So the leagues are limited to 20 interleague games.
I had thought it would be 2 cycles through one's own league = 30 series -- this would include 2 series against the opposite league, then 4 cycles through one's own division = 20 series -- this would include 4 series against the opposite league. Then there would be two series against the opposite league for 52 series.
That's still possible but 20/8 = 2.5. Half those series would have to be two-game sets. If you're going to do one cycle of an opposite league division, that's rather inelegant.
More likely then is that there will be 3 cycles through one's own league = 45 series -- this would include 3 series against the opposite league. Then one more cycle through one's own division = 5 series -- this would include 1 series against the opposite league (the rival series). Then there would be 2 more series against the opposite league (this would complete the cycle of one division in the opposite league).
That's 52 series in all or 156 games. So we'd need 6 "long" series. So one series against each divisional opponent would be long. Possibly the rival series is intended to be long (equivalently two 2-game sets); then one more -- maybe do like the NFL -- if you finish 1st this year you get another long series with another 1st place team next year; if you finish 5th then you get a long series with another 5th place team. It might be better to keep the rival series short and then have long series against the same ranked team in the other divisions of the same league.
Another problem: Suppose the NL East is playing itself. ATL-NYM; MIA-WSN; ???-PHI. It makes for elegant scheduling if the AL East is also playing itself at the same time -- say TBR-NYY; TOR-BOS; then BAL is available to play PHI without having to travel very far.
Comment