The recent weekend of Interleague play was a reminder that the schedule format we’ve been used to in recent years is about to come to an end.
MLB’s realignment in 2013, moving the Houston Astros from the National League Central to the American League West to create two leagues of fifteen teams, will mean that Interleague play will be a constant feature throughout the season from next year onwards, rather than played in a couple of blocks.
A variety of proposed schedules have been discussed that would accommodate Interleague play and the new wrinkle of not having an even number of teams in each league. ESPN.com’s Jayson Stark wrote on Saturday that MLB are close to agreeing the shape of the new schedule and it appears as though it will bring a semblance of sense to what is currently a haphazard fixture list. The main details of the new Interleague plan are:
- “20 interleague games per team.
- No more than one interleague series per day in April and over the last five weeks.
- No more than one road interleague series per team in the final five weeks.
- Division-by-division matchups rotate annually.
- Every team in a division will play the same five teams in a corresponding division in the other league, plus four “rivalry” games.
- Only four “rivalry” games per team, likely played home-and-home and back-to-back in this format: Monday-Tuesday in one park, Wednesday-Thursday in the other”.
The full intricacies are explained in Stark’s typically excellent article.
The most important point to take way from it all is that teams will largely play the same schedule as their division rivals. That sounds like an obvious, logical proposition, and it is. Â However, that’s not how MLB has worked for years now and it’s about time that some of the unfairness in the system is corrected.
It will be interesting to see if spreading out a team’s Interleague schedule will have any impact on roster construction. There will be some impact on teams, hence the scheduling concessions noted in the second and third bullet points above to reduce Interleague play at the very start and end of the season.
It’s a matter for teams to consider because the realignment is not being instigated in conjunction with a change to the playing rules. The American League and National League will continue to play under different rules (pitchers hitting in the National League, a Designated Hitter being used in the American League), with the rules of the home team being used in Interleague games.
This inconsistency, if we want to call it that, has been debated ever since the American League introduced the DH in 1973. There are entrenched views on either side of the debate and it doesn’t appear as though MLB Commissioner Bud Selig ever seriously considered raising it as an issue as part of the realignment process.
Personally, I don’t mind the two leagues playing by different rules and if there was an overwhelming wave of support to change that, my preference would be for the National League rules to be the ones used across the Majors.
The best sportsmen should have the full range of skills and part of the fun of seeing players develop over time is the way they work hard to improve all aspects of their game. Sometimes that may mean a player working on a weakness so that they can be competent at a certain discipline: a fly-half in rugby union improving his defence, a goalkeeper in football improving his distribution, a tennis player improving his ability at the net etc.
That process is important because sport at the highest level is as much about exploiting an opponent’s weakness as it is about doing something exceptionally well. If you can’t do something well then the onus should be on you to improve it, not to want there to be rules in place so that the weakness can be taken out of the contest.
I can appreciate the argument that a lot of pitchers aren’t great hitters and that some fans would prefer to see a big-bopper rather than the baseball equivalent of cricket’s walking wicket. However, there aren’t that many big-boppers around (as shown by some of the players that have been used in the DH spot so far this season) and the contest gains more than it loses by making the pitcher hit.
There’s a tactical element to it (does a manager take his pitcher out for a pinch-hitter etc), there is a skill to the hitting pitcher working within his limitations to help his team (for example by laying down a good bunt) and a team can also gain a slight advantage if their pitcher can hit a bit. It’s always fun to see a pitcher contributing at the plate. We saw Stephen Strasburg go deep against the Orioles over the weekend and Mike Leake complemented his (much-needed) strong pitching on Monday night against the Braves by hitting a round-tripper.
Maybe some would like to see a game of baseball where only the best hitters came to the plate, with the best fielders donning the gloves, the best runners taking to the basepads and the best pitchers pitching. I suspect that would actually become quite boring pretty quickly.
Thankfully we don’t have to worry about that prospect any time soon.
The two different sets of rules will continue for the forseeable future and while it may create some problems for some teams, those problems will relate to their roster (and use of that roster) rather than the current situation where an Interleague record can determine play-off spots because one team can play a significantly weaker set of Interleague opponents to that faced by a division rival.
The challenges posed to teams playing the opposing league’s rules at different times during the season will create opportunities as well. If you can gain a slight edge over your rivals through the quality of your Interleague play then that might be the difference between reaching the postseason or missing out. Using your roster in a smarter way, or even just helping your pitchers hit a bit better or your Designated Hitter to be passable at a fielding position, could now increase in importance and provide an intriguing new element to the competition.
