Who's your favorite MLB team?

[SteelMember]

Originally Posted by Preacher

See, I am just the opposite. For me, the DH adds to the game, it takes out as close to a sure out as possible in the Major leagues.

The pitcher doesn't have the opportunity to walk a guy to get to the pitcher, and possibly chase him out of the game for a hitter (and thus, end his night, especially if he is pitching good). The guy on the mound has to face a hitter.

I like that aspect a lot more.

I get all that, really, but real "purist" baseball says all 9 men bat. You can look at history and see pitchers weren't always easy outs. Actually, the pitchers back then were probably the best athletes on the team.

I just think there is much more decision making for a manager in a game in the NL. Offensively and defensively. Hit and run, Straight steal, bunt, Intentional walk.

I will say that pitchers today are way to specialized, and imo have taken away from the game a little. There are current players (middle relievers) that only pitch one, or part of an inning maybe once or twice a week. Sometimes not on back to back nights. WTH is with that. They get paid like everyday players too.

Even little league says that a player has to play the field and bat.

DH's have extended their careers and padded their stats long after they should have retired. I don't think baseball, or it's records should be watered down like that.

Just my 2 cents.

[SteelMember]

Originally Posted by SteelersinCA

Chics dig the long ball though, just saying.

Sorry, but stats the don't reflect that great of difference in HR's in the AL directly related to the DH. Steroids, yes, but not the DH.
Actually since 1998, the NL has more.
Everyone likes the longball.

Starting in 1993, the home run totals hit in the past 15 years for the AL, NL and MLB are:

(AL total, NL total, MLB total)

1993: 2074, 1956, 4030
1994: 1774, 1532, 3306*
1995: 2164, 1917, 4081
1996: 2742, 2220, 4962
1997: 2477, 2163, 4640
1998: 2499, 2565, 5064
1999: 2635, 2893, 5528
2000: 2688, 3005, 5693
2001: 2506, 2952, 5458
2002: 2464, 2595, 5059
2003: 2499, 2708, 5207
2004: 2605, 2846, 5451
2005: 2437, 2580, 5017
2006: 2546, 2840, 5386
2007: 2252, 2705, 4957

That means over the past 15 years, the AL has hit 36362 home runs, or about 2424 home runs a year. The NL has hit 37477 home runs, or about 2499 home runs a year. Overall, there have been 73839 home runs hit in the big leagues over the past 15 seasons, for about 4923 a year.


*1994 was a strike-shortened season

[rbryan]

Originally Posted by tony hipchest

hey, it took 12 games into the season this year until we were no longer above .500.

were making progress!

Back over .500 !!! I'm a glutton for punishment, so I've been watching.......don't tell anyone.

When was the last time the Pirates were on ESPN? I know its was only because the Yankees were rained out, not to mention just about every other game, but they looked pretty good last night.

[pittsburghp8baller]

Originally Posted by tony hipchest

hey, it took 12 games into the season this year until we were no longer above .500.

were making progress!

now there are right back over .500

i think this year this team could push 80 wins this year. i think anywhere in between 75-78 wins and if the back end of our rotation can steal some wins, we could get to 80.

i kno that even at 80 it isnt a winning record but it shows how far we really have come. i think we are still another top of the rotation guy away from truly competing.

the only position we have depth is at first base and catcher (other than Ryan Doumit)

[pittsburghp8baller]

Originally Posted by rbryan

Back over .500 !!! I'm a glutton for punishment, so I've been watching.......don't tell anyone.

When was the last time the Pirates were on ESPN? I know its was only because the Yankees were rained out, not to mention just about every other game, but they looked pretty good last night.

its been a while, i know they did show some spring training pirates game when they played the red sox.

how much you wanna bet the only reason they stopped showing it because the pirates were actually WINNING!

maybe now there start showing a game here and there

[SteelersinCA]

Originally Posted by SteelMember

Sorry, but stats the don't reflect that great of difference in HR's in the AL directly related to the DH. Steroids, yes, but not the DH.
Actually since 1998, the NL has more.
Everyone likes the longball.

Starting in 1993, the home run totals hit in the past 15 years for the AL, NL and MLB are:

(AL total, NL total, MLB total)

1993: 2074, 1956, 4030
1994: 1774, 1532, 3306*
1995: 2164, 1917, 4081
1996: 2742, 2220, 4962
1997: 2477, 2163, 4640
1998: 2499, 2565, 5064
1999: 2635, 2893, 5528
2000: 2688, 3005, 5693
2001: 2506, 2952, 5458
2002: 2464, 2595, 5059
2003: 2499, 2708, 5207
2004: 2605, 2846, 5451
2005: 2437, 2580, 5017
2006: 2546, 2840, 5386
2007: 2252, 2705, 4957

That means over the past 15 years, the AL has hit 36362 home runs, or about 2424 home runs a year. The NL has hit 37477 home runs, or about 2499 home runs a year. Overall, there have been 73839 home runs hit in the big leagues over the past 15 seasons, for about 4923 a year.


*1994 was a strike-shortened season

I wouldn't expect 1 player to make a giant difference in stats. Plus it's difficult to say how much of an impact steroids had on HRs, but McGwire, Sosa and Bonds all played in the NL and Clemens pitched in the AL, that would swings some HRs the AL way.