As little as the fans of 29 teams want to hear it, central baseball does not treat the Yankees fairly. The sport’s luxury tax and revenue sharing policy, for instance, are more or less explicitly designed to get the Yankees to reign in their spending, or punish them if they don’t. Baseball’s draft slotting rules, to give another example, are designed to keep rich teams — especially the Yankees — from using the full weight of their checkbooks to improve their farm systems with the best amateur players. What makes this mildly ridiculous is the way other teams happily pocket money the Yankees earn. When a fan buys a Derek Jeter shirt, the Washington Nationals get as much of the profits as the Yankees do, because licensing money is also evenly split.

These are good, solid policies that baseball has freely adopted. But they do, at least in principle, make whining over the Yankees’ dominance a bit rich.

At least one MLB rule change, though, will benefit the Yankees this October: the change in playoff schedules. In the first round of the playoffs this year, each team will enjoy two off days in a full five-game series. In the second round, which plays out to a full seven games, they’ll get four. This means that Yankee opponents will see a lot more of phenom reliever Joba Chamberlain than they otherwise would, given the team’s reluctance to use him on consecutive days. The prospect of the Yankees plowing through the post-season via the 1996-style, six-inning game handed off from the starter to Chamberlain to Mariano Rivera, is very real, Joba Rules or no.

This parallel also brings up an interesting question. In 1996 Rivera, like Chamberlain, was a phenom backing a devastating veteran, in that case John Wetteland. In 1996, Wetteland — as Rivera is now — was a pending free agent. Should the Yankees (who could lose both Alex Rodriguez and Jorge Posada this fall) give some consideration to their past actions, when they let their old closer go and gave the ball to the phenom? As obvious as that move seems now, letting the World Series MVP go wasn’t at all an obvious move at the time. Would letting Rivera go work as did the release of Wetteland?

Because the circumstances are so different, there’s almost no chance this will happen. Wetteland was a very good pitcher; Rivera is a legend. Chamberlain has the build, stamina, and arsenal to win a Cy Young Award as a starter; Rivera did not. Additionally, reports of Rivera’s decline have been exaggerated. He isn’t quite what he was three years ago. But since a wretched April, his ERA is 1.96, with a 62/9 strikeout-to-walk ratio in 59.2 innings. He’s also Mariano Rivera. There certainly isn’t a pitcher in the game I’d rather have on the mound if my life depended on the outcome.

This isn’t a question that’s necessarily going to go away, though, for two reasons. The first is that if the Yankees are wise, next year they’ll heed Earl Weaver’s dictum that the best place for a young pitcher is in long relief. Whether or not Chamberlain’s long-term future is in the rotation, he should absolutely apprentice in relief next year. It would be good for his long-term health, and a good way for him to hone his craft. The second is that Rivera turns 38 in November, and he’s long hinted at a relatively early retirement. Next year could well be his last.

It’s not hard to see how this might play out. If Chamberlain runs up a sub-2.00 ERA in the pen next year, while Rivera decides that the end of 2008 would be a good time to turn to religious work, the Yankees are going to have an awfully hard time not designating Chamberlain the legend’s worthy heir. This might not even be a bad idea. A top closer, carefully used, can have every bit the impact a top starter does, if you account for the relative importance of the innings he pitches. Chamberlain has had arm problems in the past, meaning he may be best suited for short appearances.

The danger for the Yankees, though, is that if they end up riding Chamberlain’s arm to a World Series victory this year, the pressure to leave well enough alone will be overwhelming — certainly enough to constrain their choices, to some extent, by adding another factor other than “what’s best for the player” and “best for the team” into the decision-making process. It’s a problem the team’s brass would doubtless be glad to have, but it’s still one well worth tracking. At least where Chamberlain and his unlimited potential are concerned, a World Series win could be quite the Pyrrhic victory.