Interleague: a good idea?
by 0157H7 on Jun 25, 2008 9:00 AM EDT
in News
20 comments
With the annual series against the National League nearing a close, I thought we should discuss the phenomenon of interleague play, which is controversial for fans and players alike.
Interleague play has been pretty kind to the Red Sox since its introduction in 1997. Their record from 1997 to 2007 is 105-88 (.544). In 2006, they went 16-2. Last year they were 12-6. So far this season, the Sox are 9-5 in interleague play. This fits into the larger pattern of recent AL dominance - the league is 427-329 from 2005-07.
Considering how well the Sox have done recently against the NL, you'd expect more enthusiasm from the team. Just a few days ago, Terry Francona griped about interleague to the ProJo:
"It’s not set up fair," he said. "You set your team up to play American League-style baseball and then you go play National League-style; you just do the best you can. We’re going to be asking pitchers to bunt and things they have not been asked to do. But, we’ve handled it for the most part and we’ll try to handle it again."
Unsurprisingly, some NL fans don't like interleague either. This story on the Astro's SBNation blog argues that the AL has a significant advantage over the NL because of the Designated Hitter rule. Some AL teams are constructed to take full advantage the DH, namely the Red Sox. When an NL team faces them (and Ortiz isn't injured), the Sox have a marquis slugger and the NL team is DHing their 9th best hitter.
That said, several AL teams don't get much production from their DHs - think the Mariners with Jose Vidro or the Royals with Billy Butler. Many teams use it as a place to rest position players while preserving their bats; the Angels and Rays do this, among others. Nevertheless, most AL teams are better designed to exploit the DH rule than NL teams are.
When AL teams play in NL parks, they lose their DH but gain a great pinch-hitter. Pitchers hitting is generally a wash, since most are terrible at it. So an AL team doesn't lose that much strategically coming to an NL park. A bigger concern is that AL pitchers unaccustomed to hitting and running the bases are risking injury. Chien-Ming Wang's recent injury attests to this fear. I don't think this worry is all that reasonable; the act of pitching is more unnatural than running the bases, and accounts for much more of their exertion as athletes.
My biggest issue with interleague play is the uneven schedules. This season the Red Sox play four playoff contenders: the Phillies (1st in NL East), the Diamondbacks (1st in NL West), the Cardinals (2nd in NL Central), and the Brewers (3rd in NL Central, 42-34). The soft part of their schedule was the Reds (35-42) and the Astros (35-41). The Yankees play the Padres, the Mets, the Astros, and the Pirates, all of which are struggling. Before the Reds broke it up, the Yanks had a 7-game winning streak going, sweeping San Diego and Houston in succession.
At the very least, division rivals should play the same teams. Prior to 2002, interleague was always between divisions, with the AL East teams playing the NL East, and so forth. That makes eminently more sense than alternating incompletely between divisions (ex. the AL East is mostly playing the NL Central this season). Moreover, I'm less bothered by the rules differences than the lack of parity - the NL shouldn't be losing this much when facing the AL. It must be frustrating for NL fans to watch their teams get overmatched every time interleague play comes around. That's not good for baseball.
Anyway, enough of my ranting. What do YOU think about interleague play? Should it continue as is, be modified, or be scrapped altogether?
0 recs |
20 comments
Email
Print
Comments
The poll results are interesting. Even after all these years with interleague play, 10 out of 13 (so far) think it is an “interesting premise that needs better execution.” That says a lot to me. That says Bud Selig has something here but hasn’t mastered it—even though he’s had MANY chances to. He knows interleague play isn’t perfect yet he hasn’t changed it really at all.
by Randy Booth on Jun 25, 2008 10:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Its the Schedule for me
I don’t think the DH is a huge advantage. Almost every NL team has a bench player who they bring in to pinch hit during normal NL games, they can just have them hit the entire game instead. I don’t think the pitcher’s hitting is a huge advantage either. Pitchers are still supposed to be athletes, I think they can manage a half ass swing, bunt or run 90 feet.
For me the problems with Interleague play is the poorly planned schedule. This year gives a great example with the Sox playing alot of tough teams and the Yankees playing alot of soft teams. This has given the Yankees some confidence and could boost them up enough to contend in the AL East. When you have division races for Playoff births, the schedule for each division should be similar and comparable.
I would think the most fair schedule would be for one division to only play another division. For example, every team in the NL East would play a series against the AL East. This would give an equal schedule to everyteam. It would probably work best if the East played the East because most of the good interleague rivalries would then occur.
by drabidea on Jun 25, 2008 11:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I know the schedule was set ages before the Yankee’s were slumping this season, but the fact of the matter is, upon the start of this season’s inter-league play, the Yankee’s had the same sort of basement dwelling record as the teams they have faced.
I agree, the scheduling needs to have some sort of rhyme to it’s reasoning. However, I do like being able to see some of the NL teams play that we ordinarily wouldn’t be able to watch.
by A2004LoveAffair on Jun 25, 2008 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Frankly,
(as a Dbacks fan) we’re “struggling”, too. Especially on the road.
The only reason we’re still in first is that 20-8 start we had in April.
Have the Dodgers lost yet?
by DbacksSkins on Jun 25, 2008 11:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
One thing I forgot to mention
Last year, the D’backs and Phillies made the playoffs, and the Brewers were close to making them as well (two games behind the division-winning Cubs). So it’s not like whoever created the schedule could claim ignorance that these teams would be contenders this year. As for the Yankees’ opponents, the Padres almost made the playoffs, but lost the one-game run-off for the wild card, and the Mets folded after playing .500 baseball in August and September.
Now for all we know the Yankees or the Rays could have a harder schedule next year; my complaint is not that the Sox have a tougher schedule this year, but that this system leaves too much room for variation.
by 0157H7 on Jun 25, 2008 12:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Even the playing field
Ignoring the wild card for the moment, a team’s most important regular season goal is to win the division and secure a play-off spot. Regardless of which league has the upper hand in inter-league play (AL) the division races will not be affected if you normalize the schedule. All of the teams in an AL division should play a short series against all of the teams in a NL division, which will at least be fair to the division race. For example, all AL East teams should play agains the NL West teams one year, NL central teams the following year, and NL east teams the third year. Lather, rinse, repeat.
"You know you're having a bad day when the fifth inning rolls around and they drag the warning track." - Mike Flanagan, Baltimore Orioles pitcher, 1992.
by SoxDevil on Jun 25, 2008 1:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is exactly right
It should be division against division with rotations by year. How hard is that to fathom?? Bud Selig has all the intelligence of one of those broken maple wood bats…
You can take the boy outta Boston, but you can't take the Boston outta the boy.
by B Cap on Jun 25, 2008 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This rotation is what happens, mostly
except for “natural rivalries” (Boston’s is Philadelphia), and whatever pretext they found for the Dbacks to play the Sox.* Boston is playing four NL Central teams, and next year it’ll rotate to some other division. But because the NL Central has six teams, its schedule will always be wacky and uneven.
by 0157H7 on Jun 25, 2008 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hate interleague play for a few reasons
(1) NL baseball is boring.
Who wants to watch someone worse than Alex Cora get two to four ABs a game? The "strategy" aspect of NL ball revolves around having a huge hole in the line-up. Most of it isn’t as arcane as the "purists" would have you believe. It’s pretty obvious: pitchers almost always bunt with a runner on, unless there are two outs, the bases are loaded, or runners are on second and third. 8th place hitters are almost always walked or pitched around to get to the pitcher, unless the bases are loaded. Let’s face it, double-switching isn’t too hard to do or figure out (unless you are Willie Randolph).
The AL game is based on match-ups, the best hitter v. the best available pitcher. What I mean by this is a team’s bench plays less of a role in the AL. This is good because most bench players aren’t that good or they’d be starting. Thus, unless Jimy Williams is managing your AL team, your starting 9 are the best available players on your team for their position. As for the pitchers, good AL managers go to the pen only when necessary. This is based on pitch counts, a starter’s effectiveness, or a match-up between a particular reliever and hitter. I’d much rather watch that kind of baseball than one where the decisions are based on when a team’s pitcher is hitting.
(2) The scheduling problems
I believe that teams in the same division should play exactly the same schedule. This is a hard to do in interleague play. Even if you rotated divisions-AL East v. NL East, for example-there would be problems because the NL has two more teams than the AL.
Right now, interleague scheduling is driven by a few money match-ups: Mets-MFY, Chisox-Cubs, Angels-Dodgers, and A’s-Giants. Sure, there are other regional match-ups. But it’s the match-up of teams that play in the same city that is the impetus for interleague baseball. Because of this, it is impossible for all teams to play the same schedule as teams in their division.
When I say that teams should play the same schedule as other teams in their division, I mean exactly the same schedule. For example, if the Sox play the Phillies in Philadelphia, then all the other AL East teams should do the same. The only way to do this is have all the interleague games in the NL parks one year and in the AL parks the next. This won’t happen because interleague play is about money. Another way to do it is to expand interleague play, but this will screw up scheduling for league games by eliminating division play.
Also, because teams usually only face an interleague opponent once a season (except for "rivalry games"), rain-outs in interleague games can really damage a team’s schedule.
(3) It limits the play against non-division rivals
Because of Interleague, the Sox play fewer games against teams in the AL Central and AL West than they otherwise would. In some ways this helps the Sox, who make fewer west coast trips. However, this limits intra-league rivalries in favor of bloodless games against teams that nobody cares about. I’d rather watch Indians-Sox, Tigers-Sox, Sox-Sox, Angels-Sox, or A’s-Sox than see the Brewers, Astros, D-Backs, etc.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jun 25, 2008 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's how it was before this year,
and how it should be. The NFL has it right.
This “let’s have random teams play each other” thing is stupid.
Mark Reynolds: Turning me gay since '07
by DbacksSkins on Jun 25, 2008 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
From 1997 to 2007, the Sox had an overall record of 994-787 (0.558). So it’s not really fair to say that interleague play has been kind to them overall (though it certainly has been recently).
by tortoise on Jun 25, 2008 1:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The NL is getting smoked
Mainly because of the DH thing. But, really, screw them. Pitchers hitting is ridiculous, so maybe losing to the AL helps showing them that.
Actually, I’m kidding. Not all AL teams have 9 great hitter, in fact, I can only think of about 3-4 that have this much or anything around it (Sox, Yanks, Angels, and maybe some other team I can’t remember now). Usually, a AL team has 6-7 great hitter, so that should level things up in interleague. So, there’s an answer for the disparity: There are more bad teams in the NL than there are on the AL.
It's the same old story. Boy finds girl, boy loses girl, girl finds boy, boy forgets girl, boy remembers girl, girls dies in a tragic blimp accident over the Orange Bowl on New Year's Day.
by MerryGoByeBye on Jun 25, 2008 2:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
In league disparity
Money is also a factor. The AL spends more money on payroll, both in total ($1.356 billion to $1.329 billion) and on average. AL teams spend an average of $96,919,106 on payroll, versus $83,097,874 on average for NL teams. That’s a $16 million difference. The difference in median payroll is smaller, but still significant: $88,381,983 (AL) to $78,766,000 (NL), nearly $10 million.
Source:
USA Today
by 0157H7 on Jun 25, 2008 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Couldn't this difference be also because of the DH rule?
AL teams have to spend ‘top money’ on 9 guys, while the NL have to spend on 8. I’m sure it’s not all about this, but this must be also a factor.
It's the same old story. Boy finds girl, boy loses girl, girl finds boy, boy forgets girl, boy remembers girl, girls dies in a tragic blimp accident over the Orange Bowl on New Year's Day.
by MerryGoByeBye on Jun 25, 2008 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The total payroll #s are impressive
since the NL has 2 more teams.
Mark Reynolds: Turning me gay since '07
by DbacksSkins on Jun 25, 2008 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't vote in the poll but...
I think interleague play sucks. Seeing AL pitchers trying to hit is painful. NL rosters aren’t constructed to carry a DH, so they suffer more than the AL pitchers do. It was always fun in the world series as in a short series anything can happen, but over the course of 100’s of games it gets mundane.
on another topic, did anyone see this quote by Schilling:
“I got a real clear understanding in the last 12 months of what a business this is, for better or worse … teams make decisions that are in their best interests, and if those things don’t align with what a player feels, it doesn’t matter,” he said, according to the radio station.
Now I like Schilling, but geez man, didn’t we just pay you $8mil this year for uh, wait, let me think….zero return. Sure if he goes 16-6, then we make out, if not then we lose…I thought the $8mil was fair at the time.
by sydneysox on Jun 25, 2008 7:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
By the way,
not a troll, just the Snakepit’s Foreign Minister. Hope you folks don’t mind…
Mark Reynolds: Turning me gay since '07
by DbacksSkins on Jun 25, 2008 7:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Welcome to the party
Hilarious tag line btw…I thought it was 6 beers but I guess Mark Reynolds will have to do.
You can take the boy outta Boston, but you can't take the Boston outta the boy.
by B Cap on Jun 26, 2008 7:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like inter-league
Primarily because it allows for intra-city match-ups like the Yankees vs. the Mets and I think it’s fun to see teams a bit out of their element.
Even if the AL always wins 65% of the inter-league games it doesn’t matter due to the league-based playoff system. The key is to make sure that division competitors play the same opponents. A match-up vs. Philadelphia is not the same as vs. San Diego. Those 3 games can make a difference in the end.
Let’s be realistic, though. Life isn’t fair, and the playing field will never be entirely level. Divisions’ strength waxes and wanes over the years, making it incredibly difficult, or easy, to make the playoffs. Remember the NL West a few years ago when a barely .500 team made the playoffs? Sad…
"You know you're having a bad day when the fifth inning rolls around and they drag the warning track." - Mike Flanagan, Baltimore Orioles pitcher, 1992.
by SoxDevil on Jun 26, 2008 12:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Some more info
per Jayson Stark:
Through Wednesday, AL teams had a ridiculous 116-83 record in interleague play. If that keeps up, this will be the second-most one-sided interleague mismatch in history—trailing only the AL’s 2006 wipeout (154-98). It’s also going to be the fifth straight year the AL has outwon the NL. AL teams are now 133 games over .500 in that span.Just three AL teams have losing interleague records this season, the same number as last year. The Orioles, Tigers and Twins - three teams that are 11 games under .500 against their own league - have gone a combined 29-13 against the NL. And the Royals - who are an ugly 24-40 against AL teams - are a mind-boggling 12-3 against NL teams.
by 0157H7 on Jun 27, 2008 12:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
