• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

MLB Offseason: February 15 isn't THAT far away...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hating the wild card(s) strikes me as rather odd, though.

I just don't see why teams that aren't division leaders, deserve to make the postseason. You talk about dilution...well, with too many teams in the playoffs, the value of doing so is also diluted.
 
But it isn't like the NBA, in which fully half the teams in each conference make the playoffs. I don't really see the harm in eight out of 30 teams having a postseason run. The wild card also can give an opportunity for a team to make the postseason and not be punished for having to play in the same division as some team having a meteoric run.
 
I just don't see why teams that aren't division leaders, deserve to make the postseason. You talk about dilution...well, with too many teams in the playoffs, the value of doing so is also diluted.
Why punish a team that's better than a division champion just because the latter happens to be in a worse division?

Personally I'd rather just have who makes the postseason (and seeding) determined by teams' records, like how the AL and NL did it in the pre-divisional era. But I'd still keep the divisions for organizing regular season play.
 
I doubt the MLBPA would let the DH go away completely.

As for interleague play: I hate it (why even have leagues if they're going to play each other all the time?), and I also hate the wild card. If both leagues expanded by 1 team each, they could go to a 4-division setup with no wild cards, and I'd be all over that. :techman:
The Wild Cards have added more excitement to the final weeks of the regular season though. In fact, I like the Wild Card games, even though I wish they were best of three.
 
Maybe a year or two ago, a friend of mine and I collaborated on a study and found that the rate of injuries for pitchers running the bases (we looked at a three-year sample, as I recall) was actually lower than other positions. I don't have the paper in front of me at the moment but I can try digging it up in a couple of hours.

In any event, pitchers have batted since 1876 and the world hasn't ended. I guess I just like there being some difference between the two leagues. If anything, I'd just want the amount of interleague play scaled back, because right now it's ridiculous.

Yeah, I agree with that. Although I don't think Interleague can be scaled back without changing the number of teams per league.

A lot of the premises of the DH are just things I don't accept. Not everyone is a good hitter, doesn't mean they shouldn't be required to hit (do you think I didn't want Ben Revere to have a DH bat for him?). The argument that nobody wants to see pitchers hit strikes me as unfounded (nothing is more exciting than a pitcher hitting a home run), the argument that pitchers can't be helpful to their team on offense is equally unfounded (they can bunt or sac fly at a minimum). Finally, I reject the argument that the game needs more offense. The biggest complaint about Major League Baseball is that the game is too long. Offense slows down the game. A good pitcher's duel is an extremely tense, exciting game. I like to see teams get a couple players on base and then break things open with a base-clearing double. That's far more exciting than a random solo homerun that just happens.
 
I don't think Interleague can be scaled back without changing the number of teams per league.

Logically speaking, there only has to be one interleague game per day, isn't that right? That's the absolute minimum as I understand it.

And if a team changes leagues, there doesn't have to be any at all.
 
Baseball should lose at least one team, not gain.
Healthy leagues don't contract.

Expansion for all....and the DH for all, NL pitchers don't hit in the minors, or college or even high school for the most part, why expect them to suddenly know how to do it?
 
Logically speaking, there only has to be one interleague game per day, isn't that right? That's the absolute minimum as I understand it.

And if a team changes leagues, there doesn't have to be any at all.
My understanding is this is a perception issue anyway. The number of interleague games hasn't changed recently. It's just that they're all season now.
 
My understanding is this is a perception issue anyway. The number of interleague games hasn't changed recently. It's just that they're all season now.

true, it's just that there's one every day now as opposed to a 2-week novelty period.

Really, I'm ready for this to happen. Just give the DH to the NL and let's get it over with. I mean, it's DEFINITELY happening eventually, right? If not today, in 5 years? 10? It's coming, so let's just get there and be done with it. Get everyone playing with the same rules, and makes everything a whole lot easier. Give the NL a couple years to prepare for it roster-wise, but sure they'll figure it out quickly enough; just means the old slugger with crappy knees can skip having to go act like a statue at 1B, and you can play him until 38 instead of having him retire or switch to the AL at 35.

Yes, it's "exciting" when the pitcher gets a HR, or even a hit. Know why? Because it's so damned rare. That's it, the novelty factor. Know what they call it when the DH gets a HR, or a hit? Regular baseball. If I got a HR or a hit, it would be VERY exciting, and high comedy. But I don't like my odds, and you don't want to pay to watch me give it a try. And then there's the 'strategy' of the double switch, which apparently only the mastermind managers of the NL can figure out. May be a tad overblown, not like they're playing chess while the AL is playing checkers. Just means the back end of your bench plays the last inning or two of a game instead of starting once a week and playing the whole game. Meh.

Just want to see the rules the same across both leagues, and we all know the DH isn't going to be taken away from the AL, so just give it to the NL and let's go. Can you imagine if the NFL said that in NFC games, you weren't allowed to use your place kicker and punter? Sure, it would be high comedy to watch some linebacker give it a shot, and amazing if he made a big one, but since the kicker and punter exist (and would be sitting on the bench in those games), why not let them play?
 
I don't largely care about the DH either way other than the fact it's absurd the two leagues have different rules.

It'd be like Eastern Conference teams in the NBA not having a 3-point line.
 
Not really a useful point, as they aren't currently electing to use it. Fun nit, but time for them to choose to implement it. Shouldn't take any crazy committee or anything, just do what the AL does. Probably just need a year or two warning so that NL teams can start to plan their roster moves accordingly.
 
Really, I'm ready for this to happen. Just give the DH to the NL and let's get it over with. I mean, it's DEFINITELY happening eventually, right? If not today, in 5 years? 10? It's coming, so let's just get there and be done with it. Get everyone playing with the same rules, and makes everything a whole lot easier. Give the NL a couple years to prepare for it roster-wise, but sure they'll figure it out quickly enough; just means the old slugger with crappy knees can skip having to go act like a statue at 1B, and you can play him until 38 instead of having him retire or switch to the AL at 35.

I'm still hoping the AL will grow out this silly fad ;)
 
The Mets are going to retire Mike Piazza's #31 on July 30th. I'm trying to see if I can make it, should be a packed stadium.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top