National League rules stink!!!!!

[McNulty]

They're probably sitting there rolling their eyes, saying to themselves "I can't believe I have to play with these stupid rules" and counting the games until they can get back to civilization.

I know that's what I'd be doing if I were sitting in that "damn foxhole".

Please, the NL game isn't "vastly different". It's baseball with a gimp hitting 9th and more pitching changes. Gimme a break, it's a joke.

It seems like every thread I skim over, there you are making disguntled comments. You need a hug bro?

[George]

The only negative to the AL DH rule is that a pitcher, who throws intentionally at a batter, does not have to face (literally) the consequences of his imprudent action at his next plate appearance.

In the AL, we never got to find out how tough Roger Clemens really is. It's easy to be a tough guy when nobody is firing back at you.

[olehippi]

DH or no DH....that is the question. Personally, I've always liked baseball played the way it's supposed to be played.....with pitchers who are also real athletes...real players.....who can hit and run, as well as throw a baseball.

Maybe everyone would be happy if the game evolved so that you have 8 defensive specialists who don't bat, 9 hitting specialists who don't play in the field, and 9 pitchers who only throw one inning in each game.

Wow! That's sounds like it would be a fun game to watch.....

[Moose Milligan]

It seems like every thread I skim over, there you are making disguntled comments. You need a hug bro?

Only if you can somehow make it from whoever is in Weams' avatar on any given day

Nah, I'm just saying it's a bit ridiculous...really, the strategy isn't that hard to follow and I don't understand how any NL fans can justifiably sit there and act like it's a chess match. It's not chess, it's checkers.

I was listening to the local sports talk radio station on the way home tonight (980 AM for those of you in NoVA/DC) and there was a national radio show on...I'm pretty sure Rob Dibble was co-hosting. They were saying that the two leagues need to get on the same page, either use the DH in both leagues or not...but it's a bit dumb that it's the only sport in the world with two sets of rules for different leagues.

And it's not like baseball hasn't made significant changes before...going from a dead ball to a live ball, integrating the game, raising and lowering the pitching mound, bringing the DH to the AL in the early 70's, free agency, expansion teams on multiple occasions, three division formats and wildcards. I'm probably forgetting a few other things too, like astroturf and the powers that be looking the other way on HGH and steroids, but you get my point.

When you take all those things into account it's a bit stupid that one league is so stuck in its ways that it can't make a change.

[Moose Milligan]

The only negative to the AL DH rule is that a pitcher, who throws intentionally at a batter, does not have to face (literally) the consequences of his imprudent action at his next plate appearance.

In the AL, we never got to find out how tough Roger Clemens really is. It's easy to be a tough guy when nobody is firing back at you.

I do agree with this. This is the only negative.

Though Clemens did play a few years in Houston. No one to my knowledge ever dished it back at him.

[ledzepp8]

DH or no DH....that is the question. Personally, I've always liked baseball played the way it's supposed to be played.....with pitchers who are also real athletes...real players.....who can hit and run, as well as throw a baseball.

Maybe everyone would be happy if the game evolved so that you have 8 defensive specialists who don't bat, 9 hitting specialists who don't play in the field, and 9 pitchers who only throw one inning in each game.

Wow! That's sounds like it would be a fun game to watch.....

Welcome to 5 pages ago...:wedge:

[olehippi]

Welcome to 5 pages ago...:wedge:

Sorry....but in addition to liking the NL rules, I also believe in recycling.....

[McNulty]

Nah, I'm just saying it's a bit ridiculous...really, the strategy isn't that hard to follow and I don't understand how any NL fans can justifiably sit there and act like it's a chess match. It's not chess, it's checkers.

I'm not saying that I agree with you about the chess/checkers analogy, but I still think that checkers can be plenty interesting in its own right.

You right about it not being rocket science, but what the pitchers spot allows a manager to do is have more influence on the outcome of games. In the AL, the managers in-game responsibility is managing the bullpen, sending up pinch hitters for the Freddie Bynum's of the world, and defensive positioning/subs.

In the NL, you get a whole lot more of manager involvement, which leads to more second guessing and more chances for a manager to positively or negatively affect the outcome of the game. Sometimes they leave a pitcher in longer because he's going to hit in the next inning...little stuff like that.

That's what I enjoy anyways.

[Hallas]

I'm not saying that I agree with you about the chess/checkers analogy, but I still think that checkers can be plenty interesting in its own right.

You right about it not being rocket science, but what the pitchers spot allows a manager to do is have more influence on the outcome of games. In the AL, the managers in-game responsibility is managing the bullpen, sending up pinch hitters for the Freddie Bynum's of the world, and defensive positioning/subs.

In the NL, you get a whole lot more of manager involvement, which leads to more second guessing and more chances for a manager to positively or negatively affect the outcome of the game. Sometimes they leave a pitcher in longer because he's going to hit in the next inning...little stuff like that.

That's what I enjoy anyways.

I've said this before, but I don't think that more manager involvement equates to more opportunity to second-guess the manager. 99.9% of moves involving PH for a pitcher are so blatantly obvious that it's not really something you can call strategy.

[Lt Melmo]

DH or no DH....that is the question. Personally, I've always liked baseball played the way it's supposed to be played.....with pitchers who are also real athletes...real players.....who can hit and run, as well as throw a baseball.

Maybe everyone would be happy if the game evolved so that you have 8 defensive specialists who don't bat, 9 hitting specialists who don't play in the field, and 9 pitchers who only throw one inning in each game.

Wow! That's sounds like it would be a fun game to watch.....

I said it before... by demanding your pitcher do something they inherently DON'T do, that's the same as saying all batters have to pitch. Why should pitchers be made to do more than batters?

And the whole "pitcher forced to hit = better athlete" is wacky. The whole point is that these NL pitchers DON'T hit. To me, there really isn't any difference between an NL pitcher who has a 15 OPS+ and an AL pitcher who doesn't have to show off that terribleness. I don't respect one more than the other. Just cause I can puke on a canvas doesn't mean I can make pretty paintings.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Is there a compromise to be reached here? Something like only having eight men in a lineup?

That solves both problems. It eliminates the need for a pitcher to hit, and also eliminates the double-standard (which everyone needs to admit DOES exist) in having someone hitting for another player.

Seems to make sense to me.

[RShack]

Is there a compromise to be reached here? Something like only having eight men in a lineup?

That solves both problems. It eliminates the need for a pitcher to hit, and also eliminates the double-standard (which everyone needs to admit DOES exist) in having someone hitting for another player.

Seems to make sense to me.

Sounds fine to me.

Of course, opposition will arise on the following points:

• Screws up whatever records roids didn't (which I'm guessing is why they didn't do this instead of the DH to begin with).
• Would drive the stats guys nuts, history-wise.
• In interleague play, the AL gets screwed without the NL getting comparably screwed.
• Messes with the whole 3-factor that permeates everything (although we do have a 4-factor too: balls-per-walk, bases-per-run, and W's to get a ring).

It gets rid of P's hitting crappily and hitters who can't play anywhere.

In addition, it makes the bench bigger for everybody.

Plus, when we play BOS, Ortiz would play 1B, so I wouldn't have to watch Goatee-Baldy-Guy wiggling his fat butt before every pitch.

(Drysdale and Gibson woulda stuck it in his ear for doing that.)

[BaltimoreTerp]

Sounds fine to me.

Of course, opposition will arise on the following points:

• Screws up whatever records roids didn't (which I'm guessing is why they didn't do this instead of the DH to begin with).

So do all the other rule changes, whether it is raising/lowering/moving the mound, changing the balls and bats, regulating ballpark dimensions, etc.

• Would drive the stats guys nuts, history-wise.

Not following.

• In interleague play, the AL gets screwed without the NL getting comparably screwed.

REALLY not following, since it would be a complete rule change.

• Messes with the whole 3-factor that permeates everything (although we do have a 4-factor too: balls-per-walk, bases-per-run, and W's to get a ring).

Not a worry :laughlol:

It gets rid of P's hitting crappily and hitters who can't play anywhere.

In addition, it makes the bench bigger for everybody.

Plus, when we play BOS, Ortiz would play 1B, so I wouldn't have to watch Goatee-Baldy-Guy wiggling his fat butt before every pitch.

(Drysdale and Gibson woulda stuck it in his ear for doing that.)

Well, he'd play SOMEWHERE, whether it was third base, or the outfield, or another ballpark. So, sorry :laughlol:

But I think it solves the problems here very cleanly by eliminating the big problems for both sides.

[RShack]

So do all the other rule changes, whether it is raising/lowering/moving the mound, changing the balls and bats, regulating ballpark dimensions, etc.

Not following.

The first 2 were basically the same: Everybody gets way more AB's in a year. It's like 2.5 times as much as the diff from 154 games to 162.

So all the single-season hitter counting-stats would be toast.

Plus it would screw with career landmarks too, e.g., 3000 hits wouldn't mean what it used to mean, yada yada yada.

I don't mind, but my guess is that this is why they invented the DH to begin with, rather than do your idea: to not screw with all the stuff that's involved when you change the 9-man lineup to something else.

REALLY not following, since it would be a complete rule change.

That's because I was thinking something that I never said ;-)

I was pondering interleague play as a place to road-test it, since it would PO everybody equally. But then I realized it would PO the AL fans more than the NL fans about the fairness of it.

But I think it solves the problems here very cleanly by eliminating the big problems for both sides.

I agree it addresses all the practical problems.

But not the religious problems.

[BaltimoreTerp]

The first 2 were basically the same: Everybody gets way more AB's in a year. It's like 2.5 times as much as the diff from 154 games to 162.

So all the single-season hitter counting-stats would be toast.

Plus it would screw with career landmarks too, e.g., 3000 hits wouldn't mean what it used to mean, yada yada yada.

I don't mind, but my guess is that this is why they invented the DH to begin with, rather than do your idea: to not screw with all the stuff that's involved when you change the 9-man lineup to something else.

Wow...can't believe I missed that point. That is very true.