MLB, it's time to fix things...
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 9:42 AM EDT
105 comments
As a lot of you know, I have bemoaned on here before about the unfairness between the two leagues. Since we are in the midst of Interleague Play (which I actually like to a degree), I'll complain a little more.
I am shouting it from the rooftops so all can hear:
Life is better in the American League, EVEN with the Yankees and the Red Sox.
Analysts love to mention that the AL is the superior league with better talent. I am sure in some ways that is true, but to what extent? Does interleague play record really show the difference? I don't think there are any real answers to this, but I do know this it is almost impossible to measure since there are multiple differences between the two leagues, and most benefit the AL.
Problem: The DH is a huge advantage for American League teams. How NL owners don't see this inherent disadvantage in interleague play and the World Series, I have no idea. American League teams pay one player to be the DH at all times. NL teams do not have that luxury. Look at Sheffield for an example. A rumor had him coming to the Phillies this past year and he wouldn't because he thought there was no chance at starting at all. That was 42 year old Gary Sheffield. DH stats are skewed because often a better hitter on a NL team will DH while the slick fielder plays in his spot. However, look at the bottom of the list. Even with a small sample size, we see the bottom 10 teams are all NL teams. Sketchy data? Sure, but I think we can still see a pattern there.
Solution: Put the DH in the NL. I don't care to see pitchers hit. It's not fun and is usually aggravating watching a pitcher hit with 2 on and 2 out. The DH is a good rule and should be adopted in the NL.
Problem: The number of teams in each league. The AL has 14 teams while the NL has 16. This creates a disadvantage for NL Central teams and a significant advantage for AL West teams. If all those teams were identical, the AL West team would have a 25% chance at making the post season while the NL Central team has a 16% chance. In addition, if you remove the 3 division winners, there are 11 AL teams fighting for the WC spot and 13 NL teams. That's a 9% chance for an AL team to get the WC and a 7.7% chance for an NL team. That makes it even easier for an AL West team and harder for an NL Central team.
Solution: There are 2 possible ones. Option A is to move the Brewers back (or whatever) and have an interleague series occur all the time. I kinda like that, but I like option B better. Add two more teams to MLB and split them up like the NFL does with 4 per division and 8 divisions overall. Then, make a TRUE divisional series by having the best team in the division play the #2 team to see who makes it into the "playoffs". That removes the problem with the unbalanced schedule screwing over teams fighting for the WC in harder divisions. Yeah, half the teams make the playoffs, but honestly, getting more cities involved is always more fun.
0 recs |
105 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I vote for contraction of two teams (KC and either Florida team, Florida because the owner is more evil), elimination of the DH, a new REAL GM, and firing the folks in charge of the players union.
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 9:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That’s moving backwards, not forwards.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s your opinion, mistakes that move ‘forward’ are still mistakes, correcting them (as I see it) would be fixing those mistakes and put the game in better standing.
You also need a ‘real’ Commissioner who wasn’t an owner, you need new leadership in the players union, you need to fix the draft.
You want to expand to two more cities? Where? You already have at least four teams who aren’t being ‘supported’ by their fan base (florida, tampa, kc, and pittsburgh), with cheap ass ownership sort of coasting along and benefitting from revenue sharing (which is poorly set up), what cities do you think should have teams, and find owners.
Sure the Union would love more teams and the DH in the national leage – that’s more jobs for guys who have al imited skill set or are at the end of their carreer.
Expansion was a mistake – the DH was a mistake – correct the mistakes and then worry about moving forward.
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Neither Tampa nor KC is in the bottom four in attendance. If you want to eliminate teams that don’t get fan support, then eliminate the A’s.
The best location for a new or relocated team would be the New York metropolitan area, except that the Yankees and Mets would fight it. (Southern California could probably support another team too, but that would have the same problems.) Otherwise, the best options would probably be Portland and Vancouver.
The DH is lame though.
by taco pal on Jun 17, 2009 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um – southern california barely suppoorts the padres even when they are competetive – i’m not sure they’d support another team nor am I sure where you’d put em.
Eliminate the A’s – that’s fine – but expansion of teams and the DH doesn’t ‘fix’ a problem it just exacerbates one
And I don’t agree that New York could support a 3rd team…
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know you live in California, but your impressions are just wrong. It would be a better idea to look it up.
Attendance rankings since 2001
Dodgers 8, 5, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3
Angels 20, 16, 5, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 4
Padres 18, 17, 19, 9, 7, 12, 13, 17, 20
The Padres may not be the Yankees or Red Sox, but their attendance figures are perfectly respectable. On average, they’re a middle-of-the-pack team. Saying that they “barely” get support even when they are competitive is just false.
I would think an additional team in Southern California would fit best in the Inland Empire area, which is really big and has been growing fast. It’s also so far away from LA and Anaheim that it would be unlikely to have a dramatic impact on the other teams’ attendance.
Of course, with the economy the way it is right now, especially in that area, now is not the team to think of expansion or relocation. But in the future, it might work.
by taco pal on Jun 17, 2009 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yeah – you really want to add another team to bite into the attendance figures of the padres – it’s an interesting trend the padres have going there
12, 13, 17, 20….they definitely could handle a ‘bite’ into their ‘fan base’
and the inland empire – ever been? during the summer?
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please try not to change your position in the middle of the argument. What you said originally was “southern california barely suppoorts the padres even when they are competetive.” Maybe you haven’t noticed, but the Padres have not been particularly competitive in the last two seasons. Could it be that that’s why their attendance figures are down, not because of some unexplained generalized trend? And even in the non-competitive years, they’re still near the middle of the pack. (And what exactly is so bad about placing 12th and 13th? Those numbers are above the median when there are 30 teams total.)
Inland Empire: yes, I have been there. They can play games at night, you know. Have you ever been to Phoenix in the summer? How about Arlington, Texas?
Also, I would observe that in addition to being very far from Los Angeles and Anaheim, the IE is fully two hours away from San Diego – that is, about the same as the distance between Philadelphia and New York. Do you really think putting a team there would take a “bite” out of the Padres’ fan base? If so, please explain how.
by taco pal on Jun 17, 2009 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well I don’t like the DH – i find this argument kind of silly regarding ‘strategy’ and all that – i don’t like it but I also know they aren’t getting rid of cause, again, the unioin is run by buffoons.
Hitters who can’t do anything else BUT hit aren’t the best in my opinion…that’s all
Also – the premise of the post – there are a lot bigger issues to deal with than the DH and the unbalanced leagues
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well that, I can agree with. For me it isn’t about the purity of the game or anything. It’s the fact that most DH-specialists are either slobs or cripples and I’d rather not see guys like that get regular playing time no matter how well they can hit. We need to raise the bar on the quality of athlete in baseball, not lower it.
I wouldn’t want to see the NBA create a designated 3-point shooter even if such a thing were possible to integrate into the game. It would just suck.
by taco pal on Jun 17, 2009 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Less Babe Ruths, more Doug Glanvilles.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not exactly. Ruth’s fatness is greatly exaggerated by modern day commentators. In his prime, he was actually a pretty good athlete by the standards of his era, his looks notwithstanding. It’s true that after he entered his late 30s, he became a total slob who could barely get around the bases after hitting a homer, and yes I could do without seeing any of that.
As for Glanville, getting rid of the designated hitter isn’t the same thing as getting rid of the hitter.
by taco pal on Jun 17, 2009 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What problem is the DH exacerbating? Why do we want pitchers to hit? Because they always have? In two of the other 3 professional sports, there are designated players who only play defense. Why is there a problem with that? Just because baseball has 9 spots for players to hit doesn’t mean that one of them has to be a player who has no right to hit. I find the Phillies offense more fun to watch when they play in AL stadiums.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I say Vegas and Mexico City.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What, scared of the pig flu?
I want the Rangers/Astros to have to take a bus to Mexico City.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be pretty sweet to see on a major league scoreboard “game ppd due to banditos”.
More seriously, I think Monterrey would be a more plausible option. Much closer and I think it’s richer too. Lots of drugs though.
by taco pal on Jun 17, 2009 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
not a factor
attendance shouldn’t be a factor in determining what teams should get the boot… if any…
i mean, when the phils were in LA for their split set w/the dodgers, chavez ravine was EMPTY for the most part…. we are talking about a team, with the best record in all of baseball, going head to head w/the defending champs, and nobody in LOS ANGELES could come out for that showing?! even when the marlins were the leagues best team, nobody went to any of their games either… in fact, philly, bosox, mets/yanks, and a few other big market teams are really the only ones in the league that are consistently packed houses… most other teams have half-full or less stadiums even for the big market games, just sayin….
by PHIGHTINPHILS on Jun 17, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was on the day of the Lakers game.
by taco pal on Jun 17, 2009 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
seating arrangement...
staples center holds what, 25-30 thousand people? i think LA has a few more residents than that lol
by PHIGHTINPHILS on Jun 17, 2009 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But that doesn’t mean the dodgers have a bigger fan base – they might – but i can tell you radio wise lakers tend to always be favored, year round, over the dodgers.
30 thousand people in the staples center? What nba stadium holds 30 thousand, geen 25 thousand is high as well.
Many many laker fans watched the game outside the staples center, or at bars, the middle of the regular season for basebal doesn’t exactly pull the fans like the NBA finals.
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the Phillies played a home game while the Eagles were in the superbowl, would you go, despite the fact it would be pretty cold?
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The DH is a terrible rule. It takes so much strategy out of the game, and because of it, I can’t stand watching AL baseball — regardless of if the players have “superior talent.”
I agree completely that the leagues are unfairly balanced right now and something should be changed, but if that change brings the DH to the NL, it’s not worth it. Pitchers have been hitting since the game started and there’s no reason they should stop now. It’s part of the game.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 17, 2009 10:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Part of the game? But it hasn’t been part of the game for the last 30 years in the AL. And just because something has been that way doesn’t mean it should continue.
Please explain to me the strategy that is being removed. Whether to bunt? And double switching so the pitcher comes us as little as possible? So much effort is currently made to avoid pitchers ABs and you call that strategy? I call it boring and a waste of time.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And just because a change is made doesn’t mean it wasn’t a mistake (be it adding the DH or expansion) that should be exacerbated by more.
I think the DH was a mistake – you don’t – I’m not sure why I have to explain to you why I think it was a mistake when your support of it seems to be ‘i like runs’ …
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did I mention one thing about runs? I like watching the best perform. Pitchers hitting is not the best. I may be able to hit better than some pitchers. They are only hitting because they are the best at pitching. There is no need for it. I haven’t seen an argument that defends pitchers hitting other than that’s how it always has been done or some sort of lazy analysis like that.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why not expand to two DH's
and give the catcher’s a break, too, and have another defense-only specialist? Frankly, I agree with the other guys, I couldn’t care less about the DH. What’s wrong with everyone playing offense and defense?
by Screen Name 20 on Jun 17, 2009 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm also against the DH
jonk, you mentioned above that in two of the other three sports, there are players that only play defense. In the case of football, the sport is too physically taxing for two way players to exist anymore. Additionally, the roster size allows for specialized roles such as the luxury of having a separate kicker and punter.
I am going to assume the other sport that you referenced in regards to players only playing defense is hockey. While hockey has defensemen, the primary job of the defensemen is (obviously) to play defense – goal prevention – while the secondary job is to play the point and help the offense. This is akin to the pitcher who primary job is run prevention but secondary, contributes to the offense even though they’re not particularly good at it.
If you meant the goalie, then I think the goalie is comparable to the pitcher. A hockey team could have a more potent offense if they went with 6 skaters on the ice but their goal prevention would suffer. This is the sacrifice a team makes by putting a pitcher on the mound. A “DH” in hockey would be like an extra skater whenever a team had possession and getting to keep to goalie in the net. Really, I feel football is the exception and that the sport couldn’t be played if players had to play both offense and defense.
by Sokojoe on Jun 17, 2009 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I absolutely hate the DH. If you want to “even” things up, take it out of the AL rather than put it into the NL. It makes the manager’s job that much easier to not have to think about switches during games. It’s an awful position. 9 fielders, 9 batters. That’s baseball.
by SJPhillyVT on Jun 17, 2009 11:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Don’t you see how lame of an arugment saying “That’s baseball” is? I mean, you may have a great argument somewhere about the DH, but this isn’t it. At least Taco Pal wants to claim that DHs are fat and unathletic.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And what’s your argument in favor of the DH, not just in the NL but period.
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That wasn’t even my main point, it was a tag on to my post that just further helps where I’m going with it.
by SJPhillyVT on Jun 17, 2009 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont like the DH
but I am not sure if you can say it is an advantage of the AL over the NL in the World Series. In interleague games, yeah definjately, so long as they are played at the American League park.
But if you play an equal amount of games at NL and AL, I think the pitchers having more or less no experience hitting (or bunting or what have you) balances out with the AL team having a more experienced DH.
Most teams in the World Series are going to have a good bench anyway, so for NL teams that make it that far it is not a big deal. Probably the NL teams that suffer the most from it are the bottom teams as they can barely get 8 good hitters in the line up.
by Whack8888 on Jun 17, 2009 11:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The difference between the 1st guy off the bench and a paid for DH is much more significant than the difference between pitchers of whom may or may not have spent time in the other league or hitting in the minors. It’s a matter of fact that the NL cannot match the AL in terms of quality from the DH spot and the little bit of experience their pitchers MAY have doesn’t come close to evening it out.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think a point
I was trying to make but didnt quite make clearly is that the difference between a paid DH and the first guy off the bench on the NL team that makes it to the World Series will probably be relatively small. One foolish thing about it too is that the AL NL home field advantage is decided by the All Star game which is dumb, and it should be either best record or back and forth. If you have 4 World Series games in the NL instead of AL it can make the lack of DH a pretty big problem for the AL team.
When AL teams bat in an NL park it is also not just that the pitcher is less experienced, but that it can interupt their offense in sometimes major ways. Ie, say you are an AL team and you pay a realtively high price for a guy who cant field at all but can still hit really well, and then you play in an NL park. Do you put that guy in the field, or do you just let your normal fielders field, some of whom may be substantially worse hitters. If you are an AL team that relies on a DH for your 3-5th batter, removing him for a pitching spot, or placing him in the field at the expense of defense can be about as disruptive if not more than the NL, especially the best NL team, taking their best hitting bench guy and putting him in the DH spot.
This is pertty selective because of my limited knowledge, but Juan Pierre will be the first bench guy Id imagine from the Dodgers, and Matt Stairs would be the first bench guy from and both of those guys would be pretty decent DHs. I would be interested to see who the Brewers, Cardinals, Mets, Cubs and maybe a few other teams would have as probable DHs, especially as compared to some of the lesser teams in the AL’s DHs.
by Whack8888 on Jun 17, 2009 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My 2 cents
Baseball is a mess. But the mess is making money. The owners are complacent. There are many problems not mentioned (like the crazy-a$$ed MLB draft) that also contribute to the bigger problem. Until MLB gets a real Commissioner with “a set” nothing will change and status quo will rule.
"Red, it took me sixteen years to get here. You play me, and I'll give ya the best I got."
by Touchdown on Jun 17, 2009 12:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
they had one with a set and they fired him…
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hate the DH. Do you really want every single baseball game to last close to 4 hours?
by doubleh on Jun 17, 2009 1:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The average length of the american league game is close to 4 hours?
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know that Red Sox/Yankees games last forever. I’m not saying all games would last that long, but you won’t get many crisp, quick games by adding the DH. Can you imagine how long Phillies/Mets games would go with a DH?
by doubleh on Jun 17, 2009 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So – what is the average length of an AL game vs an NL game these days?
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
2007
In ’07 AL games only took on average 6 minutes longer than NL games.
That doesn’t mean I support your position! I hate the DH
by BigPhillyStyle on Jun 17, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and I’m with you on contracting, not adding teams. Marlins are the first to go. 2 WS titles in 12 years and no one goes to the games, the ownership pockets most of the revenue sharing instead of putting it back into the team and wants the city/taxpayers to pay for 75% of a new stadium. Gone. As for the other team to contact, I don’t know.
by doubleh on Jun 17, 2009 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You want to hold the marlins responsible for the city paying for their stadium? Why? That’s standard greenmail business these days – besides it’s not like they are giving them a ‘billion dollar launching pad’?
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It might be the standard, but it doesn’t mean we have to like it.
by doubleh on Jun 17, 2009 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've got an idea
Why don’t we expand the rosters and have 9dhs and nine guys who take the field when the other side’s up. That way we’d get to see the best possible baseball.
Then maybe we could eliminate the bases,make the field a 100 yard long rectangle, change the horsehide for a pigskin, eliminate the bats and give the players helmets and a lot of cool looking body armor and add goal posts.
by MJW on Jun 17, 2009 1:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
No better way to make an argument than setting up an implausible argument based on a strawman and being sarcastic while doing so. Instead of trying to actually get a point across, you made yourself look like a jo. For all I know, that was your intent.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BTW
Name calling is a very effective and mature way to argue. I was simply testing the logical limits of your premise, I didn’t realize you were so sensitive that a little bit of good natured sarcasm would upset you so. I f you didn’t like to see pitchers bat, I assumed you wouldn’t want to see a weak hitting shortstop bat either and so on and so on.
My point is that there are some changes that are organic or evolutionary and occur without changing the fundamental nature of the game, and that there are other changes that redefine the game and make it something different. Hey if you prefer something different, that’s just a matter of taste. For me, however, the maneuvering and strategy that surround the given that your position players, including your pitcher, also have to bat (or be pinch hit for) makes the game more interesting. Watching one dimensional players bat 4 or five times a game on the other hand doesn’t enhance my pleasure. To each his own.
by MJW on Jun 17, 2009 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s the equivalent as useless sarcasm I’d think.
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do – but it’s not a ‘effective or mature way to argue’
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
You’re probably right that sarcasm isn’t the most mature way to argue, but at least I used it to try to make a substantive point. Calling somebody a jerk off or even saying they made themselves look like a jerk off has no relation to the substantive argument.
by MJW on Jun 17, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I had made my argument. You added nothing and I pointed out that you added nothing. Was I supposed to argue with myself?
Me: The second law of thermodynamics states…yadda yadda yadda.
You: Thermonuclear bombs can be hot. So can the sun. Why don’t we all live on the sun. Oh wait, we can’t, because we’d melt!
Me: Excellent point, but heat transfer is…yadda yadda yadda.
Is that how you wanted me to respond to your useless post?
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, you see it as a substantive point, I see it as silly and pointless = he wasn’t talking about radically changing the game – he was talking about what he felt was ‘leveling’ the playing field (and expanding the number of teams) – the two aren’t all that similar at all…
You were trying to be a smart ass – and you got called on it – and then got defensive about it and tried to justify your smart assery
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can level the playing field
by making AL pitchers hit too, ya know. I see nothing wrong with using sarcasm to make this point.
by Screen Name 20 on Jun 18, 2009 8:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Name calling? Are you serious? Cause I said you made yourself look like a jerk-off? I didn’t call you one. Let’s call a spade a spade here. You were acting a little jerk-offish. Come on now, you know you were…admit it. We all know the truth, you just gotta come out and say, “Oh, all right, you got me. I was being jerky, just a tad.” Ok, now that we are beyond that…
First, your entire premise is undermined by the fact that the DH has been in use for 30+ years. Seriously dude. Shortstops are still hitting for themselves, nobody is wear pads, dogs and cats aren’t living together, this is not mass hysteria. In fact, it has worked out fairly well for the AL and they now have an advantage over us.
I should have made myself more clear in the original post. The DH is NOT going away. It is here to stay in the AL. Because of it, the AL holds a slight to significant advantage over the NL. I want that advantage taken away and the only way to do so is to add the DH to the NL. Can that be argued other than to say, “I don’t mind being at a disadvantage, keep the DH.”?
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's your metric
What’s your basis for saying the AL has an advantage over the NL, and do you have any statistical basis to demonstrate that the advantage is as a result of the DH rather than overall better talent? What’s the big deal? The difference between the leagues is only relevant in a handful of interleague games a year and the world series. I think it would be pretty hard to attribute any AL world series victories to the fact that the AL regularly plays with a DH while the NL doesn’t, but if you have some proof I’m willing to listen. Basically, I don’t see that there’s anything that needs to be fixed.
I’m afraid the subtle difference between being told I made my self look like a jerk off and actually being called one must have eluded me. You can call me anything you want. It just doesn’t further the debate.
by MJW on Jun 17, 2009 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What kind of metric do you want? If I accumulate data showing that the AL’s DH has a significant;y higher OPS than the NL’s DH (or 9th hitter) would that suffice for you? Do you think that having a full time second 1st baseman in a lineup is statistically insignificant when compared to having the first guy off of your bench? That’s like my team is the Phillies +1 more Ryan Howard and your team is the Phillies +Gregg Dobbs. Seriously dude, do you not get the impact? Interleague games is a means to show us the unfairness of the issue, but the real problem is the World Series.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but the real problem is the World Series.
Phillies
Red Sox
Cardinals
White Sox
Red Sox
Marlins
Angels
Diamondbacks
Yankees
Yankees
Yankees
Marlins
Yankees
Braves
Blue Jays
Blue Jays
Twins
Reds
Athletics
Dodgers
Twins
Mets
Royals
Tigers
Orioles
Cardinals
Dodgers
Phillies
The last 28 world series – the AL ‘leads’ 16-12
that’s real dominance I guess
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does that mean that they didn’t have an advantage? It’s not about winning, but rather playing on a level playing field. If one team is clearly dominant over the other, then yeah, it won’t matter. But my point is that the starting point isn’t the same. Your argument is that Ryan Howard doesn’t have an advantage by playing in CBP because he has hit more homers on the road. My retort is that he DOES have that advanatge and he’d hit even less homers at home if he were playing in a homer-neutral park.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can you back any of these arguments up with any supporting information aside from your opinion and need for attention?
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
After that whole thing on sarcasm, you had to throw in that need for attention. You just had to, didn’t you. What supporting information do you need? There is a homerun rate at CBP that affects Howard raw homerun total. Normalized to a 1.00 park, he’d have less homeruns. That’s a fact and is indisputable.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No – dear stu – what I’d like is proof that the DH gives teh AL a substantial advantage WHEN IT MATTERS – interleague was stupid from the get go and I don’t like it.
So – in the world series – show me that the DH gives the AL a substantial advantage…
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because the AL team is equipped to play with a DH and the NL team is not. I don’t know what else I can possibly say to explain this to you. No player on the bench in on any NL team is a better hitter than a player an AL team can put as their DH. If that player existed (and was available to all teams) then he’d be playing full time DHing and making more money.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the AL pitchers aren’t prepared to hit and the NL pitchers are in the NL parks.
Again – you have ACTUAL RESULTS from the world series while the DH has existed – show me that the DH gives the AL team a distinct advantage.
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I'd like first
is to get a clear understanding of what the supposed problem is. In the World series the American league gets to use the DH in some games and so does the National league. Do you have any evidence that the difference in performance between the American league DHs and the national League DHs in those games affects the outcomes in a major way? And conversely do you have any evidence to show that the fact that the American League doesn’t get to use the DH in some games isn’t a disadvantage to that league. All you’ve done is call for a solution for a problem that you haven’t even established exists.
If you’d rather watch a dh hit than a pitcher, fine, that’s your perogative. There’s nothing to discuss. But if you’re really arguing that the lack of a dh has actually made a difference in any world series, I’d like to see some actual evidence not a bunch of speculation. Not every DH is as good a hitter as a first string player. A lot of DH’s are guys like Matt Stairs. Can you show me a convincing case that any American League world series victory was a result of the differential between the performance of the AL and NL DHs during that series.
D
by MJW on Jun 17, 2009 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really fair to compare a DH to the pitcher one-to-one, calling them both the 9th hitter. Compare the 9th hitter to the 9th hitter, not the DH. Still gonna get a better hitter on the AL club, but it’s not as ridiculous.
by SJPhillyVT on Jun 17, 2009 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would think that the average NL pitching staff has a real crappy OPS
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
LOLZ! Let’s make baseball into football. lolol.
by FuquaManuel on Jun 17, 2009 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
DH is cheating
The Designated Hitter rule is cheating, plain and simple. It is the legal and lawful version of prescribing steroids for your lineup. It’s asking the math wiz in your class to take your test for you.
Baseball is about nine players working together at the plate and on the field. It’s about strategies and plays and most of all, it’s about teamwork and working with the strengths and weaknesses of each player. Bunts, walks, sacrifices – these are the tragedies and tribulations of baseball, and they are what makes it human. I would rather watch a team earn their win rather than blast away with reckless abandon.
by afn on Jun 17, 2009 3:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
But more runs makes things better!
by SJPhillyVT on Jun 17, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just threw up in my mouth a little
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you change the rules, you change the game. You can argue that the change is for the better, but this is an aesthetic choice, and thus fundamentally subjective. For me, one of the fun things about baseball is the history, the sense of tradition that accompanies the game. I embrace this and as a result prefer the traditional definition of the game, which is two teams of nine each playing against each other. Each player is responsible both for run creation and run prevention. The DH doesn’t fit this definition.
In the traditional game, all nine players obviously are not and never have been equally skilled at both run creation and prevention; thus, one of the aspects of the game is the strategies surrounding roster creation, and player utilization. Everyone has seen managers pinch-hit for a weak-hitting shortstop with runners on base late in a tight game, or the reverse, putting in a all-glove, no-stick outfielder to help preserve a narrow lead. These players are, like all players, better at one aspect of the game than another. The difference with pitchers is just one of degree. Pitchers on average are vastly better at run prevention than run creation.
I like the extra thought that pitchers batting requires.
by phatj on Jun 17, 2009 3:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How do you handle the difference in the leagues then. Are you going to demand the removal of the DH or let the difference continue? The DH isn’t going anywhere and the only way to fix this issue is adding it to the NL.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eliminate inter-league and restore the grandeur and mystery of the world series.
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The doesn’t eliminate the distinct advantage the AL has with the DH.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose if NL teams didn’t get the DH in american league parks i’d care more…
Then again, you got AL teams short one position player usually cause they are carrying a guy who usually can do nothing else than hit so that they are at a disadvantage in NL parks.
If you eliminate inter-league play the only time it matters is the world series – and i don’t see a string of AL dominance in the world series indicating that the DH makes that much of a marked advantage
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d rather Big Papi (not this year’s version) as the first dude off the bench than Gregg Dobbs or Matt Stairs (heroics included).
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This years version i’d still rather have than dobbs or stairs – and he’s doing much better recently
Of course – how much does ortiz mke versus dobbs or stairs.
You’re paying a guy a LOT of money to (for all intents an purpose) pinch hit 4-5 times a game
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s my point entirely. It is factored into the AL team’s budget. NL teams are ill-equipped to play with a DH since they haven’t and can’t put a 10mil dollar player on their bench. It’s changing the rules on the NL team at the very end. It doesn’t effect the AL team since they already have that player.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
as related to my post above
this works both ways — when the AL team is playing in an NL park a large portion of their overall budget is essentially wasted on the guy they are paying as DH. Thus, you can think of it like the NL teams cant afford to pay a 10 mil dollar bench player, and AL teams, when playing in an NL park, are basically forced to pay a guy 10 mil dollars to come off the bench.
by Whack8888 on Jun 17, 2009 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The DH isn’t going anywhere, including into the NL, so it’s just as moot to suggest that as it is to suggest eliminating it.
Anyway, I’m not convinced that the DH gives AL teams a significant advantage when AL and NL teams meet.
by phatj on Jun 17, 2009 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree that the DH may not come to the NL. I think it has a distinct possibility once the owners see the uneven playing field. It won’t get eliminated because of the player’s association, but the owners could always decide on adding it.
Does it matter the significance of the advantage as long as it’s there. Do you deny that they have an advantage regardless of size?
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What will impact the DH coming to the national league more than anything will probably be the NEXT CBA negotiations. THe league will want to try and ‘fix’ the draft, and the union will fight them tooth an nail purely on principle and demand ‘something’ from the owners to concede. The DH in the National League creates 16 more jobs for guys that wouldn’t usually ahve them…owners get some cost certainty from draft picks and the players get more green. everyone wins.
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am not so sure it creates jobs, but instead creates a monetary imbalance that increases salaries more. Instead of a 1-2 mil dol guy on the bench, you now have an 8 mil DH. If you have to cut back slightly in other areas to compensate, it more than balances out by increasing salaries across the board. That is all the MLBPA wants. They want a steadily increasing average salary.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it does create jobs – guys on the bench sort of have to not completely suck at fielding because they might be called on to do such – a DH job is to hit and nothing else – so the crappiest fielders in the world – over the hill guys who can’t move anymore to play first base but can swing the bat – these guys keep jobs as DH’s.
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but the crappy no hit fielders lose their jobs. Still 25 guys per team. That spot on the team just makes a shitload more money now.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have you seen David Ortiz play first base? It’s embarassing
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I neither admit nor deny that the DH gives AL teams an advantage. As I said before, I’m unconvinced.
The average AL DH has put up an OPS of roughly .775-.800 over the last three years. The NL DHs have done worse than that (albeit in a much smaller sample), but I’m not sure it’s because they have a structural disadvantage so much as because they don’t use their resources as well as they could. Remember the Phils playing Tomas Perez at 1B and DHing Thome a few years ago, when they had Ryan Howard destroying worlds in AAA? My sense is that NL teams too often treat interleague games as an opportunity to give their best hitters a day off in the field, rather than a chance to get another good hitter into the lineup.
by phatj on Jun 17, 2009 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
While this is all true, it’s a strawman argument that ignores the premise. All teams can bring up hard hitting studs to play (if they have them). Many don’t and most aren’t on the same level as most DHs. The NL team does that because it is ill-equipped to play the American League game.
For Who? My teammates.
For What? To Win.
How Much? Where do I sign?
by jonk on Jun 17, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What strawman?
You have yet to demonstrate that the NL has an ACTUAL (read: not theoretical) disadvantage due to the DH.
by phatj on Jun 17, 2009 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait, repeating it over and over isn’t demonstration?
Damn
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes – but notice that i wasn’t trying to make an argument or point with my sarcasm :)
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
AH!
So sarcasm for sarcasm’s sake is good. I gotcha. Just trying to learn the rules around here.
by MJW on Jun 17, 2009 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you’re tyring to learn the rules – a good rule of thumb is don’t do what i do :)
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ll bear that in mind when posting in the future. Thanks for the tip.
by MJW on Jun 17, 2009 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
most likely is – i mean seriusl – what’s the average OPS for any national league pitching staff?
"Someone created the box score," Morey says, "and he should be shot."
Blocked shots — they look great, but unless you secure the ball afterward, you haven’t helped your team all that much.
by jemagee on Jun 17, 2009 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
thoughts
1. I agree with jonk, add the DH to the NL. I don’t particularly like the DH, but the toothpaste is out of the tube, so to speak, so might as well adapt. And I don’t see it as as much of a fundamental “game raper” as many here seem to.
2. Fine with the league composition as is. The NL Central has sent enough teams to the Wild Card for me to be convinced that it’s basically a “win your ballgames” proposition, even if it is a little bit stacked against them. I could also see adding two teams to the AL, and I am strongly against contraction. The game is financially healthy.
And, I would do away with Interleague Play, I like the mystique and “specialness” of the World Series when it’s the only time the leagues face-off. But I guess the White Sox and Angels have tickets to sell…
http://www.thegoodphight.com
by WholeCamels on Jun 17, 2009 4:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If we had a DH in the NL, we’d never get the magic of Brett Myers vs CC Sabathia. Think about that.
by SJPhillyVT on Jun 17, 2009 5:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m still awaiting how the AL has such a distinct advantage. Is this because some people think they have the ‘superior talent’? Is this like how in the NBA the Western Conference was unquestioned power for all those years? Because they operated under the same rules, so it was just some cyclical talent distribution thing.
In the World Series, in an AL park, yes the AL has the high paid superior hitter as opposed to a likely defensively capable bench player. However in the NL park, the NL pitchers should be better suited to hit and bunt, and they should have a deeper bench and better strategy in theory, therefore balancing things out, adding to a ‘home field advantage’. I’m not seeing any advantage, let alone a distinct one.
by FredEx on Jun 17, 2009 8:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
World Series Wins by League
1938 -1972
AL – 20
NL – 15
1973 -2008 (After introduction of DH)
AL – 20
NL – 15
Take that for what it’s worth…List
by Screen Name 20 on Jun 18, 2009 8:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
