Export thread

I was curious what people here thought about interleague play during the regular season.

Personally I am against it. Sure you can get good matchups that people want to see (subway series, Yankee- Dodge,rCards-Twins, etc.) but I feel you ruin the feel of the World Series. You used to have 2 teams who had never faced each other during the regular season, no direct comparisons could be made.

I totally agree with you. I mean, I like it because the AL does GREAT against the NL but all in all it kinda makes the inter-conference playoffs anticlimactic.

I like Interleague play. I do agree that it can make the World Series a bit less lack-luster if the two teams have already played that season. From a fan perspective though, I love being able to see players & teams that I would normally never be able to see in person because they're in a different league.

You want to play a team from the other league? Fine. Make the World Series.

I see Jebus' point. I like it when we place AFC teams in the NFL so I don't see this as being all that different. I don't like it but I'm not wedded to the idea, either.

AFC-NFC is completely different. Interconference play has been part of the schedule ever since the merger.

Inter-conference has only been around for a bit over 10 years. I don't like it because it screws up the normal schedule. Now all teams don't play the same teams the same number of times a year. And since those schedules do not match any longer, the bread and butter of the ravenous baseball fan is out of whack. STATISTICS. Pitchers don't see the same batters and vice-versa.

Jebus said:

I like Interleague play. I do agree that it can make the World Series a bit less lack-luster if the two teams have already played that season. From a fan perspective though, I love being able to see players & teams that I would normally never be able to see in person because they're in a different league.

Click to expand...

Really? It doesn't make the NHL playoffs any lackluster...

Inter-league play belongs back in preseason, or extend the season the # of games of the inter-league play, and ignore the results for the purpose of the standings and performance statistics.

So the main argument against is that MLB hasn't done it for that long? That's a crappy argument.

Dave said:

So the main argument against is that MLB hasn't done it for that long? That's a crappy argument.

Click to expand...

Ya can't go messing with tradition.

(Plus the DH is an abomination only Satan (Or Charlie O. Finley) could've come up with.)

Dave said:

So the main argument against is that MLB hasn't done it for that long? That's a crappy argument.

Click to expand...

my argument is that it skews the stats. I don't care how long that they had IL play, but Jeter's stats against Reggie Jackson's don't mean the same thing anymore.

sixpackshaker;374493][QUOTE=Dave said:

So the main argument against is that MLB hasn't done it for that long? That's a crappy argument.

Click to expand...

my argument is that it skews the stats. I don't care how long that they had IL play, but Jeter's stats against Reggie Jackson's don't mean the same thing anymore.[/QUOTE]

Why? Because the pitchers were from a different Conference? That's dumb. They are major league pitchers, also.

But you will only face a couple of their pitchers, not every pitcher on the pitching staff like you would against a team you play several times a year. You only face their best or worst pitching. Not the whole enchilada. The games affect your standings in the division, but a few years ago the only games that affected your division were division games.

When the NFL merged with the AFL the schedule expanded 4 games to allow you to play 4 teams from outside your division and conference, then expanded again, I guess for kicks.

Baseball in effect cut several games from its long standing schedule and added back the same number of midseason-preseason games, that count. I don't mind them playing, just expand the season and don't let the IL games count.

Lol the season already is 9000000 games long including pre season, the games barely count cause you have another 1000 to make up the loss you just had. I can't possibly see how facing IL pitchers hurt, fine you aren't use to them, but guess what they aren't use to you either.

crono1224 said:

I can't possibly see how facing IL pitchers hurt, fine you aren't use to them, but guess what they aren't use to you either.

Click to expand...

Although I'd imagine Roy Halladay will enjoy playing in some AL stadiums again.

Gorram Blue Jays!

I like it - it presents World Series style challenges (DH rule) to at least one team, lets the fans see their home team play against a wider variety of opponents, and lets AL fans get a good glimpse of the top NL talent that their teams will poach for the playoff run.

I like it because it gives the fans a chance to enjoy a subway series when it's obvious at least one of the teams isn't going to be making to the post-season. Or in the case of Chicago, neither team.

And the DH basically removes two liabilities from NL teams - having the pitcher hit, which is an easy out like 85% of the time - and having to use a position on a guy who can't field comparably well but can really hit. That gives you a defensive hole that can be capitalized on. There's a reason AL teams dominate at All-Stars, Interleague play, and in the World Series. Best example? David Ortiz - great hitter for several years, and a major part of the Red Sox's World Series wins. Can't field for shit. Francona would rather sit him than put a glove on him, most games.

I still think it's pretty weird and stupid that the two leagues have different rules that very directly result the way the game is played/managed.

One thing I've seen the Yankees do with the DH position is use it as a form of half-rest and rehab for some of their players. Matsui's knees were getting pretty bad last season, and he never had a great arm in the outfield, so they put him in the DH slot. .615 average in the postseason shows that wasn't a bad idea. Posada spends a good amount of time DHing when the starter prefers a different catcher. Johnny Damon spent time DHing as well when he was hurting.

Jorge Posada's an interesting case. 5 World Series rings, and he's 2nd or 3rd all time among Yankees catchers in terms of hits, homers, etc. On the other hand, he's a career .280 hitter who won't break 500 homers. Does he deserve to be in the Hall of Fame? I'd have to think that when your numbers compare favorably to a bonafide legend of the game (Yogi Berra), you deserve to get voted in.

Back to the subject at hand - There's no way the Mets are going to come close to making the playoffs. But Interleague play lets the Mets fans see them play the defending World Series champs and their crosstown rivals. Same thing for the Nationals and the Orioles - they won't meet in the postseason, so why not now?

And as for the games - if the Yankees play Boston 15 times instead of 19 because of interleague play, well, I don't see that as being a huge difference overall.

If you can't field for shit, you don't belong out there, and you don't deserve your chance at bat either. It's as old as the schoolyard. If you don't field, you don't get to bat.

The DH was created to let guys well past their prime stick around for a few more years and get their cuts. You ended up with guys like Edgar Martinez who made entire careers out of doing nothing but DH. It is nothing but an abomination.

One thing I've seen the Yankees do with the DH position is use it as a form of half-rest and rehab for some of their players

Click to expand...

Girardi has been doing that a lot this year. Giving Teixeira a half day off putting him at DH and playing Nick Johnson at first. Yesterday they played Pena at Third gave Johnson the day off and put A-Rod at DH.

It was a good game

DarkAudit said:

If you can't field for shit, you don't belong out there, and you don't deserve your chance at bat either. It's as old as the schoolyard. If you don't field, you don't get to bat.

The DH was created to let guys well past their prime stick around for a few more years and get their cuts. You ended up with guys like Edgar Martinez who made entire careers out of doing nothing but DH. It is nothing but an abomination.

Click to expand...

You're an idiot. How many NL teams are carrying guys who aren't great in the field because of their bat? I'd bet there's at least one on every team. How many pitchers can really hit? Does their lack of ability to hit mean they shouldn't be able to pitch? You seem to be arguing that every player should be a good all-arounder. That's just not realistic - some people are going to have really strong points that shouldn't be ignored despite their weaknesses.

And let's talk about Edgar Martinez - do you think he was a liability to his team because he never fielded? David Ortiz as well - without his bat (and doubling that bat with the weak-fielding Manny Ramirez) the Red Sox aren't even a contending team. The difference between a world series championship and not making the playoffs seems to indicate that he makes a difference, despite not fielding.

Anyone who can hit major league pitching for better than .300 deserves to play, and to argue otherwise is simply absurd. Oh, and as for your "guys past their prime sticking around" - Pete Rose played in the National League. No DH. Instead he was a disaster at 1st base and padding his record towards the end of his career. That's really better for the sport? As opposed to say, a guy who can mentor the younger players on the team while still contributing with his bat.

Pete Rose was a shithead, period.

If the guy can't field, he's a liability. The DH takes away a potential glove when you might need it.

So the NL pitchers are weak hitters? So what. That's why you have sacrifices and the hit-and-run. You don't succumb to the "sit around and wait for the 3-run homer" trap the AL has gotten themselves into. You get actual *gasp* strategy.

Q: So what do you call "Strategy" that doesn't result in victory?

A: National League Baseball.

Sorry, I don't see how "have the pitcher bunt" is considered cunning strategy.

The only reason the NL is inferior competitively is that they don't have the DH. If they abolished the DH and put in a salary cap, eventually the leagues would get back to being equal.

And man do they need the salary cap and revenue sharing. I'd start watching again if anyone could win it.

Omaha is kind of no man's land. What team would you support? Kansas City? Minnesota? Milwaukee? Cubbies?

The Lovely Boner said:

The only reason the NL is inferior competitively is that they don't have the DH. If they abolished the DH and put in a salary cap, eventually the leagues would get back to being equal.

Click to expand...

I'd have to disagree with you there. Even with the DH, it didn't help the AL through most of the 70s and 80s, losing 11 all-star games in a row from '72-'82.

As of 2009, only three teams (all of them expansion) have not won a pennant: the Texas Rangers (formerly Washington Senators, est. 1961), Washington Nationals (formerly Montreal Expos, est. 1969), and Seattle Mariners (est. 1977). However, all three teams have participated in post season play, either in the Division Series or League Championship Series.

1990 - Cincinatti Reds NL def. Oakland Athletics
1991 - Minnesota Twins AL def. Atlanta Braves
1992 - Toronto Blue Jays AL def. Atlanta Braves
1993 - Toronto Blue Jays AL def. Philadelphia Phillies
1994 - No World Series
1995 - Atlanta Braves NL def. Cleveland Indians
1996 - New York Yankees AL def. Atlanta Braves
1997 - Florida Marlins NL def. Cleveland Indians
1998 - New York Yankees AL def. San Deigo Padres
1999 - New York Yankees AL def. Atlanta Braves
2000 - New York Yankees AL def. New York Mets
2001 - Arizona Diamondbacks NL def. New York Yankees
2002 - Anaheim Angels AL def. San Francisco Giants
2003 - Florida Marlins NL def. New York Yankees
2004 - Boston Red Sox AL def. St. Louis Cardinals
2005 - Chicago White Sox AL def. Houston Astros
2006 - St. Louis Cardinals NL def. Detroit Tigers
2007 - Boston Red Sox AL def. Colorado Rockies
2008 - Philadelphia Phillies NL def. Tampa Bay Rays
2009 - New York Yankees AL def. Philadelphia Phillies

That's 21 teams out of 28 being represented in the world series over the last 20 years. That's literally 75% of the field having a recent shot at a championship. The Yankees have appeared the most - 7 times - but the Braves have made 5 appearances as well. Out of those 20 years, there have been 12 different champions.