Relocation or expansion, where do you think a team should play?

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I know that this have been asked on other forums before, but I am curious how you guys think about it.

If a team had to be relocated or if MLB decided for an expansion, where do you think the team should play?

Let me put it this way: In case of relocation, which team and where to?

In case of expansion, where to?

[Mudge]

Very complicated question, given the current economics of baseball, which of course has an impact on these things.

Here's a little study I did a year ago where I decided to do some basic statistical research to illuminate the relationship between player payroll and playoff participation.

METHODOLOGY
I chose to sample from 1995 to 2009. This covers the entire Wild Card Era, 8 playoff teams per year, and the 15 seasons divided nicely into three 5-year segments.
I broke the team salaries, both AL and NL combined as reported by USA Today*, into quintiles: (1-6)(7-12)(13-18)(19-24)(25-30)

TOTAL (all 15 years) 1995-2009 43% of the playoff teams were from the 1st quintile (that is, 1-6 in total team salary)
25% of the playoff teams were from the 2nd quintile (7-12)
18% of the playoff teams were from the 3rd quintile (13-18)
6% of the playoff teams were from the 4th quintile (19-24)
8% of the playoff teams were from the 5th quintile (25-30)
In the last 15 years almost 70% of the playoff teams had salaries in the top 40% of the leagues, whereas under 15% of the playoff teams represented the bottom 40% in salary.

2005-2009 (the last 5 years) 42.5% of the playoff teams were from the 1st quintile (1-6)
25% of the playoff teams were from the 2nd quintile (7-12)
20% of the playoff teams were from the 3rd quintile (13-18)
5% of the playoff teams were from the 4th quintile (19-24)
7.5% of the playoff teams were from the 5th quintile (25-30)
*(http://content.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/default.aspx) NOTE: These were team salaries as reported at the start of the season. Mid-season additions to total team salary are not factored in. What effect this would have? Probably not much (the rich tend to get richer and the poor tend to get poorer)

UPDATE
For 2010, things actually evened out a bit, even though 5 of the 8 teams were in the top two quintiles:Yankees 1
Phillies 1
Giants 2
Twins 2
Braves 2
Reds 4
Rays 4
Rangers 5

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I have tried to look up the meaning of the word quintile, but I could not find it. What does that word mean?

[Mudge]

I have tried to look up the meaning of the word quintile, but I could not find it. What does that word mean?
Sorry. When you divide something into five parts, each part is called a quintile (like a half, third, quartile). So the top 6 teams in payroll in any given year are said to be in the top quintile. The next 6 teams (in this case 7-12) are in the second quintile, and so on. Same basic concept as the top half and the bottom half, just divided up more.

[Mr. Baseball]

In previous years I would have said relocation of Tampa Bay would be a good move. However, due to their recent success, relocation wouldn't be the best move for Major League Baseball. The Oakland A's have had awful attendance for years now, I think of at any point if Bud Selig decided to relocate a team they would be at the top of the list (New ballpark or not).

I know there's a lot of concerns regarding gambling in moving a team to Las Vegas, but over the years the city continues to grow rapidly and I'm beginning to think it could be in baseball's best interest.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I am not so sure if Las Vegas would be a good site for an MLB franchise. Sure they draw a pretty good crowd over a season. For the last ten seasons it has been pretty stable. About 400,000 a year. But in which industry do most people in LV work? And at what times does that industry have the most customers? At night time.

I think a city like Indianapolis would be a good option. The city supports two major league teams (NFL and NBA), I think a third would fit in quite well. The Indians have drawn about 600,000 in the last three seasons. Not bad for AAA.

The city of Indianapolis itself has more than 800,000 inhabitants. Together with the area around Indianapolis, there are more than 1.5 MM inhabitants. I think that might be a good basis.

The only objection may be that the surrounding states all have an MLB team already (Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis, Cleveland, Milwaukee), so many may have adopted a team already, which could lead to less visitors.

[Cathy]

I would have to say one of the following places would work:

Oregon (although I am not so sure because of broadcast demographics)
Kentucky
Tennessee (Nashville or Memphis would be my choice)
Las Vegas
North Dakota
South Dakota
New Mexico
Montana

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I would have to say one of the following places would work:

Oregon (although I am not so sure because of broadcast demographics)
Kentucky
Tennessee (Nashville or Memphis would be my choice)
Las Vegas
North Dakota
South Dakota
New Mexico
Montana

Oregon might work, but their former AAA team didn't drew that many crowds. So you may wonder if a MLB team can survive there.

Las Vegas: I have my doubts. I have stated the reasons already.

North and South Dakota: Both have cities with a population of less than 100,000. So I don't think that they can support an MLB team.

Montana: Billings is the biggest city with a population of just a bit over 100,000. Again here I doubt if that is enough to make an MLB club survive.

[Cathy]

What about Kentucky and Tennessee?

[yankeebiscuitfan]

What about Kentucky and Tennessee?

Kentucky's biggest city is Louisville. The population is about 721,000 and the metropolitan area it is over 1.2 million. Big enough I guess to support an MLB team.

Tennessee's biggest cities are housing a major league team already, so I guess MLB may succeed here.

But now I am looking only at poplulation, but I am sure the financial success of an MLB team depends of more things than that. Things that are beyond my knowledge.

[Cathy]

If you could relocate a current team who would it be and why?



I guess the obvious choice would be Oakland.

[Mudge]

A lot of folk would push for somewhere in North Carolina.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

A lot of folk would push for somewhere in North Carolina.

The Raleigh-Durham area?

[Cathy]

Isn't that kind of close to Washington and Maryland?

[Mudge]

The Raleigh-Durham area?
Most likely, but they'd also draw from Winston-Salem, even Charlotte and Roanoke, VA. I think that the Panthers continue to draw well.


Isn't that kind of close to Washington and Maryland?
Whether the Braves or the Nationals would have any say in the matter is of course always an issue. Not the Orioles I shouldn't think.

[Cathy]

I was just wondering, because we don't want another issue like what happened when the Expos moved to DC, do we?

[Cathy]

Just curious, how far does the Broadcast demographics run?

[RickD]

TN has 5 minor league teams. Realistically Memphis would not be conducive to a MLB team. Knoxville is too much of a College football town. Nashville makes the most sense as its central location makes a drive reasonable and would make attendance accessible.

[WilsonC]

I'd go for another team in the NYC area before anywhere else.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I'd go for another team in the NYC area before anywhere else.

I am all for a return of the Dodgers to Brooklyn...

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I checked out the "United countries of baseball" map Mudge. When I saw the area that should cover fan attention for the Marlins, I LMAO.
They can't even get a stadium full in Miami. So why do they think they would have fans in the rest of Florida. It won't happen any time soon because of the new stadium lease, but if one team should be relocated it is the Marlins. And Loria should be forced to sell the team. He is a disgrace for baseball.

[Mudge]

I checked out the "United countries of baseball" map Mudge. When I saw the area that should cover fan attention for the Marlins, I LMAO.

They can't even get a stadium full in Miami. So why do they think they would have fans in the rest of Florida. It won't happen any time soon because of the new stadium lease, but if one team should be relocated it is the Marlins. And Loria should be forced to sell the team. He is a disgrace for baseball.
Well, I have to say I agree on all points.

The map is suggestive at best, and the Marlins range probably outlined simply because they are the Florida Marlins rather than the Miami Marlins. They will not fill a new stadium much more than they filled the fish tank.

As for Loria, you know my position there.

Personally, I say contract two teams (we missed that opportunity, I'm afraid) and go back to four divisions of 7 teams each.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

Contract two teams? Besides the Marlins who else? Not the A's or the Pirates. They have a rich history.

[Mudge]

Contract two teams? Besides the Marlins who else? Not the A's or the Pirates. They have a rich history.

Never mind. Too late now, but I would never have let a team go to Washington. Nor would I have ever put two teams in Florida.

Oakland should move.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

You said: MLB had a chance to contract two teams. That must be the Twins and the Expos. How would you have reacted? Sure there isn't much difference for an Expos fan now. The team is gone anyway. To me there is no difference between being contracted or being moved.

What do you think?

[CoreyR]

I'm with Mudge, Oakland needs to relocate. Vegas could be a good fit for them if we are thinking only demographically. It's not to far from Oakland.

California already has the Giants, Dodgers, Padres, Angels, and the A's. Let's tone it down a bit.

[Cathy]

Personally, I think that MLB should step in and take control of both the A's and Royals. I know everyone is going to say that the Royals just renovated their stadium, but they are so cheap, it's not funny. With regard to the A's, their total attendance this past season was absolutely disgraceful. They were 29th out of all 30 teams.

[CoreyR]

Personally, I think that MLB should step in and take control of both the A's and Royals. I know everyone is going to say that the Royals just renovated their stadium, but they are so cheap, it's not funny. With regard to the A's, their total attendance this past season was absolutely disgraceful. They were 29th out of all 30 teams.

What everyone doesn't realize about the Royals is the fact that they have one of the strongest and deepest farm systems out there. No need to go out spending, sure they renovated and could of spent that on a big name player or two, but they didn't need to. They renovated their stadium for the future, why for the future? Because they have a futures all-star team stewing and developing in that farm system. Especially with the major acquisition of the 3 big league ready prospects they received from the Brewers in the Zack Grienke trade. No need to go out and spend money on big names. 1 or 2 big names aren't going to get you a World Series title, nor will it even get you a playoff spot, so why waste the money?

They have a really deep farm system, they will let them develop and eventually become pretty damn good contenders.

[Cathy]

You do have a point.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

What everyone doesn't realize about the Royals is the fact that they have one of the strongest and deepest farm systems out there. No need to go out spending, sure they renovated and could of spent that on a big name player or two, but they didn't need to. They renovated their stadium for the future, why for the future? Because they have a futures all-star team stewing and developing in that farm system. Especially with the major acquisition of the 3 big league ready prospects they received from the Brewers in the Zack Grienke trade. No need to go out and spend money on big names. 1 or 2 big names aren't going to get you a World Series title, nor will it even get you a playoff spot, so why waste the money?

They have a really deep farm system, they will let them develop and eventually become pretty damn good contenders.

There has been some discussion about the Royals' management and farm system in another thread. Mudge countered on my claim that the Royals management is incompetent with some good arguments.

I know it takes some time to build a team out of your farm system. But journalists keep saying for years that the Royals have one of the best farm systems stuffed with talent. If that is the case, I really wonder why they have not been able to build a team with a winning record.

[CoreyR]

Some prospects develop a lot slower than others, and other big name prospects never pan out to be what they were hyped up to be. If that makes sense, so maybe the Royals have been unlucky with their prospects not panning out, anything could happen. A top prospect once known to be a potential star doesn't pan out for years and years to come, or he doesn't pan out whatsoever. I guess it's the luck of the draw.

The Dodgers have had a few prospects who didn't develop until their late 20's, and now they provide some production. It just depends. Let's see how the next few years roll out for the Royals.

[Mudge]

I can't say that the Royals have done well with their prospects or for that matter, poorly. It's just that their margin of error is so slim compared to the big market teams that whatever mistakes they make are magnified.

The Red Sox can waste money on a pitcher who does not pan out or they can develop lots of pitchers who don't pan out, but they have a cushion to absorb the loss. The Pirates, Royals, A's do not.

I know everyone loves to bring up the Marlins as the poster child for low-payroll teams that win, and while that may be true for 2003, it certainly was not the case in 1997. Their payroll then was $48 million -- 7th out of 30. The Yankees led the majors at only $59 million that year.

[Mr. Baseball]

I was thinking about this the other day, and It came to my attention that La Habana (Havana), Cuba isn't too far from Miami. With Cuba having such a large interest in baseball and producing so many professional ballplayers, it makes me wonder if they may get a team. If not Havana, maybe a team in Northern Mexico could join the league. If we extend the perimeters of Major League Baseball into Canada, why not move South?

Probably never going to happen, just a thought.

[munson15ny]

Relocation is the obvious choice as expansion would dilute the pitching even more than it is already. Population should not be a factor in placing a team. Where a team should go is all relative as many people will only support a winner.

[Mudge]

Relocation is the obvious choice as expansion would dilute the pitching even more than it is already. Population should not be a factor in placing a team. Where a team should go is all relative as many people will only support a winner. Where do you think that should be, and who do you think should relocate?

[yankeebiscuitfan]

IMO population should be one of the factors. There is a bigger chance for a team to succeed in an metro area of over 1 million people than in Hicktown.

[jaded28]

Where do you think that should be, and who do you think should relocate?

I think you need to really need to evaluate the city, the greater metropolitan area, and know the history of what a culture will support.

If you just look at attendance totals let's say for the past decade as to genuine support then Pittsburg, the Florida teams, KC, Oakland, and maybe even Toronto are suspects as to genuine support. I think you need to look deeper. The Pittsburg and KC situation might be more about performance. I think the florida teams and Toronto may be more about cultural support. As a rule, Florida has not been a great pro sports supporter. I think it is even less so for baseball. When you talk to born and breed Floridians, they love their high school and college football. I think basketball is next. So the answer to Mudge's question for me is: First find the areas that have a history of baseball in the minors and stay away from areas that are entrenched with other sports and activities. Look, population is important, but if you use this as the measuring stick, I guess Green Bay, WI would not have a football team.

[JoshRedcay]

I would have to say one of the following places would work:

Oregon (although I am not so sure because of broadcast demographics)
Kentucky
Tennessee (Nashville or Memphis would be my choice)
Las Vegas
North Dakota
South Dakota
New Mexico
Montana

Portland, Oregon would probably work as they already have and NBA team, and Memphis would also work well enough. Although I'm not so sure about Kentucky and Las Vegas. Las Vegas is a questionable city just because of all the gambling. North and South Dakota, New Mexico, and Montana all don't really have any major cities to support an MLB team. Sure, New Mexico has Albuquerque, but I'm not a big fan of putting an MLB franchise in a city that doesn't support any other major teams.

[Mudge]

Montreal.
They tried that once. Unfortunately, it didn't work so well.

[JoshRedcay]

The Marlins situation isn't good. I think the Pirates get more fans to their games, and that's saying something. That state just isn't a baseball state. The same could be said for the Rays, but the success the Rays have had has helped them a bit. I would have to think that the Marlins should be first on the list when it comes to relocating.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I saw a story about how they almost kept the Expos in Montreal, but the ball was dropped by city officials. It certainly wasn't because of the lack that fans wanted them there. I think they need another Canadian team again.

One can only wonder where? Montreal is hockey crazed and until the 1994 strike they supported the Expos pretty well. But then came Loria... The rest is history. I don't know if MLB wants to take another gamble to assign a team to or relocate a team to Montreal.

Years ago, back in 1994 or so I was staying in a hotel in Germany. The wife of the owner told me, when she saw me wearing my Expos cap, that when she was in Montreal (she had a sister overthere) many people were wearing those Expos caps. I think that says it all about the support of the Expos before 1994.

When a team is appointed to Montreal again, they may use the moniker Expos and wear the same caps and unis again, as far as I am concerned.

---------- Post added 01-18-2011 at 12:07 AM ---------- Previous post was 01-17-2011 at 11:52 PM ----------


I was thinking about this the other day, and It came to my attention that La Habana (Havana), Cuba isn't too far from Miami. With Cuba having such a large interest in baseball and producing so many professional ballplayers, it makes me wonder if they may get a team. If not Havana, maybe a team in Northern Mexico could join the league. If we extend the perimeters of Major League Baseball into Canada, why not move South?

Probably never going to happen, just a thought.

Cuba? Interesting thought. Only then Fidel and his clan need to go first. As long as they are in power, no MLB team will land there. And if Castro is gone, the country's economy will need time to recover. With the current salaries hardly anyone can afford a ticket to an MLB game.
Ticket prices need to be at a certain level for a club to be able to pay the salaries. IF Havanna will ever get an MLB team, I think it will take two decades before that will happen.

[Cathy]

I believe (and someone can correct me if I am wrong on this) that the new Marlins Stadium is not that far from Havana.

[pooh555]

In general Florida is way overextended as far as sports teams go

Portland for a baseball team wouldn't be a good fit IMO, I'd love to see it, but the economic viability of it just isn't there to me

I like Tennessee or Kentucky, somewhere in that area

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I believe (and someone can correct me if I am wrong on this) that the new Marlins Stadium is not that far from Havana.

True. Why do you think that Miami has such a big Cuban community? Maybe the Marlins can move to Havana in 20 years.

[JoshRedcay]

In general Florida is way overextended as far as sports teams go

Portland for a baseball team wouldn't be a good fit IMO, I'd love to see it, but the economic viability of it just isn't there to me

I like Tennessee or Kentucky, somewhere in that area

Yeah I would take Tennessee over Kentucky, though, seems like things would just work better there as they already have a football franchise.

[LetsPlay2]

Here's a post I wrote over at SBT on this subject:


Let's be honest.... the league isn't going to contract. We are stuck with 30 teams. So I say while we're at it, let's bump it up to 32.... with both expansion teams going to the AL, for now at least.

Two leagues, 4 divisions each league (ala NFL), division winners ONLY in the playoffs. This allows the extra round of playoffs that people seem to like, but gives more importance back to actually winning your division! No more playing for second place....

Scale the schedule back to 154 games. I would do 14 games against inter-division teams (one 3-game series home and away, one 4-game series home and away) and the rest of the games against teams in the same league. NO INTERLEAGUE.

So here's my take on it:

AL East -- Red Sox, Yankees, Orioles, Indians
AL North -- White Sox, Twins, Detroit, Blue Jays
AL South -- Rangers, Royals, Rays, RALIEGH-DURHAM or NEW ORLEANS EXPANSION
AL West -- Athletics, Mariners, Angels, LAS VEGAS, SALT LAKE CITY or PORTLAND EXPANSION

NL East -- Phillies, Nationals, Mets, Pirates
NL North -- Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals, Reds
NL South -- Braves, Marlins, Astros, Rockies
NL West -- Giants, Dodgers, Padres, Diamondbacks

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I agree with you on the abolition of interleague play. The special feel of interleague play during the World Series is gone. I think it is an interesting thought to form four divisions in each league.

[Mr. Baseball]

Pretty sure the coast of Cuba is only about 20 miles from the coast of Florida. I could be wrong.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

The distance between Florida (the Keys) and Cuba is 90 miles.

[ChiCubs23]

I know this is old, but thought I'd respond. I was against the last two expansions. There are enough teams in baseball and I'm one of those who feel the talent is watered down. I think we should drop a couple of teams, not add more.

[WingsOfSteel]

The main cities that come to mind for me are Charlotte and Las Vegas, though a Charlotte team would cut into our fanbase.

[frankosport2011]

Greetings ....

As far as any future MLB expansion-realignment goes, I support these .....

(1) There are a MAXIMUM of 32 teams, 16 teams per league and four teams in each of four divisions in each league.

(2) The teams in each division should be reasonably close to each other as possible, but certain rivalries such as Cardinals-Cubs, Dodgers-Giants, Yankees-Red Sox and Phillies-Pirates (YES, THEM!) should be maintained.

(3) Interleague Play that is based on an annual designated division-vs-division schedule, as is done in the NFL.

(4) ONLY DIVISION WINNERS advance to the post-season, where the Division Series, League Championship Series and World Series would all be best 4-of-7 affairs.

I have some other suggestions, including what expansion teams should be added, what existing teams should be moved, how division titles are decided plus the fate of the Designated Hitter (DH) rule. I plan to post those up at a later time.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frankosport2011

[yankeebiscuitfan]

The main cities that come to mind for me are Charlotte and Las Vegas, though a Charlotte team would cut into our fanbase.

If Charlotte should house a team, it should be IN Charlotte NC, not in Fort Mill SC.
IMO the Knights alienated their fan base by moving across the border.

---------- Post added at 09:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 AM ----------


TN has 5 minor league teams. Realistically Memphis would not be conducive to a MLB team. Knoxville is too much of a College football town. Nashville makes the most sense as its central location makes a drive reasonable and would make attendance accessible.

And I guess to have more ties with the whole state of Tennessee, the name should be Tennessee .... , just like the Titans did.
Another option may be Salt Lake City. The city itself has a population of a bit less than 190,000, but the area where Salt Lake City belongs to, the Wasatch Front, has 2,2 million inhabitants. The last couple of years, the Bees (Salt Lake City's PCL team) has drawn over 500,000 a year. I think an MLB team can survive there.
What are your thoughts on this?

[WilsonC]

Brooklyn, of course!

It's unlikely, due to the political clout of the two NY teams, but without a salary cap, there really should be another team in the NYC area.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

Brooklyn, of course!

It's unlikely, due to the political clout of the two NY teams, but without a salary cap, there really should be another team in the NYC area.

I rather see the Dodgers return to Brooklyn. With the next expansion LA should be rewarded another team.
But like you said, that will never happen.

[Mudge]

Greetings ....

As far as any future MLB expansion-realignment goes, I support these .....

(1) There are a MAXIMUM of 32 teams, 16 teams per league and four teams in each of four divisions in each league.

(2) The teams in each division should be reasonably close to each other as possible, but certain rivalries such as Cardinals-Cubs, Dodgers-Giants, Yankees-Red Sox and Phillies-Pirates (YES, THEM!) should be maintained.

(3) Interleague Play that is based on an annual designated division-vs-division schedule, as is done in the NFL.

(4) ONLY DIVISION WINNERS advance to the post-season, where the Division Series, League Championship Series and World Series would all be best 4-of-7 affairs.

I have some other suggestions, including what expansion teams should be added, what existing teams should be moved, how division titles are decided plus the fate of the Designated Hitter (DH) rule. I plan to post those up at a later time.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frankosport2011

Welcome. There is some merit to having two more teams in order to even things up (whether the system can support two more is problematic). As a general rule, I am not for expansion -- though it is more likely here than contraction.

[Mudge]

My guess is that the schedule for a 32-team majors (2 leagues/4 divisions per league) would have to look like this:

Games against your own division: 3X18=54 (9 home, 9 away)
Games against your own league: 12X6=72 (3 home, 3 away)
Games against an interleague division: 4X9=36 (uneven home/away split)

[frankosport2011]

Greetings ....

Mudge -- that assumes a 162-game regular season. But if we have that -AND- three tiers of best 4-of-7 play-off series, then the overall season could get pushed into November.

By making the InterLeague set-up 6 games (3h, 3a) each, that makes it 24 interleague games and an overall regular season of 150 games. This makes it easier to have all three post-season affairs as best 4-of-7.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport 2011

[yankeebiscuitfan]

Greetings ....

As far as any future MLB expansion-realignment goes, I support these .....

(1) There are a MAXIMUM of 32 teams, 16 teams per league and four teams in each of four divisions in each league.

(2) The teams in each division should be reasonably close to each other as possible, but certain rivalries such as Cardinals-Cubs, Dodgers-Giants, Yankees-Red Sox and Phillies-Pirates (YES, THEM!) should be maintained.

(3) Interleague Play that is based on an annual designated division-vs-division schedule, as is done in the NFL.

(4) ONLY DIVISION WINNERS advance to the post-season, where the Division Series, League Championship Series and World Series would all be best 4-of-7 affairs.

I have some other suggestions, including what expansion teams should be added, what existing teams should be moved, how division titles are decided plus the fate of the Designated Hitter (DH) rule. I plan to post those up at a later time.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frankosport2011

With two 16 team leagues, Interleague Play isn't necessary anymore. Therefore I'd abolish it.

[Mudge]

Greetings ....

Mudge -- that assumes a 162-game regular season. But if we have that -AND- three tiers of best 4-of-7 play-off series, then the overall season could get pushed into November.

By making the InterLeague set-up 6 games (3h, 3a) each, that makes it 24 interleague games and an overall regular season of 150 games. This makes it easier to have all three post-season affairs as best 4-of-7.

Thanx-A-Lot, Frank-0-Sport 2011
I agree that would be preferable -- certainly more balanced in terms of home/away. The opposition would likely come from all those dependent as much on statistics as competition.


With two 16 team leagues, Interleague Play isn't necessary anymore. Therefore I'd abolish it.
Works for me too. But then, again, I've never liked it.

[yankeebiscuitfan]

I agree that would be preferable -- certainly more balanced in terms of home/away. The opposition would likely come from all those dependent as much on statistics as competition.


Works for me too. But then, again, I've never liked it.

Me neither. Like I said, the special feel of Interleague play during the WS has disappeared.