Here’s a new name for us baseball lifers.. S. Preston Chuhon…he’s a young graphic designer living in Southern California with a liking for sports in general and spending summer evenings in baseball Parks in particular…professionally and artistically it’s minimalism that’s a particular interest for him – where what is displayed is just enough and no more to capture the essence of the subject…
so what? well, Deadspin has just told us he’s produced the first eight posters of MLB Parks…here are four of them…
there are four more out now…no Turner Field yet but he says on his website there’s more to come – he’s obviously going to do them all…i think they’re sensational, hope some others do too…all this kind of stuff is so personal of course but, hey, fire away – whaddya think? Miller Park, for me, should be in the Guggenheim! (usual disclaimers)
I’d like to highlight Hotspur’s @49 from the last thread as the best defense of the pitcher batting for himself that I have read in years.
So I am off to St.Petersburg tomorrow. Anything I should know, has any of you been?
#1 Couldn’t agree more – well put Hotspur.
Granted it’s a new stat, but Andrelton’s defense continues to impress. He now has the single season record for DRS at 37 with about a quarter of the season left. In his 168 game career so far he has an incredible 56 runs saved.
http://www.actasports.com/stats_detail/?StatId=376
Thanks for sharing, blazon. I like them.
On the topic of the DH, I am in the minority here (vocally so) but I want to make my position clear, so when I grouse in game threads, I might not be misunderstood:
I prefer a game without the DH. I think any baseball fan would. My personal belief is that anyone who loves the DH is probably a “sports” fan who watches baseball during baseball season, but isn’t a “baseball person.”
My problems are these: The teams don’t care if their pitchers can hit. Sure, they prefer if they can hit, but they don’t care enough to spend any serious time or money on it. If they wanted pitchers who could hit, they would INSIST that they hit in the minor leagues. They don’t do that, because use of a DH allows teams to get 3 extra at-bats per game for a position player (I say 3, because at-bats 4 and 5 would be a pinch hitter if not for the DH) When an American affiliate plays a National affiliate, the DH is used, regardless of which affiliate is the home team. AND, when two National affiliates play, they have the option of agreeing to use the DH that day. THAT’S RIDICULOUS. If you want them to hit, MAKE THEM HIT. INSIST THAT THEY HIT. DEMAND THAT THEY GET TO HIT!
And when it comes to the MAJOR leagues, they use this “purity of the game” argument for why they shouldn’t have a DH. But they don’t care about the “ability of the players” enough to ensure the “purity of the game” at the minor league level.
It’s because they don’t want to have to pay a DH. That’s it. If 15 more teams adopted DHs, that would mean 15 more GOOD hitters, thus highly paid hitters, at the expense of 15 “25th man” type players, thus poorly paid hitters.
SECOND: The Angels or Red Sox or Yankees have a very real, distinct advantage on the free agent market. The Braves may be able to pay Brian McCann $16m a year for as long as they think he’ll be a viable catcher. The Angels can pay Brian McCann $16m a year for as long as they think he’ll be a viable catcher, PLUS however long they think he’ll be a viable HITTER.
So all the stars go to the AL, where the contracts are longer, and this asshole running the game insists on having his little midseason exhibition game effect the eventual outcome of the World Series, so MY team is getting it in the rear twice. Some AL team will get all our good players, and stick them in the All Star game to beat MY players, and take home field advantage away from MY league in the World Series.
I’m for the purity of the game. But not for the purity of the individual games at the expense of the larger game.
If the teams compete for talent, they need to have the same roster rules. If theres a “wild card” based on over-all record, the teams need to play a balanced schedule. The rules of the sport need to treat all teams the same. MY team is getting screwed by the DH.
So, get rid of the DH altogether, you say! That’s not happening.
So give me the DH and give me a level playing field.
I’m going to withhold my opinion of the posters.
@2 I visited St. Pete for a weekend last October – I recommend the Salvador Dali Museum. If you’ve got time, it’s also a nice place to rent a bike and ride around… the terrain is totally flat and there’s a lot of waterfront to check out.
We ARE talking about St. Petersburg in FL right?
The only thing a person needs to know about St. Petersburg is Taco Bus.
Unless you think the Braves are going to find some money someplace, introduction of the DH will be a disaster for Atlanta, as well as all teams not near the top in salary. Having to locate, and pay for, another elite offensive starter is going to be a huge problem for a lot of clubs, and an instant advantage for the Mets/Phillies/Giants/Cards/Dodgers. Not only will it not save McCann for the Braves, it will drive his price up by increasing the pool of bidders. Further, the hitting/bunting abilities of the Braves have also been an apparent advantage – one that will also immediately disappear, both in the regular season and in any WS they should compete in. The DH will not only NOT level the playing field, it will exacerbate the existing inequities in the system.
Thanks for the posters. I like them.
Really like the posters. Appreciate the effort to share. Mac would approve, I believe.
Bethany, your opinion is probably the one I was most looking forward to reading.
jjschiller is right about the DH and what it does to the “level playing field”. I hate it, but I just think it’s inevitable.
—————
I’ve never been a Yankee hater, but A-Rod and his “representatives” are pushing me in that direction. Good grief, I found myself rooting for the Red Sox last night.
Ever since he had that fling with Madonna, it’s all been downhill for him. Pretty sure there’s a connection.
@8 – I don’t buy that. First of all, 14 other teams besides Atlanta will have to “find some money somewhere.” And sure, alot of those teams are more likely to find it than we are, but if we’re the best team in baseball NOW, there’s a reason, and it’s superior scouting and player development. I find it hard to believe that teams that ALREADY spend more money than us, and play worse baseball than us, will suddenly turn it around by spending more money.
Second, since the DH was instituted, the AL has won 2 more All-Star games and 2 more World Series than the NL has. And that’s certainly within the margin of error of a coin flip, but to contend that somehow NOT having a DH is an advantage for the NL is just false. Further, since the institution of interleague play, the AL has won 2079 games to the NL’s 1883. That’s a pretty solid sample size, I’d say.
The AL, on average, is playing better baseball than the NL. Why?
Rooting for a team that won it’s WS on the back of a couple of highly paid steroid users – one still employed – is sure one way of showing A-Rod we won’t stand for that kind of stuff
#12
In the 2006 World Series, the Tigers’ pitchers could not lay down a bunt. (They couldn’t field either, but that’s another story.) This gave the Cards a significant advantage.
I think a guy like Ernesto Meija would’ve gotten a long look at DH had there been one in the NL. It doesn’t have to be an aging expensive slugger you know. Could be a young, player without a position type or one who’s blocked elsewhere.
Living in NYC, the A-Rod thing is like a never-ending reality show that you cannot escape.
Recently, I was meeting people at a West Village bar before we went to a club. The radio talk in the cab on the way to the bar was A-Rod, the conversation at the bar was A-Rod & then the conversation among the doormen at the club was A-Rod. I’ll be at Yankee Stadium Wednesday night, and I’m guessing there’ll be plenty more. (If I’m lucky, it’ll be actual baseball talk.)
It feels like I’m the only person in the city who’s perfectly willing to wait until this mess goes to arbitration so that we can be done with it. Of course, having watched A-Rod up-close since he arrived here in 2004, something tells me that it’ll never really be done.
@14 – And in the course of the other 38 years, that makes the AL +3 in championships. Why?
#15
Like Terdoslavich?
@15 – Exactly. Or it could be used for Evan Gattis, who could catch 80 games, DH 80 games, and likewise for Brian McCann.
We’d have a disadvantage over AL teams that ALREADY HAVE A DH, if we were able to play Brian McCann 160 times AND play Evan Gattis 160 times, instead of getting 120 and 80 out of them? An additional 120 combined games, about 500 plate appearances, from two guys we’re ALREADY PAYING, would put us at a disadvantage against teams that wouldn’t be making a change at all?
EDIT: Okay, call it 75 and 75, because even a DH needs 10 days off a year. But you still get my drift.
12 – You have ignored my argument completely. The Braves, along with many teams, have minimal payroll flexibility compared to a few big spender teams in the league. That will not change if a 9th offensive starter position is created. It will certainly allow a Los Angeles or St Louis to just purchase an FA slugger.
Second – that’s certainly within the margin of error, that’s right. Secondly, have you looked at AL performance in NL parks? Or at which team had home field advantage in those series? The interleague number is 53-47%, also well within the margin of error, and one that does not look at the fact that the scheduling of games is arbitrary in terms of opponents – and even if it were a perfect number of matchups, the fact that one set of teams wins more is CORRELATION that may or (in all likelihood) may not have anything to do with the DH. Having watched an AL team in an NL park try to manage a pitching staff, or move a runner or double switch, it’s pretty clear it’s not something that comes easily.
I don’t think there is nearly the evidence that the AL is significantly superior to the NL, and even if so, there are all sorts of things – like the resources of the Yankees and Red Sox, that may account for the difference.
@19
Way to use the only year in forever where we’ve had someone who could competently serve as an everyday DH as your example. For heaven’s sake, don’t pick one of literally every other year since interleague play has come into existence where we didn’t have that guy.
Along the same lines, there is nothing more irritating than hearing a Braves fan say, “Yeah, bring on the DH. I mean, we could play Gattis everyday, and then we’d be sure to re-sign McCann over the offseason.” As if the only freaking reason why McCann is likely leaving is that the NL doesn’t have a DH. Right, yeah…keep convincing yourself that we’d easily re-sign McCann if only we could use the DH. I’m sure it’s true.
So the Nats have picked up the missing piece to their title run. David DeJesus!
If they introduced the DH into the NL tomorrow, I think the team that would benefit the most would be the Braves. It’s not even close.
It’s also worth noting that most AL clubs don’t have a “true” DH. There just aren’t that many elite hitter around who can’t find a position somewhere.
OMG I love these.
18 – Exactly. Look I hate the DH, but I don’t think it has to be an advantage to a big market team. You can still be smarter and use that spot on a cost-controlled guy in his prime production years. Obviously it’s great when money is no object, but this year should be a great indicator that getting the top free agents is not the best way to put together a team. Look at LAA, NYY, Phi heck even our 2 highest paid guys have been the least productive.
Also, the Ted poster has to be coke bottle, right?
@23
Yes, due to the vagaries of random chance, if the DH were suddenly foisted upon the NL for the rest of the season, the Braves would benefit…for the rest of the season.
What about next year (after McCann leaves)? And the year after that? And the year after that?
You guys have latched on to my Brian McCann/Evan Gattis thing and are acting like it’s the basis of my argument. It’s merely an example.
I think the key points are made by mavery and Dusty: a.) There aren’t a bunch of elite hitters around who can’t find work because they can’t field. The advantage of the DH is in the flexibility, the insurance it provides “Well, if we’re wrong about how this guy will age, we can always give him more and more DH at-bats.” b.) Teams that hand out cash like it’s nothing are ALREADY DOING THAT, and are ALREADY PAYING CONSEQUENCES for it. The teams that are deep and well-rounded are already at a long-term competitive advantage, and adding a hitter to the lineup could actually allow those teams to make better use of their resources, but getting more at-bats out of their deep, well-rounded clubs.
Do you not believe that the ability to use a DH gave the Rays a kind of insurance policy when they chose to sign Evan Longoria to a 15 year contract at an AVERAGE VALUE of 9.63 million a year?
If we had the DH, I’d sign Jason Heyward for 15 years at 10m a season. I wouldn’t touch that with a 10 foot pole in our current state.
That’s an example of a SMART team, using the DH to remain competitive in the most money-rich division in the game. They don’t get Evan Longoria for 10m during his prime if they don’t commit to him until he’s 36. You think they commit to him until he’s 36 if they think they HAVE to use him at 3B for the next 15 years?
There aren’t a bunch of elite hitters around who can’t find work because they can’t field
That’s right – so who gets those few guys? The teams with the most money, that’s who.
Teams that hand out cash like it’s nothing are ALREADY DOING THAT, and are ALREADY PAYING CONSEQUENCES for it.
And the DH helps get them off the hook for it too. That Howard contract doesn’t look half as bad if he can slide to DH. It makes the life on an NL GM with resources A LOT easier. Shame we’re not one of them.
For most teams, your DH is usually a guy you overpaid five years ago who can’t field his position any more. (Like these guys: http://bbref.com/pi/shareit/MrUXS)
The DH would not really open up a lot of spots for the Ernesto Mejias and Barbaro Canizareses and Brandon Joneses and Kila and Kala Kaai’hues of the world. There will always be tweeners who get screwed by the system, who fail in their first 100 (or 200 or 300) plate appearances and never really get another shot. If anything, the DH encourages teams to give more stupid, bad money, long-term contracts (of the type I looked at a few days ago: http://bravesjournal.us/?p=10497#comment-1406346) because teams can always hide their old overpaid players at DH.
So I don’t think that an expansion of the DH would necessarily be a boon for Quad-A players who are blocked in the current system.
The Phillies are paying the price for NOT having a DH. They didn’t want to let him walk away TO A TEAM THAT COULD DH HIM, so they had to pay a market price they can’t actually afford.
Under the current rules, that was obviously a mistake.
But why should they have had to watch their best hitter in decades walk away because they can’t offer him what the Angels or Rangers could have? How is that somehow more level?
EDIT: AND, to answer your question above, no, I didn’t take the time to look at homefields in those 4000 games. But a 53-47 percent advantage is pretty sizable across a FOUR THOUSAND GAME sample size.
Oh good lord. Just because the AL wants to play softball doesn’t mean everyone else does. I’m willing to let a guy go to watch real baseball than give in so that EVERY game is a boring slog. We might win more, but I will care a whole lot less.
My view on the DH is simple: In baseball, everyone should wear a glove & take swings.
If we lose a player perhaps because he can also DH in the AL, IMO, c’est la vie. The NL version of the game is the one I prefer to watch.
I’m not all about these posters, to be honest. They’re of an aesthetic you could call Modern Internet Minimalist, but almost too much so.
The best thing I’ve seen all year design-wise is this dude named M. Willis who re-imagined every baseball uniform as a soccer kit. Unfortunately, I can’t get any of the images to render on two different browsers and I hope he didn’t get some kind of cease-and-desist order.
http://mwillis.com/post/44231606092/the-entire-soccer-out-of-context-major-league
I’m calling bullshit on the “I’ll stop watching if the NL adopts the DH” stuff. Give me a break. AL games aren’t boring – they just don’t involve the Braves so the level of interest and emotional investment is somewhere along the same lines of the level of watching the Cubs play the Padres. If the Braves and everyone else begins to use the DH, you’ll still watch, and you’ll still enjoy the game.
The day the NL adopts the DH (hopefully after I die) is the day I stop paying attention to MLB.
AL baseball is duller than dirt.
Don’t forget that the criminal (or at least actionable) tv deal the Braves are tied to would impact us greatly, as well, if the DH were made universal.
Like I tried to explain above I DON’T WANT TO WATCH DH BALL EITHER.
But the purpose of a Major League Baseball Championship season is to produce a champion. The games should be played in pursuit of crowning a champion, and any television drama should emanate from the meaningfulness of the games, in their relation to the crowning of a champion.
Developing rules based on “what the viewers want to see” is the NFL and the NBA’s game. I don’t watch those sports, just like I don’t watch wrestling or reality TV.
That was what the DH was about, too. And it was a mistake.
But it’s not going away, the union won’t let it, the AL teams who have already signed their players assuming they’ll have it won’t let it.
So the only way to play a fair, championship season is to bring it to the NL.
That’s the crux of my argument. The argument of the relative benefits to the teams is mostly noise.
EDIT: And IF I’m wrong, and bringing the DH in is BAD for my team competitively.. THAT’S STILL MORE FAIR.
I’m fine with keeping the status quo, and I’m fine with an NL DH. I watch baseball because I love the game and I root for the Braves. Neither is affected by the DH. There’s not a single baseball fan on the planet that would stop cheering for their team if pitchers didn’t hit and the thrill of the sac-bunt and once-a-week double-switch was taken away from them.
the only way to play a fair, championship season is to bring it to the NL
I disagree. And if it is, than krussell’s challenge notwithstanding, I won’t be terribly interested. I like baseball an awful lot more than the Braves. The baseball I like doesn’t have a DH.
@40 – I agree with this completely.
That awesome play by Andrelton the other day, for example, was a product of NL baseball. If the pitchers didn’t hit, no one would have bunted, and even if they did, we couldn’t have run the wheel play on a real hitter, and if we weren’t running the wheel play, they don’t sniff it out and pull a butcher boy.
But I wouldn’t know I was missing that! I’d just have to be amazed by the OTHER plays Andrelton Simmons makes.
I watch the baseball because I love baseball. I watch the Braves because they were my dad’s team. And I’ll watch them regardless of any rule changes in the game.
I don’t recall any AL teams going bankrupt since 1973.
@35
WCG..
i like his stuff also…great to see young one man bands using the web, being creative and drawing attention to their work…
i followed your link to one i found for NL East – Upton ready to suit up!
http://mwillis.com/post/44144682605/soccer-out-of-context-the-nl-east
Are we seriously having a collective freak-out against a hypothetical world in which Fredi Gonzalez has fewer temptations to bunt?
Am I on the right internet today?
@42
perfect..
Which brings us to the “If only we had the DH, we’d have something to do with Ernesto Mejia/Mauro Gomez/Barbaro Canizares” argument. But if either of those three players were at all worthy of Major League at-bats, wouldn’t they have, like, gotten Major League at-bats? There’s nothing precluding us from calling them up as power bats off the bench. Yet, we didn’t. Why? Probably because they’re not Major League caliber players. In which case, we wouldn’t want them getting at-bats at DH.
And yes, the DH does allow you to give a player a “rest” while still including his bat in the lineup and getting someone else some at-bats at the same time. But players having days off in the NL just doesn’t bother me in the slightest, and I’m certainly not willing to undergo having to watch awful AL baseball for the rest of time just so that my team can more efficiently rest players and get other players more ABs.
And as far as Ryan Howard, the Phillies did have an option, and it’s what they should’ve done in the first place. Let him walk! If the Cardinals had a DH, they very well might have signed Pujols. Do you think they’re wishing that had happened right now? For that matter, would the Howard deal have been a good deal if the Phillies could use him for DH duty right now? I would argue no.
@44, No ,we are apparently arguing that because the NL has no DH they have only won 4 of the last 5 and 8 of the last 12 WS, a clearly intolerable state of affairs.
Yeah, I’d keep watching with a DH. But I don’t think it’s just my Braves fandom that makes me find NL ball more interesting. I feel the same way when I watch two teams I don’t care about much, like the Dodgers and Giants or Cardinals and Cubs.
And I too think the NL DH is inevitable, and I can live with it. I just wish it weren’t and I didn’t have to.
Well, as long we’re making straw men and false dichotomies:
No, we’re arguing because people are trying to disguise their emotional arguments as rational arguments, to no avail.
How can you say the NL is being deprived of “the only way to play a fair, championship season” when they have WON THE WS 4 of the last 5 times? How is this a strawman when there is apparently NO PENALTY ATTACHING to the NL for not having one? Where is the suffering that must be righted?
I’m DH-agnostic. I just like making jokes about Fredi’s in-game tactical ability.
@26
most likely…email him, still could be time enough to wield your influence…coke bottle or otherwise…
Well obviously those Championships are tainted by the advantage the NL teams have by training their pitchers to bunt!
Look, you reduced my argument to it’s most absurd state, after I gave you 39 years of WS and ASG evidence, that shows the AL is only a tick better than the NL (within the margin of error, but notable that both tip in the same direction) plus 3900 games of interleague data that makes the AL look like the Red Sox and the NL look like the Cubs, and you’re coming back by LIMITING the sample size to only 5 years, which you know is ridiculous, AFTER you threw your hands in the air and said “well I just won’t watch.”
I tried to debate rationally with you, and you get frustrated and go all reductio ad absurdum on me.
I think my points stand fine on their own, thanks.
You have yet to definitively tie the DH to any of the things you mentioned. let alone “proved” the assertions behind them. Your complaint is that without the DH there is an unlevel playing field that the NL is suffering from. Anecdotally, I have shown this to be false. Your points do in fact stand alone – no support or data to distinguish them from rank assertion, and countervailing evidence that they are not particularly accurate or instructive. You can keep them.
In the end, the National League and the American League teams still really aren’t competing against each other. The National League is competing against themselves and the American League is competing against themselves. At the end of the season, one team from each league will be directly competing with each other, but only in a seven-game series, where the effect of the year-long DH advantage (if you even assume that it exists) is greatly reduced and the effect of random chance and other factors is greatly increased.
As far as the All-Star Game goes, if you seriously think that the AL has a considerable advantage in a single game featuring nothing but All-Stars that plays with the DH every year…well, I vehemently disagree. And besides, home-field advantage matters, but it’s not the be-all, end-all. If we fast-forward a month and find ourselves playing Game 1 of the World Series tomorrow against the Tigers, I’m not gonna be fretting about the lack of home-field advantage. I’m just not. Win one road game. And another point, why in the hell are we adopting the DH instead of scrapping the idiotic All-Star Game format?
Yes, AL teams and NL teams compete in interleague play, but there’s not crossover in the standings or anything. Those games are used to help decide the division championships, but since everybody plays them, it pretty much cancels it out. For the season, the NL teams are really only competing with the NL teams.
So I’m really not seeing a way that it’s absurdly, patently unfair. If the cost of not having every single baseball game I watch feature the DH for all of eternity is that my team might be minutely inconvenienced in the World Series or in the ability to obtain home-field advantage for said series, I’ll live with it. And for the other 95 percent of the years where my team is out of it and it inconveniences another NL team, there is no way on this earth that I could possibly care less.
@36 – I have been a season ticket holder for more than 15 years and I can tell you 100% for sure: when the NL gets the DH I am done. Ask me how many hockey games I have watched since the Thrashers left Atlanta…
@56, I don’t believe you for a second. If the Braves actually left town (like the Thrashers) then I would believe that many people would stop watching baseball, but that’s not what we’re talking about.
If they play next season with a DH then you and everyone else will still watch. You still watched after multiple strikes. You still watched after they canceled a postseason. You’ll still watch after they adopt the DH.
Perhaps DHs are like PED abusers – the only ones that seem to offend are the ones on other teams.
That part that I don’t quite get is why NL pitchers don’t practice more and try to get better at hitting. Most of these guys were the best hitters on their teams all the way through their teens and sometimes even beyond (especially the position players converted to pitchers). I would think there’d be enough incentive to stay good at hitting. Ok maybe “good” is a stretch, but “not terrible” seems doable.
You’re certainly right about one thing: I have failed to definitively tie anything to anything. But I’m fine with that. I’m arguing on the internet, not writing my dissertation.
But I debated in good faith, on the merits, and offered the data I had available to me.
But my larger point stands: two teams playing by different rules can not produce more fair results than two teams playing by the same rules.
My assertions regarding who is getting the short end of that stick could very well be wrong. I doubt it, but I admit it’s possible.
But if you expect me to “definitively tie” anything to anything before I can dare disagree with you but still have my argument treated with basic fraternal respect, I think you’ve got too high a bar.
I’ve got this to say: you abandoned the rational for the emotional, spoke about me rather than to me, reduced my argument to the absurd, and then scaled-back the sample-size until it fit your narrative… well that all sounds like a man who knows he’s beat, and just doesn’t care.
shorter 60 – “I made stuff up”
You just can’t admit that you’re making an emotional argument.
you can’t show that the NL is at a competitive disadvantage
you can’t show that the DH would fix this.
Other than that, you whooped me.
My assertion is that having two sets of rules is inherently unfair. My reason for giving a damn is that I feel the NL is as a competitive disadvantage.
My solution is to make the rules the same.
How is this unfairness manifested? What provable harm is being done?
I don’t have a way to quantify the “harm” being done.
If you don’t think the AL has an advantage on the FA market, I can’t prove that they do.
If you don’t think 2079 – 1883 advantage in interleague play is meaningful, I can’t convince you that it is.
But there is no competitive reason to have two leagues play by different rules.
If the AL is getting beat in 4 of the last 5 the World Series because they have to pay 9 starter-quality contracts, then that is just as unfair as if the assertion that I made is true.
The only way to know you’re getting a fair result is to play by the same rules.
I think the emotional argument is that a lot of people like the fact that the leagues play by different rules. It adds to the mystique of the World Series. I can kinda buy that argument. I’m not necessarily pro-DH … I just don’t care enough to be vehemently against it.
I’m as much FOR the DH as I am FOR a balanced schedule.
Some years the unbalanced schedule (and the wildcard)will help my team, some years it hurts my team.
But I don’t like that it’s different. The things “left up to chance” should be on the field, not in the rules. It would be more fair if they played the same schedule by the same rules.
@66
I, for one, am horrified that each and every playing field in the majors isn’t exactly the same. Colorado’s outfield is so big that it could fit two national parks inside of it, Cincinnati is a damn Little League field, Houston has a freaking hill in the middle of the field (How is that safe?), Boston has a really tall wall in left and a really short wall in right. The foul territory in each park is different, too. How is this fair? I would argue that it’s not fair. After all, what if some teams have to play more games on a silly non-conformist field than others? Therfore, I hereby demand that every field in Major League Baseball be changed to cookie-cutter 330-375-400 dimensions over the offseason. After all, the only way to ensure that every game is fair is for every game to be played on the exact same field. I don’t have any proof that any team is getting adversely affected, but it sure seems like they would be, and there’s no competitive reason to have every team playing their home games on a different-shaped field. The only way to know that you’re getting a fair result is to play every game on exactly the same field.
In other news…how bout those boys from South Nashville? Offensive explosion today for the run-rule win. I’ve driven by the fields those kids play on probably hundreds of times; never would’ve thought there’d be a LLWS team from literally “just down the road” from a couple places I’ve lived.
EDIT: Also, I appreciate blazon sharing the posters, but I don’t particularly like them.
the designated hitter rule
divides the genius and fool
to which do you belong?
who sings your Siren song?
the sixth and most contentious tool.
@69 – That, again, is absurd. You could also demand that all games be played at the same elevation. Hell, you could demand that all games be played at the SAME LOCATION. All 30 teams play their 162 game schedule in the same venue. It would hold 12 games a day.
But that’s several gradations from demanding that one league construct it’s roster differently from the other.
What if, for some strange reason, one league or the other had a rule that all their teams had to have 11 man pitching staffs, no more, no less? Why give one group of GMs one objective and the other group a different objective, and then make them compete for the same title?
66, So if there is no problem to solve, why ought the NL owners, who are doubtless perfectly happy, and NL fans, who are seem in large part to also prefer this style of play, change anything?
If the AL has an advantage on the FA market, it’s because the arbitrariness of a handful of the largest markets and savvier FO’s are there – hardly a function of the DH or anything that will likely be rectified by it.
I don’t find 2079-1883 meaningful because –
1. it’s not that large of a lead (53-47%)
2. It doesn’t control for scheduling inequity
3. It doesn’t control for ownership/management/payroll inequity
4. It doesn’t control that there can easily be random goodness and badness of unequal portion for one league or the other
5. It certainly doesn’t establish that the DH would materially change this.
6. It’s not that many games in the grand scheme of things – 4000? that’s only 25 team-seasons or not even a full al+nl year
It’s just a data point, and not particular evidence of anything.
I don’t care that their are two sets of rules. Why should I, or anyone? What is it hurting?
I don’t have any idea why the AL got beat 4 of the last 5, but why should that data point drive me to do anything at all. There is literally NO reason to change anything for anyone.
Fair result of what? The WS? it’s already “unfair” in that every team doesn’t play every other team the same amount of times. It’s already “unfair” by arbitrary “divisions” and “Wild Cards”. And their is no particular virtue in “fairness” here as again, as there is nothing particular to be gained by it.
70—Yeah, it’s crazy. They’re just down the road from the place I currently live, too.
@73- Your reasons for finding the 2079-1883 advantage to be less than instructive are the exact reasons I cannot PROVE one league or the other is being punished by the DH.
I don’t know how the 2006 Cardinals would have performed with a DH. I don’t know who that DH would be. Likewise, I don’t know who the Cubs, Astros or Pirates DH would have been. The Cards might not have made the playoffs if the NL had a DH.
There’s just no way to prove this hypothetical with data.
I think they should balance the schedule and bring the DH to both leagues, do away with divisions and take the top 4 records in to the playoffs.
Because of travel restrictions, mostly, the only viable option in there is to bring the DH to both leagues. And I admit, it isn’t that viable.
I’m not trying to argue that it’s an inevitability. I’m just stating a preference, and I have nothing by reason to back it up. I don’t think an argument that relies on reason, rather than data, is simply “making things up.”
In unrelated news, I just got back from NY where I played softball with the local NYC area BBTF Primates. Have started posting pics of that over there, and there’s some nascent interest by a few southeastern folks in a potential ATL area game. I can probably drum up some Primates from the Carolinas as well, but was thinking we’d probably need to throw it open to Journalers as well.
Just a thought. It’s a really early scheme at this point.
But you can’t even make the prima facie case for doing anything – inductive reasoning is fine but you don’t seem to have a premise, let alone offer why your solution would work or on what – just that you’d find it more aesthetically pleasing if the rules were the same. That’s not an argument relying on reason without data (which I don’t think I quite grok, but we’ll pass that). It’s just, well “it’s just like, your opinion, man.”
In case you didn’t catch it, here’s B.J. Upton on being sorta-platooned:
http://www.ajc.com/news/sports/baseball/bj-on-limited-playing-time-whats-my-argument/nZRkR/
But this is back to the false dichotomy stuff. I HAVE a premise, and I have anecdotal evidence, (the Rays with Evan Longoria – the Phillies with Ryan Howard – the inevitable parting of the Braves with McCann) and I have raw, uncontrolled data (the interleague, World Series and All Star game data all skewing, however slightly, in the same direction.) But it isn’t conclusive, definitive data. You’re equating that with having NO premise, NO data.
If I was arguing to a Congressional committee, I’d agree, that’s no data. I think I’ve got plenty to support a cogent argument in the comments thread of a baseball blog.
You don’t buy it, that’s fine. Just don’t be, you know, a dick, man.
Maybe I misunderstand – please restate what your premise is then. What is the problem, and how will having a DH solve it?
Because if a genie came down tomorrow and granted your wish what could you guarantee would would happen?
That the leagues would be more competitive? That player movement would cease? Anything other than the rules being the same?
I on the other hand can say with a great certainty that it will cost more money. It will make life harder for mid and low payroll teams. It will remove a significant tactical component of the game in the NL. Many people will be turned off by it. Comparatively few will be turned on. It will exacerbate salary problems and increase, rather than decrease player movement. In short, the woes are guaranteed and the joys, even if fully realized, are negligible. What is to be gained here? Why is it worth the risk and cost?
@79, keep it above the belt, please.
“I’m as much FOR the DH as I am FOR a balanced schedule. But I don’t like that it’s different. The things “left up to chance” should be on the field, not in the rules. It would be more fair if they played the same schedule by the same rules.”
I agree: abolish the DH rule in the AL.
Oh, but “that’ll never happen.”
As far as I know, MLB is the only major professional sports league to have two different sets of rules within the game. I’m also agnostic on it, but there is something about the difference that just doesn’t seem right. I can say that I love it when the Braves play an AL team on the road. I love having nine hitters in the lineup.
I personally don’t think about the DH rule very much.
Like it or not, the NL is the outlier here. It’s very strange to have this one league with such a significant rule difference from all others, particularly with the advent of interleague play. I believe we’ll see the DH in the NL eventually, and when it happens it won’t bother me in the slightest. At least it would eliminate one source of head slapping decision making by Fredi.
You’d think this was a thread from the ’70s.
Oh, and I don’t like the posters. They’re minimalist to the point where they lack discernable identity. Heck, the Dodgers poster is just a blue poster with wording. That’s it. I’m pretty sure it represents “Dodger Blue,” but I don’t really consider that very artistic.
I wonder what the ideal response to being benched is, and how likely it is that a professional athlete would actually say it. I’d probably say it’d be something like, “Ya know, man, I suck right now. I won’t suck in the future, but I do now, and I understand why I’m not getting playing time.” You never hear that though. You hear things like what BJ said. Just own it. You suck right now, but you probably won’t soon. Own it and move on.
Over the last 15 years 7 of the 9 AL WS winners were the Bosox and Yankees. It is more the big spenders winning than the DH rule
@88 – Well, I think he kind of did that. “What’s my argument? I don’t have an argument.” That’s saying that he sucks. He’s basically saying “How am I going to say I deserve to play? I’m hitting .160.”
It would save money to just not make the pitcher bat, just the 8 position players.
Batters have to field, it’s not that hard.
Our buddies the Nats are getting absolutely curb-stomped at Wrigley, 8-1 in the 7th. Magic number imminently dropping to 23.
Also, how about the Marlins beating the Dodgers 6-2 in the 8th?
Well, I can keep it above the belt but I’m not sure everyone can.
At least in the morning.
And clearing the pitcher is a big part of the game.
I have the perfect solution, let’s do an Extra Hitter (EH) like they do in slow pitch softball and make the pitcher hit too. (-: (Please note sarcasm in the sentence above as it doesn’t always come across well in print.)
@90 I agree. He basically said he does suck but just used different words. At the same time, he knows he will still get his chance to play purely because of his contract. I want him to be successful too, but playing Gattis or Schafer over BJ now will give us a better chance to win. That’s for sure.
16 games ahead, 28 games above .500, best record in baseball…and we are still complaining!!!
The kink in the platoon plan is that Schafer is hitting .125/.263/.125 (though in only 15 PA) since he returned from the DL.
Obviously you can’t get too excited about 15 PA, but when you consider that his performance BEFORE the injury was the big surprise, you kinda have to wonder whether he’s shaking off the rust, or turning into a pumpkin.
EH is Extra Hitter
DH is Dumb Hitter
It seems the Nats put their season savior DeJesus on waivers immediately after trading for him…
@98 It’s the Braves Journal way!
Our manager is somewhere between good and very good, our general manager is somewhere between very good and excellent, we have one of the youngest rosters in the major leagues with no major weaknesses, we’re in first case by 16 games, and we’re on pace for our 15th first-place finish in 23 years.
On balance, I’m pretty lucky to be a Braves fan.
* Fredi is not a brilliant in-game manager, it’s true. But he appears to be a very good manager of the clubhouse. Yes, he presided over one of the worst collapses in baseball history in 2011. But he managed to retain the respect of his players and led the team to a surprisingly strong 94-win season the following year, and a first-place finish this year. He deserves a lot some of the credit for all of the success that our young players have had — every team has prospect attrition, busts, and flameouts, but we haven’t had as many of those as many of our rivals, and the success of Andrelton Simmons, Freddie Freeman, Alex Wood, Julio Teheran, and, yes, Jason Heyward owes a good deal to the manager who stuck by them and put them in a position to succeed. Likewise Chris Johnson, who was given a chance to win a job, won it, and continued to justify his skipper’s faith. Fredi’s done a lot of things wrong that we can spot in the box score. But he’s done a lot of things right that we can see in the standings. On balance, I think he’s probably in the top half of big league managers, at least. Of course, I believe Wren’s a top-5 GM, easy.
@6,7… I should have been clearer… St.Petersburg, Russia, actually.
@103 Nobody could have imagined a smoother transition between two HOFers in JS and Bobby to Wren and Fredi (in fact, it’s sad that nobody wrote anything about this.). While we would all love the team to have a larger payroll and a better TV deal, what Wren and Fredi have achieved has been very impressive.
Puig/Gattis…
interesting events in the Dodgers game at Miami last night…Puig was VERY close to total melt down after a disputed strike call…his teammates/coaches had to restrain him, get him off the field, get him out of the dugout down below…he was contorted in rage, it was very ugly…he acted like a street thug which I’m guessing he was…he will flame out unless they ‘shrink’ him and who wants that job?
He may have the flashy numbers, we’ve got the quality guy…Evan, we love you.
Less contentiously Stanton hit one a mile in the 8th – a thing of beauty which crashed into that art deco melange.
Alex…your piece on Fredi was spot on, very fair.
and…anyone yet like to add their comments on the posters…so far we’ve had more pluses than minuses I believe.
So the Nats picked up DeJesus and put him right back on waivers. MLB Trade Rumors said they think the Nats claimed him to prevent him from going to “another contender.”
That made me laugh
DeJesus was hoping to go to a contender.
Any chance that DeJesus will be player to be named later?
Remember that year we were out of it and Schuerholz traded for Wickman and Baez?
Slick Wickman and Joan Baez did a show at Turner?