Talk:Interleague play

message: I have removed the incorrect statement that the DH can be used for any player, but is usually used for the pitcher.  That's not true under professional rules.  That's a high-school rule.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.197.28 (talk) 04:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: * Well I guess you're right, i was unaware that rule was changed. Frank Anchor Talk to me (R-OH) 19:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of DH 

message: > Since the Montreal Expos were located to Washington D.C, the Blue Jays do not have an annual rival.
When the Expos moved to DC, the Orioles went from the Phillies to the Nationals, and the Blue Jays went from the Expos to the Phillies.  The Jays and Phillies were, at the time, the last opponent each had faced in the World Series.  The Jays and Phillies have played each other every year since.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.166.172.164 (talk) 12:07, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And, conicidentally, the Phillies once changed their team nickname to "Blue Jays" in the 1940s,long before Totonto had a team.  The name change was ignored by the public and eventually reversed.WHPratt (talk) 17:37, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blue Jays Rival 

message: The 2007 New York Mets are the first, and only team to date, to play every post-season team from the season before during the regular season. They played at Detroit. They hosted Oakland and Minnesota. They also played a home and away series with the crosstown New York Yankees. The Mets went 8-7 in these games and played an extra series against the Dodgers in 2007.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.104.253 (talk) 00:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 2007 New York Mets 

message: "Before the 1997 season, teams in the American League and National League did not meet during the regular season. AL/NL matchups only occurred during spring training, the All-Star Game, other exhibition games such as the Hall of Fame Game in Cooperstown, New York, and the World Series. "
This sentence should be rewritten. Someone unfamiliar with baseball might think the WS is an exhibition.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.245.21 (talk) 11:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading sentence 

message: I could not find a place in the article which answers the question: Do results from interleague games affect the standings of the teams and their chances of reaching the World Series?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.142.243.117 (talk) 21:40, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effect on standings 

message: Japanese probaseball also have interleague match. also Korean probaseball had interleague play in 1999, 2000. But this article only cover mbl interleague --정과 (talk) 06:00, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that the international baseball leagues' interleague play should be covered on the same page.  If these other interleague games are notable (I am only familiar with MLB as far as season structure goes), then separate pages could be created.  This page could be moved to "Interleague play (MLB)" and the "Interleague play" page would become a disambiguation page.  But this page should be specific to the interleague play used in MLB. Frank AnchorTalk 14:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Frank.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:38, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  expand request 

message: (I'm not sure of the best way to word this, but ... .)
With interleague play, each league is no longer a closed system wherein wins and losses must necessarily balance.  Should either league win a solid majority of the contests this serves to take a significant number of wins "out of" the other league.  (For example, in 2006 the A.L. was +56, and in 2008 they were +46.)  With an extreme imbalance, one league could have ten or more sub-.500 teams, and at least one division winner with a losing record. WHPratt (talk) 16:37, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  An additional "con" argument 

message: Now that there will be an interleague game or games on most days throughout the season, I'm thinking we should keep the table (and specifically the row indicating the 2013 wins by league) updated on a daily basis, just like an ordinary standing or statistic table, what do y'all think? --96.32.138.125 (talk) 07:17, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daily updating 

message: Seven interleague games were scheduled and played for each of the last two days, Tue-Wed Aug 5-6 (as we say). The Boston Globe and perhaps other newspapers who share a service show 7 again today but that is a mistake, exchanging the Chicago White Sox and Cubs; there are 5 series today.
Today Thu Aug 7 four teams have the day off, whereas everyone played yesterday. If you are interested in the details of the transition: The four teams off today are the visiting teams from the four games listed at the top of the MLB Schedule at Google; select "Yesterday" (but contents advance daily). Namely Padres, Rays, Rangers, Braves. Their four yesterday-hosts face each other today, namely Twins@Athletics and WhiteSox@Mariners. Two of those four completed series were interleague, Padres@Twins and Braves@Mariners, and the other five of yesterday's 7 interleague series continue today. 
I suppose but haven't checked that today's interleague games are all third games of 3-game series while Padres@Twins and Braves@Mariners on Aug 5-6 played half of their "two two-game series against the remaining team" in their designated divisions. At a glance it appears Twins@Athletics and WhiteSox@Mariners are the only new series beginning today. I guess but haven't checked that these may be 4-game 'halves' of the 'sevens' in "6 or 7 games against each of 10 intraleague opponents". Perhaps everyone else will initiate a 3-game series tomorrow.
--P64 (talk) 21:32, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  2014 August 5–6, etc 

message: Last hour I added several notes above, #First Interleague Game, primarily concerning the inaugural 1997 schedule. --P64 (talk) 22:23, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  1997 interleague schedule 

message: After the 2012-2013 rearrangement into six 5-team divisions, 2015 will only complete a first cycle for each division thru all three divisions in the other league. I wonder whether or not we should write the current sections of this article in terms of a continuing cycle, where 2016 will match 2013, and so on.
Anyway, we now say regarding the favored rivalries, "the two teams play four games, two at home and two away (prior to 2013, there were six games between the two team". Checking 2015 for a few teams only, I find 
* 2013 and 2014 (as we say): 4 game svs favored rival; 4 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 = 16 vs five teams in the paired division
* 2015: 6 vs favored rival; 4 + 4 + 3 + 3 = 14 vs four other teams in the paired division
I don't know how the latter matches or differs from the schedule for AL teams in 2012 and some previous seasons ("prior to 2013" but see the preceding section). --P64 (talk) 19:40, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  2013 and later 

message: When interleague play began, the Boston Red Sox and the Atlanta Braves were natural rivals because the Braves had been based in Boston until moving to Milwaukee in 1954. The current arrangement (the Red Sox and Blue Jays being split between the Braves and the Phillies) happened after the move of the Expos to Washington (becoming the Nationals) because that move broke up two previous pairs: Phillies-Orioles and Expos-Blue Jays. Nationals-Orioles was a given but that left no good pairings for the Phillies and Blue Jays, so the league settled on the current arrangement as the best of a bad lot.
The Phillies would probably be best paired with the Yankees were it not for the fact that Yankees-Mets is a lock; Red Sox-Phillies has no particular justification. There really isn't anybody to pair the Blue Jays with now that they are the only Canadian team.
Mdulcey (talk) 20:49, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red Sox rivals 

message: note - this section has errors which need corrected; for example, Seattle and Colorado did not play in 2019, an odd-numbered year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.62.211.190 (talk • contribs) 15:12, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Split rivalries

message: When the schedule was changed in 2020 to the corresponding inter-league division (along with same division only intra-league play) the Reds and Tigers met for 6 games and the Indians/Pirates are doing the same while the Indian vs. Reds met for 4 games (two in each city back to back) and the Tigers vs. Pirates only played 3 games (in Pittsburgh).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aceee1 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Central rivalries swapped in adjusted 2020 schedule 

message: Are the rivalry pairings the MLB assigned permanent or not? I feel they are since the provisions of the new schedule are that the 3-game series that are played between non-rivals rotate venues between seasons. 131.247.224.20 (talk) 15:20, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I provided a source to state they aren't permanent, but we might not know for certain until 2025 (as the 2024 pairings could easily be a home/away reversal of 2023). O.N.R. (talk) 19:55, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: For both 2023 and 2024 seasons, there are 4 games between Atlanta and Boston, as can be seen in the 2 games in the 1st half of the 2023 season + 2 games in the 2nd half of the 2023 season & 4 games in the 1st half of 2024. Therefore, the same can be said with Philadelphia and Toronto. The same can be said with Colorado and Houston, as can be seen in the 2 games in the 1st half of the 2023 season + 2 games in the 2nd half of the 2023 season & 4 games in the 1st half of 2024. Therefore, the same can be said with Arizona and Texas. As it seems, the split rivalry era has ended for these 8 teams. Spesh531(talk, contrib., ext.) 03:29, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said before, we won't know until the 2025 schedule is released. Had the odd/even rotation remained intact, home games would be imbalanced; however, absent evidence split rivalries are dead, they can switch every two years instead of every year. No reliable source has stated that split rivalries are dead, because it's possible that even Major League Baseball themselves don't yet know what they're doing for 2025. O.N.R. (talk) 04:25, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Permanent or not? 

message: With the Arizona vs. Texas matchup this year, this is the second World Series to feature formal interleague rivals (the previous being the 2000 New York Yankees/Mets World Series). 
Before this, there were 17 informal interleague World Series matchups, mostly intra-city matchups, in addition to the 1985 intra-state Kansas City Royals/St. Louis Cardinals and 1989 Oakland Athletics/San Francisco Giants Bay Area matchup.
Nobody would seriously consider the California intra-state matchups of 1974 Oakland Athletics/Los Angeles Dodgers, 1988 Los Angeles Dodgers/Oakland Athletics, or 2002 Anaheim Angels/San Francisco Giants as an interleague rivalry, since each team already has their corresponding local rivalry (Giants/Athletics & Dodgers/Angels), so I have not included those 3 on the table below. The table I put together (mostly co-opted from List of World Series champions) contains all interleague rival World Series matchups, formal and informal.
The two formal World Series of 2000 & 2023 should definitely be included somewhere in the article, but should the 17 informal rivalries be included as well?
Year	Winning team       	Manager                 	Series          	Losing team     	Manager     	
    	Chicago White Sox  	align="left"            	                	4–2             	Chicago Cubs	
    	New York Giants    	rowspan="2" align="left"	5–3             	New York Yankees	            	
    	New York Giants    	4–0–(1)                 	New York Yankees	                	            	
    	New York Yankees   	align="left"            	                	                	            	
    	New York Yankees   	rowspan="3" align="left"	                	                	            	
    	New York Yankees   	4–1                     	New York Giants 	                	            	
    	New York Yankees   	4–1                     	Brooklyn Dodgers	                	            	
    	St. Louis Cardinals	align="left"            	4–2             	St. Louis Browns	            	
    	New York Yankees   	align="left"            	                	                	            	
    	Cleveland Indians  	align="left"            	                	                	            	
    	New York Yankees   	rowspan="4" align="left"	                	                	            	
    	New York Yankees   	4–2                     	New York Giants 	                	            	
    	New York Yankees   	4–3                     	Brooklyn Dodgers	                	            	
    	New York Yankees   	4–2                     	Brooklyn Dodgers	                	            	
    	Brooklyn Dodgers   	align="left"            	4–3             	New York Yankees	            	
    	New York Yankees   	align="left"            	                	                	            	
    	Kansas City Royals 	align="left"            	                	                	            	
    	Oakland Athletics  	align="left"            	                	                	            	
    	New York Yankees   	align="left"            	4–1             	New York Mets   	            	
    	                   	                        	                	                	            	
;Legend
*  The 1922 World Series each included one tied game.
*  The 1921 World Series was in a best-of-nine format (carried by the first team to win five games).
Spesh531(talk, contrib., ext.) 15:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding a section for interleague World Series matchups