)
2003 69-93 -1 same (5th)
2004 76-86 +2 same (4th)
2005 73-89 +3 4th not 5th
Total +14 wins +1 DIV and playoff spot (’99)
The Reds were on the outside looking in despite 96 wins in 1999. The fair schedule boosts them to 100 wins and a division championship. Who knows how they would have fared in the playoffs? Would a World Series champion have felt the need to trade for Junior Griffey?
ANAHEIM Angels
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 78-67(87-75) +1 1st not 2nd
1996 70-91 -2 5th not 4th
1997 84-78 +8 same (2nd)
1998 85-77 -1 same (2nd)
1999 70-92 +6 same (4th)
2000 82-80 -3 same (3rd)
2001 75-87 0 same (3rd)
2002 99-63 +4 same (2nd WC)
2003 77-85 +1 same (3rd)
2004 92-70 +7 same (1st)
2005 95-67 -2 same (1st)
Total +19 wins 1 extra playoff spot (’95)
Sending the Royals out west really would have boosted Anaheim’s win totals over the years, but it’s the amputated season in 1995 that cost them a chance at playoff glory right after the strike.
CLEVELAND Indians
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 100-44(113-49) -1 same (1st)
1996 99-63 +5 same (1st)
1997 86-75 +2 same (1st)
1998 89-73 +1 same (1st)
1999 97-65 0 same (1st)
2000 90-72 +2 2nd (WC) not 2nd
2001 91-71 -1 same (1st)
2002 74-88 +5 same (3rd)
2003 68-94 +3 same (4th)
2004 80-82 -1 4th not 3rd
2005 93-69 -6 same (2nd)
Total +9 wins Gain one playoff spot (’00)
The Indians’ glory days wouldn’t have hit a speed bump in 2000, and considering how well wild card teams have done in the playoffs, that could have been the year they ended Cleveland’s long championship drought.
MILWAUKEE Brewers
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 65-79(73-89) +2 3rd not 4th
1996 80-82 +3 same (3rd)
1997 78-83 +1 2nd not 3rd
1998 74-88 +13 2nd not 5th
1999 74-87 +6 2nd not 5th
2000 73-89 -6 5th not 3rd
2001 68-94 -3 5th not 4th
2002 56-106 +5 4th not 6th
2003 68-94 +7 3rd not 6th
2004 67-94 +5 3rd not 6th
2005 81-81 0 4th not 3rd
Total +33 wins virtually unchanged
Though it wouldn’t have helped them gain entry into the playoffs, Bud Selig’s own Brewers were hurt mightily by the switch of leagues in 1998. While these numbers should be taken with the largest grain of salt, my best guess is Milwaukee would have seen 33 more wins over the years and some second-place finishes had they stayed in the AL Central with their other Great Lakes rivals.
Bud’s Six Big-Time Winners
The following teams were helped the most by interleague play, etc.:
FLORIDA Marlins
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 67-76(76-86) 0 3rd not 4th
1996 80-82 0 same (3rd)
1997 92-70 -6 3rd not 2nd (WC)
1998 54-108 +3 same (5th)
1999 64-98 -6 same (5th)
2000 79-82 +3 same (3rd)
2001 76-86 -5 same (4th)
2002 79-83 -2 same (4th)
2003 91-71 -6 3rd not 2nd (WC)
2004 83-79 0 same (3rd)
2005 83-79 0 4th not 3rd
Total -19 wins Lose 2 playoff spots (’97, ’03)
Enough said.
ATLANTA Braves
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 90-54(101-61) +2 same (1st)
1996 96-66 0 same (1st)
1997 101-61 0 same (1st)
1998 106-56 0 same (1st)
1999 103-59 +3 same (1st)
2000 95-67 -3 2nd (WC) not 1st
2001 88-74 +1 2nd not 1st
2002 101-59 -6 same (1st)
2003 101-61 +1 same (1st)
2004 96-66 0 same (1st)
2005 90-72 0 same (1st)
Total -2 wins -2 DIV and 1 playoff (’00-’01)
Considering Atlanta’s record in the playoffs during the streak, it’s perhaps important to ask if there’s a bit of smoke and mirrors behind it?
SEATTLE Mariners
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 79-66(88-74) -2 2nd not 1st
1996 85-76 0 same (2nd)
1997 90-72 +3 same (1st)
1998 76-85 0 same (3rd)
1999 79-83 0 same (3rd)
2000 91-71 -2 2nd not 2nd (WC)
2001 116-46 -1 same (1st)
2002 93-69 +1 same (3rd)
2003 93-69 -1 same (2nd)
2004 63-99 0 same (4th)
2005 69-93 +3 same (4th)
Total +1 win Lose DIV (’95) playoff (’00)
Even though the Royals are a doormat, expanding the AL West to five teams makes it slightly more difficult for the Mariners to get over the hump, robbing them of a division title in 1995 and putting the Wild Card just out of their reach in 2000.
HOUSTON Astros
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 76-68(86-76) 0 same (2nd)
1996 82-80 -1 same (2nd)
1997 84-78 +9 same (1st)
1998 102-60 -3 same (1st)
1999 97-65 -7 2nd not 1st
2000 72-90 +2 3rd not 4th
2001 93-69 -3 2nd (WC) not 1st
2002 84-78 +2 same (2nd)
2003 87-75 -5 same (2nd)
2004 92-70 -4 TWC not WC
2005 89-73 +1 same (2nd WC)
Total -9 wins Lose one playoff (’99) tied (’04)
I attribute a full seven Astro wins in 1999 to the schedule and the presence of a lousy Brewers team within the division. The Astros also would have had to fight for the Wild Card slot with the Giants in 2004.
BALTIMORE Orioles
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 71-73(80-82) +1 same (3rd)
1996 88-74 -2 same (2nd WC)
1997 98-64 -1 2nd (WC) not 1st
1998 79-83 0 same (4th)
1999 78-84 -6 5th not 4th
2000 74-88 +5 same (4th)
2001 63-98 +1 same (4th)
2002 67-95 +2 same (4th)
2003 71-91 +4 same (4th)
2004 78-84 +4 same (3rd)
2005 74-88 -2 5th not 4th
Total +6 wins Lose 1 DIV (’97)
Even though the Orioles would have won a few more games in the ‘00s without interleague play, they would have had to hand back the division championship in 1997. Still a playoff team there, though.
KANSAS CITY Royals
Actual +/- from actual Result
1995 70-74(79-83) 0 4th not 2nd
1996 75-86 +3 4th not 5th
1997 67-94 +1 4th not 5th
1998 72-89 -3 5th not 3rd
1999 64-97 +3 5th not 4th
2000 77-85 -5 5th not 4th
2001 65-97 +2 same (5th)
2002 62-100 +1 5th not 4th
2003 83-79 -9 5th not 3rd
2004 58-104 -7 same (5th)
2005 56-106 -5 same (5th)
Total -19 wins virtually unchanged
Look, no amount of realignment or schedule changing can mask the awfulness that has been the Royals ever since the strike, but if there’s one thing Kansas City fans should be thankful for, it’s getting to stay in the traditionally weak AL Central instead of being shifted over to the highly competitive AL West, where they’d have to get churned up by some pretty wicked Mariners, Athletics, Angels and even Rangers teams over the last decade or so.