The Pointless Realignment Outpost

[IceCap]

NBA if they cared about the fanz!!!111one

East

Atlantic

Boston Celtics

Brooklyn Nets

New York Knicks

Philadelphia 76ers

Central

Chicago Bulls

Cleveland Cavaliers

Milwaukee Bucks

Washington Zephyrs

Central East

Detroit Pistons

Indiana Pacers

Pittsburgh TBA

Toronto Raptors

Southeast

Atlanta Hawks

Charlotte AirFliers ('cause Bobcats is dumb0

Miami Heat

Orlando Magic

West

Midwest

Dallas Mavs

Denver Nuggets

Oklahoma Thunder (they never shoulda left and their unis and logo suck)

Phoenix Suns

Northwest

Minnesota Timberwolves

Portland Trailblazers

Seattle SuperSonics (continuation of teh original sonics even though they're not)

Utah Hornets ('cause tehy're the beehive state and hornets r like bees/continuation of Charlotte/New Orleans Hornets though just the name changed)

Pacific

Los Angles Lakers

Oakland Warriors ('cause Golden State sounds liek a college name()

Sacramento Kings

San Diego Clippers (LA is teh lakers town)

Southwest

Houston Rockets

Memphis Express (give grizzlies back to vancouver incase of expansion)

New Orleans Jazz (new orleans seems more jazzy then utah/official continuation of New Orleans Jazz/Utah Jazz team even if they just switched names with Hornets)

San Antonio Spurs

[MattF]

NBA if they cared about the fanz!!!111one

East

Atlantic

Boston Celtics

Brooklyn Nets

New York Knicks

Philadelphia 76ers

Central

Chicago Bulls

Cleveland Cavaliers

Milwaukee Bucks

Washington Zephyrs

Central East

Detroit Pistons

Indiana Pacers

Pittsburgh TBA

Toronto Raptors

Southeast

Atlanta Hawks

Charlotte AirFliers ('cause Bobcats is dumb0

Miami Heat

Orlando Magic

West

Midwest

Dallas Mavs

Denver Nuggets

Oklahoma Thunder (they never shoulda left and their unis and logo suck)

Phoenix Suns

Northwest

Minnesota Timberwolves

Portland Trailblazers

Seattle SuperSonics (continuation of teh original sonics even though they're not)

Utah Hornets ('cause tehy're the beehive state and hornets r like bees/continuation of Charlotte/New Orleans Hornets though just the name changed)

Pacific

Los Angles Lakers

Oakland Warriors ('cause Golden State sounds liek a college name()

Sacramento Kings

San Diego Clippers (LA is teh lakers town)

Southwest

Houston Rockets

Memphis Express (give grizzlies back to vancouver incase of expansion)

New Orleans Jazz (new orleans seems more jazzy then utah/official continuation of New Orleans Jazz/Utah Jazz team even if they just switched names with Hornets)

San Antonio Spurs

No Hartford Whalers=fail

[LightningRide75]

NBA if they cared about the fanz!!!111one

Pacific

Los Angles Lakers

San Francisco Warriors ('cause Golden State sounds like a college name)

Sacramento Kings

San Diego Clippers (LA is teh lakers town)

Now that's better

[ZapRowsdower8]

Sorry to break up the fun, but I have a bit of "real" pointless realignment that local radio was talking about. Driving home yesterday some DJs were talking about how they believe Selig proposed the floating realignment mostly as a way for the Rays to compete and bring in more fans. Selig doesn't want to look bad that a team is failing and with more success he believes a new stadium would have to be built. (Thats their theory, not mine.) They made a simple suggestion which I actually kind of like. Just swap the Rays and Nationals. The Rays then get more natural rivals in Miami and Atlanta and Philly and the Mets will still bring in good crowds, although not as good as Yankees and Red Sox. The Nationals in turn get to play Baltimore more and the added crowds that NYY and BOS bring in.

Of course, the downside of their plan is that then Washington is in the same situation as the Rays.

[BBTV]

Sorry to break up the fun, but I have a bit of "real" pointless realignment that local radio was talking about. Driving home yesterday some DJs were talking about how they believe Selig proposed the floating realignment mostly as a way for the Rays to compete and bring in more fans. Selig doesn't want to look bad that a team is failing and with more success he believes a new stadium would have to be built. (Thats their theory, not mine.) They made a simple suggestion which I actually kind of like. Just swap the Rays and Nationals. The Rays then get more natural rivals in Miami and Atlanta and Philly and the Mets will still bring in good crowds, although not as good as Yankees and Red Sox. The Nationals in turn get to play Baltimore more and the added crowds that NYY and BOS bring in.

Of course, the downside of their plan is that then Washington is in the same situation as the Rays.

Hmm... that's not a dumb idea, however I'm not sure that it would benefit the Rays that much, and it would certainly kill the Nationals in the long run (they might get a short term revenue boost though.) Unless the Nationals, who would have to be considered one of the larger-market teams find a way to exploit that somehow, and get in a financial league with the other big guys. Of course, Baltimore is in a similar position, and they can't, so maybe it's not possible.

That's the other thing - leagues like splitting up teams that share large markets, so more teams can benefit by playing against those teams. If both NYs were in the same division, then the other teams in that division would have a disproportionate amount of games against those clubs, and probably earn more revenue because of it. Keeping them in different leagues allows more teams to have dates against NY. I'm not sure if BAL-WSH is considered one large market in the context of sports, but if so, there would be little chance that MLB would want them in the same league.

[gueman]

Sorry to break up the fun, but I have a bit of "real" pointless realignment that local radio was talking about. Driving home yesterday some DJs were talking about how they believe Selig proposed the floating realignment mostly as a way for the Rays to compete and bring in more fans. Selig doesn't want to look bad that a team is failing and with more success he believes a new stadium would have to be built. (Thats their theory, not mine.) They made a simple suggestion which I actually kind of like. Just swap the Rays and Nationals. The Rays then get more natural rivals in Miami and Atlanta and Philly and the Mets will still bring in good crowds, although not as good as Yankees and Red Sox. The Nationals in turn get to play Baltimore more and the added crowds that NYY and BOS bring in.

Of course, the downside of their plan is that then Washington is in the same situation as the Rays.

I'm not sure if BAL-WSH is considered one large market in the context of sports, but if so, there would be little chance that MLB would want them in the same league.

You bring up something that I thought about...See I live in the Balt/DC market and EVERY one here views it as 2 separate markets with 2 separate cultures (for the lack of a better term). BUT with that being said I could see how the rest of the US could now view it as one huge entity. The same way I guess us east coasters view LA. We see LA as being one massive city and really don't get why a team in Anaheim is not considered LA, and San Jose and Oakland is not San Fransisco. Do the rest of you view Balt/Wash as one market? Do you view LA/Anaheim and SF/SJ/OAK as one single market too?

[BBTV]

Being close to Bal and WAS, and having been to both cities / regions quite a bit, I feel that they are two separate markets. If Baltimore vanished from the Earth, the Washington market would be largely unaffected, and vice versa. If Los Angeles vanished from the face of the Earth, I have a hard time believing that Anaheim wouldn't be incredibly affected.

[Still MIGHTY]

Being close to Bal and WAS, and having been to both cities / regions quite a bit, I feel that they are two separate markets. If Baltimore vanished from the Earth, the Washington market would be largely unaffected, and vice versa. If Los Angeles vanished from the face of the Earth, I have a hard time believing that Anaheim wouldn't be incredibly affected.

You'd be surprised.

There are a large amount of commuters from Orange County to LA of course, but then there are a ton from Riverside, Thousand Oaks, Valencia, the Inland Empire, etc. So yes Los Angeles is the hub between Santa Barbara to Orange County, with Camp Pendelton serving as a buffer between Orange County and San Diego. But while it is the hub, there are equal, and maybe just slightly less, business taking place in Orange County. LA is so packed with it now, that Orange County is almost equal in business terms. All of SoCal is one huge urban sprawl, but the only thing that is really different between LA and Orange County is that LA has its clearly defined downtown. I'd say they are almost on even terms at this point. Plus there is equal traffic going in either direction on freeways in the morning in most places, that's a good enough indicator

Basically if LA vanished, then things would shift easily to Orange County. They'd be affected sure, because initially everything spread out from LA from large to small, but now everything is the large urban sprawl. Things have built up to be equal entities, but there are the dividing lines of course. Trust me, they're connected, but they are separate enough.

To bring this example back to the sports teams, a majority of Angels/Ducks fans come from Orange County, Riverside, and I know the Angels at least extend into the South Bay. They do draw from LA (the Angels more than the Ducks for sure), but not as much as you would think.

Really the comparison of SoCal (minus SD) is analogous to the Bay Area (SF,SJ,OAK). Yes they are connected via urban sprawl, but they are different areas.

[the admiral]

Do the rest of you view Balt/Wash as one market? Do you view LA/Anaheim and SF/SJ/OAK as one single market too?

I view Greater Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area as single markets because that's exactly what they are according to Nielsen and the Combined Statistical Area listing from the census. To wit,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles-Long_Beach-Riverside,_CA_CSA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Jose-San_Francisco-Oakland,_CA_CSA

http://www.tvjobs.com/cgi-bin/markets/market2.cgi

Baltimore-Washington is the only one that's a little iffy. They're separate television/radio markets, but compose one CSA. I think as the sprawl continues through southern Maryland, there will be fewer reservations about lumping Baltimore and Washington together.

[aci]

Here's my realignment idea. It's actually got a modicum of seriousness to it, unlike most of the recent posts on the thread.

It involves a sort of promotion/demotion system, with 6 new expansion teams (drawn from existing Triple-A teams, plus an additional Canadian and Mexican team, to broaden horizons and take advantage of large existing ballparks.

Because the National League is the Senior Circuit, it takes the role of the top-flight league in the system. The American League is the Junior Circuit, and becomes the second division. Each league has 18 teams, with three divisions of six teams apiece.

To begin the system, the 18 best MLB teams from 2009 will make up the NL. The bottom 12 teams and the 6 new teams will make up the AL. The divisions are as follows:

National League

-----East------------------------Central------------------------West

New York Yankees-------Minnesota Twins--------Los Angeles Angels

Boston Red Sox---------Detroit Tigers---------Los Angeles Dodgers

Philadelphia Phillies---St Louis Cardinals-----Colorado Rockies

Tampa Bay Rays----------Chicago Cubs----------San Francisco Giants

Florida Marlins---------Milwaukee Brewers-----Texas Rangers

Atlanta Braves----------Chicago White Sox-----Seattle Mariners

American League

-------East--------------------------Central----------------------West

Toronto Blue Jays--------Cincinnati Reds------Oakland Athletics

Baltimore Orioles--------Cleveland Indians----Arizona Diamondbacks

New York Mets------------Houston Astros-------Portland Beavers

Pittsburgh Pirates-------Kansas City Royals----San Diego Padres

Montreal Expos-----------Memphis Redbirds------Albuquerque Isotopes

Washington Nationals-----Omaha Golden Spikes----Monterrey Sultans

I tried to pick popular teams in decently-sized markets with good stadiums for the expansion teams. Monterrey has the biggest ballpark in Mexico (seats 27,000) and is near the US border, while Montreal still has the serviceable Olympic Stadium. Needs work, but it's better than just about any Triple-A park.

Anyways, the important thing about this proposal is the promotion/relegation aspect. The key is that BOTH leagues are still major leagues. These teams can't drop down to Triple-A, it's just two-tiered, and each will have their own minor-league affiliates regardless of whether they are AL or NL. At the end of each season, the division winners in the AL are promoted to their respective NL divisions, and the worst team in each NL division move own to the AL. By doing this, geographical rivalries wouldn't vanish, and teams would be less likely to routinely suck. It could also raise attendances, as a team like the Pirates would be more likely to win games in the second-division than in the current NL Central.

Each team plays 150 regular season games: 12 against each division rival, 6 against each other team in their league, and a three-game set (either home or away) against each team in the opposing league's division (AL East vs NL East, etc).

For the playoffs, I have two possible options:

1) Eight teams qualify: Each division winner, plus two wildcard teams from the NL. The NL division winners are seeded 1-2-3, and the other 5 fall into place according to their won-loss records, with NL teams getting preferential treatment in the case of any ties. Each of the three playoff series will be seven games.

2) Sixteen team qualify: Division winners, plus a further 9 teams from the NL and 1 from the AL. The teams would again be seeded with the NL division winners 1-2-3, and the other 13 falling where their records dictate. This would involve 5-7-7-7 playoff series.

The draft: Teams from the lower division draft first, with the best team going first (to promote not tanking a season), and the worst team drafting 18th. From there, the worst NL teams would draft, moving up the rankings (to promote balance at the top).

Anyways, does anyone have any thoughts on this? I tried to put some thought into it, and I think it'd go over pretty well (especially compared to that floating realignment crapola).

[DustDevil61]

Here's a little thought I had--what if the Clippers did move to Seattle? (Not that it's going to happen--it makes too much sense). How would the NBA's Western Conference look like then? Here's what I thought:

Northwest Division

Denver Nuggets

Minnesota Timberwolves

Portland Trailblazers

Seattle Supersonics (formerly the LA Clippers)

Utah Jazz

Southwest Division

Dallas Mavericks

Houston Rockets

Memphis Grizzlies

New Orleans Hornets

Oklahoma City Thunder

Pacific Division

Golden State Warriors

Los Angeles Lakers

Phoenix Suns

Sacramento Kings

San Antonio Spurs

My reasoning for the Spurs being in the Pacific Division is that some of their biggest out-of-division rivals are Phoenix and the Lakers, though I wouldn't exactly like to see the Texas teams split up.

Some other ideas of mine:

Blow up the current Northwest Division and go with a "new Midwest division":

Midwest Division:

Denver Nuggets

Houston Rockets

San Antonio Spurs

Minnesota Timberwolves

Utah Jazz

Pacific Division:

Golden State Warriors

Los Angeles Lakers

Portland Trailblazers

Sacramento Kings

Seattle Supersonics (former LA Clippers)

Southwest Divison:

Dallas Mavricks

Memphis Grizzlies

New Orleans Hornets

Oklahoma City Thunder

Phoenix Suns

Or, how about this:

Midwest Division:

Denver Nuggets

Oklahoma City Thunder

Phoenix Suns

San Antonio Spurs

Utah Jazz

Great River Division:

Dallas Mavericks

Houston Rockets

Memphis Grizzlies

Minnesota Timberwolves

New Orleans Hornets

Pacific Division:

Golden State Warriors

Los Angeles Lakers

Portland Trailblazers

Sacramento Kings

Seattle Supersonics (former LA Clippers)

"Great River" obviously referring to the Mississippi River, of course. However, things would be made far simpler to see the Grizzlies move to Seattle or back to Vancouver, then you could simply swap them and Oklahoma City.

[BlueSky]

Here's my realignment idea. It's actually got a modicum of seriousness to it, unlike most of the recent posts on the thread.

I'm mildly offended. Or not. But perhaps you missed the thread's title? It is after all the Pointless Realignment Thread Outpost. Wouldn't that make you the one not like the others?

[aci]

Here's my realignment idea. It's actually got a modicum of seriousness to it, unlike most of the recent posts on the thread.

I'm mildly offended. Or not. But perhaps you missed the thread's title? It is after all the Pointless Realignment Thread Outpost. Wouldn't that make you the one not like the others?

Well, the pointlessness in me posting was in that nobody would take it seriously, right?

[Magnus]

NHL time:

Phoenix Coyotes move to AHL, and become the Canucks' new AHL affiliate.

Manitoba Moose move into Northwest Division.

Colorado moves to Pacific Division, taking Phoenix's vacated spot.

Atlanta switches leagues with its AHL affiliate in Chicago. (The NHL players can stay in the NHL and vice versa, just the team identities change.)

The Wolves move into the Central Division, alongside the Blackhawks.

Detroit moves back to the Eastern Conference, in the Northeast, rekindling its Original Six rivalries.

Buffalo moves to the Atlantic, joining the Rangers as cross-state rivals.

The beleaguered Islanders move to Kansas City, and join the Central Division alongside St. Louis.

Now there are 6 teams in the Central, so we move Nashville to the Southeast.

New division structure:

Northwest: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Minnesota

Central: Columbus, St. Louis, Kansas City, Chicago Wolves, Chicago Blackhawks

Pacific: Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Dallas, Colorado

Northeast: Detroit, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Boston

Atlantic: Buffalo, New York, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia

Southeast: Nashville, Washington, Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina.

[aci]

NHL time:

Phoenix Coyotes move to AHL, and become the Canucks' new AHL affiliate.

Manitoba Moose move into Northwest Division.

Colorado moves to Pacific Division, taking Phoenix's vacated spot.

Atlanta switches leagues with its AHL affiliate in Chicago. (The NHL players can stay in the NHL and vice versa, just the team identities change.)

The Wolves move into the Central Division, alongside the Blackhawks.

Detroit moves back to the Eastern Conference, in the Northeast, rekindling its Original Six rivalries.

Buffalo moves to the Atlantic, joining the Rangers as cross-state rivals.

The beleaguered Islanders move to Kansas City, and join the Central Division alongside St. Louis.

Now there are 6 teams in the Central, so we move Nashville to the Southeast.

New division structure:

Northwest: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Minnesota

Central: Columbus, St. Louis, Kansas City, Chicago Wolves, Chicago Blackhawks

Pacific: Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Dallas, Colorado

Northeast: Detroit, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Boston

Atlantic: Buffalo, New York, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia

Southeast: Nashville, Washington, Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina.

That actually makes sense, but I don't think Chicago can support two NHL teams. When the Blackhawks sucked, everyone ditched them for the Bulls. Milwaukee would probably be a better choice, as they're a reasonable and unused market (and would have immediate rivalries with Minnesota, Manitoba and Chicago). The rest makes sense, though.

[crashcarson15]

-

Edited April 8, 2010 by sizemorematters

[Magnus]

I'll agree with that. Milwaukee would be a good market for an NHL team.

[BBTV]

I'll agree with that. Milwaukee would be a good market for an NHL team.

Based on market size, arena, potential ownership candidates, corportate community, fan interest, or, just because?

[IceCap]

I used to think that it would be a market the NHL should have, but the more I hear about the Bucks' situation, the more I'm not so sure. The AHL may be the perfect level for them.

[BBTV]

I actually don't know anything about the city or the market, I just hate when people say "city X deserves a team" (or variations of that.) What is the Bucks situation? I know it's been mentioned recently that Milwaukee is the smallest market in MLB, but I also know that market size is a little less important in hockey than in the more mainstream sports.