baseball's plan to cause me angst

According to an article in USA Today, Major League Baseball is considering having an abbreviated season using a modified league and division alignment. This isn't the place to go into great detail, but at a high level:

• Teams would play their home games at their spring training sites, which are all in Arizona and Florida.
• The MLB would be split into two leagues, based on spring training sites and nomenclature. That actually works nicely, since Florida and Arizona each hosts fifteen teams.
• Each of these leagues would be split into three divisions.
• The leagues would play an abbreviated schedule, with the champions facing off in a world series in November.
• All games would be played without a live audience.

I'm not going to pretend to have a clue as to whether the plan is feasible or makes economic sense. I don't know any of the details of the television contracts or player contracts, so I don't know who is out how much money if the season doesn't happen, or whose losses are mitigated if an abbreviated season occurs. Clearly, though, money is a major motivator. Relatedly, MLB wants to stay relevant. I also have to wonder about the health issues. Even without a crowd in the stands I don't see how they can play a baseball game while social distancing. But all that's for them to figure out.

I don't really care much as a fan. I don't follow baseball. I used to. But I stopped when they had the strike in 1994. Except for the various stoopidstats I like to look at at the end of the season.

My concern is how this affects my stoopidstats. As an ongoing stoopidstats project, I keep track of the cumulative wins and losses of all franchises in major league history. I also like to group them by nickname, location, and state (or state-like entity*). After the 2019 season, I updated the statistics and blogged about it here. If MLB goes ahead with its plan, I will have some decisions to make. For the sake of this discussion, I'll reference the Phillies, though it applies to 27** of the 30 teams.

According to the plan, the Phillies would be playing their home games in Clearwater, Florida. For grouping wins by franchise, by nickname or location there's no issue. I take location as indicated in the team's name. They are the "Philadelphia Phillies," so their location is indicated as Philadelphia. For the record, the Brooklyn Dodgers are included as "Brooklyn" rather than "New York."

But what about state or state-like entity? Should that be informed by what state the team, plays in? Or what state the location indicated by their name is located in. In the case of the Phillies, would their wins be credited to Florida (since they'd be playing their home games in Florida) or Pennsylvania because they are still called the "Philadelphia Phillies" and Philadelphia is in Pennsylvania?

This is actually related to an issue I have thought about without coming to a conclusion. Look at Football. The New York Giants and New York Jets play their home games in New Jersey, even though their name indicates a city in New York State. If the Yankees (or Mets were to move to New Jersey but retain the "New York" in their name, would I start crediting their wins to New Jersey or New York?

And let's not even think about what to do if the Boston Red Sox start following the example of football's Patriots and start calling themselves "New England."

*The state-like entities are states, Canadian provinces and the District of Columbia. To date, there have been MLB franchises in 25 states, two provinces and DC.
**The issue, as described, is not a concern with respect to the three teams that already play their home games in ARizona and Florida.