Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Larry Dierker Says Astros Fans Will Get Used To New League

Dierker isn’t generatin’ that Texan’s are stupid or something, but…

Many Houston Astros fans are up in arms about the team’s impending move to the American League. But one person who isn’t is a former player, manager and broadcaster.

As an Astro, Larry Dierker has seen it all. He debuted for the then Colt .45’s as an 18-year-old pitcher in 1964, spending most of his 14-year career with the team. Later he managed the Astros and also spent a number of years calling games from the broadcast booth. He doesn’t like the move to the American League that comes with the sale of the team, but says fans will get over it quickly.

“Most of them just want to be at Minute Maid Park and most of them just want to watch a ballgame. I don’t think a high percentage of them are so knowledgeable about baseball and so avid in their fan participation that they’re really going to be affected that much. I think it’s mostly they just want to go to the ballpark and have a good time.”

 

Repoz Posted: November 19, 2011 at 01:56 AM | 184 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: announcers, astros, media

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. base ball chick Posted: November 20, 2011 at 06:02 AM (#3997787)
RTG

i wasn't alive at the time, but my mama told me that there were a LOT of rantings about all of that.

pinch hitters/pinch runners/LIDR are a reasonable part of the game - they have to stay in and play both offense and defense,

the relief pitchers who only face 1 batter - sigh - is unfortunately a part of the game i can't think how to get rid of. trust me i do NOT like the endless lefty/righty crap. but then again, this means there are only 3 pinch hitters/team and the manager SHOULD be thinking about how to best use em.

we've seen managers lose PLENTY of games because of poor use of bench and having to have pinch hitters lay defense because a reliever didn't hold a lead.

but it is still in the spirit of the game in which everyone as to be at least ready to play offense and defense

and you must admit it was absolutely teh kewl the time that old korean lefty reliever had to face randy johnson - one of my favorite baseball moments...
   102. Joe Kehoskie Posted: November 20, 2011 at 08:03 AM (#3997798)
I know the Astros/A.L. wound is still fresh for Lisa. Just speaking generally here ...

pinch hitters/pinch runners/LIDR are a reasonable part of the game - they have to stay in and play both offense and defense,

But this is only partly true. If it's so sacred for pitchers to hit, then shouldn't anti-DH people object to non-pitchers pinch-hitting for pitchers? A non-pitcher who pinch hits for a pitcher and then leaves the game (i.e., replaced by the next pitcher) is little more than a DH by a different name, but I've never seen a single objection to this aspect of the game. "DH = moral outrage, PH = good/acceptable" doesn't seem to compute.
   103. Something Other Posted: November 20, 2011 at 08:04 AM (#3997799)
Leave Lisa alone!!

Good God--when the woman's right, she's right. The shock alone of having your NL team kidnapped and taken, bound and gagged, to the DH league... that deserves the cutting of some serious slack. If the Mets, especially with their current, evil owners, were spirited to the American League, I'd be sharpening my knives when I came out of the coma.
   104. bumpis hound Posted: November 20, 2011 at 08:52 AM (#3997801)
I'm not an "only NL" guy, I actually think it's ok to have two leagues. I only get riled up when the groupthink rises up and declares the DH-into-the-NL as some sort of inevitability (which happens all the time here, as well as with people like Keith Law, the efficiency expert). Which is BS, it's an imposition that I can only hope runs out of time, creditability. I started out an AL fan (Oakland, I was born there but never lived there), but one Giants game–NL rules, NL –and I was hooked. This was '90 BTW, so it wasn't like I was front-running or anything.

Just leave the NL alone. There is no inherent purity to the DH, there is no progress, or logic, or order. It's a bastardization that has become instituted, and just because some people have drank enough of that kool-aid to assuage the pain of having to watch DH ball, doesn't mean I have to, at least not without a bit of dissent.
   105. Barnaby Jones Posted: November 20, 2011 at 08:54 AM (#3997802)
But this is only partly true. If it's so sacred for pitchers to hit, then shouldn't anti-DH people object to non-pitchers pinch-hitting for pitchers? A non-pitcher who pinch hits for a pitcher and then leaves the game (i.e., replaced by the next pitcher) is little more than a DH by a different name, but I've never seen a single objection to this aspect of the game. "DH = moral outrage, PH = good/acceptable" doesn't seem to compute.


No. A pinch hitter is a substitution. He himself is subsequently substituted for and lost for the remainder of the game. Substitution is quite normal and very different that the invention of a whole new position.
   106. Joe Kehoskie Posted: November 20, 2011 at 09:43 AM (#3997807)
No. A pinch hitter is a substitution. He himself is subsequently substituted for and lost for the remainder of the game. Substitution is quite normal and very different that the invention of a whole new position.

But if the argument against the DH is that they don't play defense, then why isn't the same argument used against non-pitcher PHs with regards to pitching? There's no logical consistency to the arguments. Why is it an outrage for J.D. Martinez to DH for Jordan Lyles for the whole game (but not play defense), but not an outrage for Martinez to pinch-hit for Lyles in the 7th inning (but not pitch, and instead be immediately replaced by an actual pitcher)? Calling Martinez a "substitution" is just semantics. Martinez is no more an ML pitcher than Lyles is an ML hitter. If having the pitcher hit is so sacred, then a pitcher should always have to hit.
   107. Do Not Touch Fancy Pants Socially Distanced Handle Posted: November 20, 2011 at 11:16 AM (#3997811)
I just find it interesting that BBC, of all people, is perfectly happy to treat AL fans as second class citizens. I mean, apparently we can't even get to seperate but equal...
   108. "RMc", the superbatsman Posted: November 20, 2011 at 01:09 PM (#3997815)
after all some women prefer plastic dolls to live men, right?

This reminds me of the last DH argument I had around here; somebody said that switching to a DH league was equivalent to one's spouse getting a sex change. "After all, she's the same person, right?"

Uh-huh. It's at this point you realize that you're not dealing with a serious or rational person. They're not arguing about the DH at all, but about some God-knows-what wound deep in their psyche, somehow triggered by a rule change in a sport, played by millionaires they will never meet.

Nuts.
   109. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 20, 2011 at 03:11 PM (#3997828)
The DH argument in baseball has a parallel in an old football debate about limited vs. unlimited substitution rules, or "one platoon" vs. "two platoon" football. Although few current fans realize this, prior to 1941, and again from 1952 through 1964, two platoon football was outlawed in the colleges. During that last period, there was an ongoing debate that's very similar in tone to the DH debate here. Here's just one example, in a Harvard Crimson editorial from the end of the 1954 season. In particular, consider the highlighted paragraph near the end, as it's an exact parallel of what Lisa's been saying about the DH.

Limiting The Game (December 2, 1954)

Last fall, after Princeton scored in the last two minutes to defeat Harvard by one touchdown, Princeton coach Charley Caldwell walked into the post game press conference and astounded the assembled reporters. "Now if you want to watch some really good football," he said, "you'll go out there and pump for the return of spring practice and two-platoon football.

One year later, on the eve of the post-season coaches' conferences, Caldwell's views seem as inappropriate and undeserved as on their first utterance. Despite his argument about improving the game and reducing injuries, one platoon, fall season football has proven its worth.

To the Ivy football coach who watches varsity crews practicing during the fall, the ban on spring football sessions undoubtedly seems maddening in its inconsistency. If crew can row through a full year, they argue, why should football not be a two season sport. It is a strong argument, for both are played under the same athletic codes by students from the same university. But the fault lies not in the sports themselves, but in the relative pressures involved. Football's burden stems from its own popularity--in a sense its restrictions are self-imposed.

For today's college football has been left a strange legacy. It has been set aside from the rest of the athletic program by an almost fanatic following on the part of undergraduates, alumni, and local fans. This difference is evidenced numerically by the 40,000 people who watched the Yale game, and the 10,000 who could not get tickets. Saturday's front pages are another indication--both the Boston and undergraduate papers treat the games with headlines equalled only by the resignation of a college president. Football, the game played between undergraduates has been caught up and dominated by something else: football, the focus point for a Saturday social event.

It was this emphasis on football and the resulting abuses which forced the spring practice ban in March, 1952. After two years it is apparent that one season football is a success. While spring practice does not represent the chief danger of big time football, it is one aspect of football's emphasis, and by removing it, the game itself is played down. For the use of spring practice too often implies a drive at professionalism, which is no problem in any other collegiate sport. It is unfortunate that football coach and player are denied something available to the crew teams, but it is a price that football must pay for its importance, interest, and subsequent gate receipts. When 50,000 people are willing to pay $5.00 a seat to watch a crew race, then it is time to end fall crew practice.

Voluntary spring practice has often been advanced by proponents of off-season workouts. Caldwell and other coaches have reiterated countless times that it keeps players in shape and reduces injuries. But recent studies have shown no noticeable increase in injuries among players deprived of spring practice. Few would contest the point that any player who will keep in shape over the summer after undergoing spring practice will also stay in shape over the summer without it. Moreover, spring practice would hardly be voluntary, as football players out for lacrosse, track or baseball would jeopardize their standing on the football team by not attending its spring workouts.

The case for the retention of one platoon football is considerably more clear cut. The scores of Harvard's Ivy League games for the two years under the ruling are the soundest argument for limited substitution. The biggest margin of victory is still the Crimson's 13-0 win over Yale in 1953, while the present season, in which Harvard lost to the University of Massachusetts and still beat Cornell and Princeton should convince anyone of the close competitive game which the one platoon rule has returned to football.

The proponents of two-platoons argue that it produced a better game and allowed many more boys to play, but close football is often a very fine substitute for professional football, particularly on the amateur level. Admittedly, there were many more boys who played under the old two-platoon rules, but perhaps the resultant specialist was not a football player in the complete sense of the word.

Ivy League and collegiate football have come a long way since 1952 when college athletics were married by scandals. Since then football has regained the respect of educators, as well as enthusiasm of the fans. Perhaps too it is a more frustrating brand of football for the perfectionist to coach. But college football is designed for undergraduates to play and watch, not for older men to teach.

Even after two years of de-emphasis, football is still dangerously susceptible to the combined pressures of bigness and popularity. This year is no time to slacken requirements. Even if the NCAA in its forthcoming meeting returns to two-platoon football, the Ivy colleges, now entering the threshold of legitimacy, should limit substitution, just as they should limit practice sessions.
   110. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 20, 2011 at 03:53 PM (#3997845)
each player has to take his turn. You don't get to skip out at what you aren't any good at


Right, everybody has to take his turn pitching, catching, and playing shortstop.
   111. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: November 20, 2011 at 04:20 PM (#3997854)
Right, everybody has to take his turn pitching, catching, and playing shortstop.

It would be a very interesting game if everyone had to play every position, i.e., each inning you rotate one spot defensively.
   112. asdf1234 Posted: November 20, 2011 at 04:53 PM (#3997870)
Uh-huh. It's at this point you realize that you're not dealing with a serious or rational person. They're not arguing about the DH at all, but about some God-knows-what wound deep in their psyche, somehow triggered by a rule change in a sport, played by millionaires they will never meet.

Nuts.


Not really. The issue the poster is raising (indelicately) is one of identity. If the NL became a DH league, it would lose a significant part of its identity in the eyes of most fans.

Debates over the DH are always goofy, Beatles-vs-Rolling Stones affairs. That said, if you'd rather have your taters than sacrifice bunts and the Kael-esque sense of aesthetic superiority that most NL fans enjoy, then more power to you.
   113. TerpNats Posted: November 20, 2011 at 05:10 PM (#3997881)
One wonders if Japanese baseball fans have a similar DH debate (the Pacific League uses it, the Central League doesn't, and interleague play was instituted a few years ago).

Good piece on one-platoon vs. two-platoon football, BTW. People forget that on those great Syracuse teams of Ben Schwarzwalder, stars such as Jim Brown and Ernie Davis played on both sides of the ball. And while colleges such as Marquette and the University of Detroit dropped football in the early '60s, the two-platoon rule probably led to George Washington U. ending its football program after the 1966 season.
   114. McCoy Posted: November 20, 2011 at 05:29 PM (#3997887)
If the NL became a DH league, it would lose a significant part of its identity in the eyes of most fans.

And yet the AL was somehow able to continue despite losing a significant part of its identity.
   115. Jim Wisinski Posted: November 20, 2011 at 05:46 PM (#3997897)
Jim W,
you are dead wrong - most of the REAL astros fans have left, and the rest will be leaving at the end of the year. what is left are all the groups and casual fans, as i've said a zillion times.


Uh-huh.
   116. McCoy Posted: November 20, 2011 at 05:59 PM (#3997902)
So then attendance next year will be what? 2,066,500?

Bold declaritive statements about the future are always amusing.
   117. Flynn Posted: November 20, 2011 at 06:00 PM (#3997904)
Ending two-platoon football and unlimited subs would end the scourge of 320 lbers in the game, which can only be a good thing.
   118. CrosbyBird Posted: November 20, 2011 at 06:40 PM (#3997932)
But if the argument against the DH is that they don't play defense, then why isn't the same argument used against non-pitcher PHs with regards to pitching? There's no logical consistency to the arguments.

The argument against the DH is that he doesn't play defense AND there is no consequence. A pinch-hitter or relief pitcher requires the original player to leave the game for good. It's a trade-off for not being a capable all-around player. The DH removes the cost for being unable to field a position competently (and for being unable to hit as a pitcher). The heart of the disagreement over the DH is whether that consequence matters to you, but it's perfectly logically consistent to care about it.

There are other arguments (the DH rule is kludgy and unattractive, the extra offense reduces the quality of the game, it's an extra starting position to pay for which favors wealthier teams) but the fundamental disagreement is almost always about whether or not there should be a cost for specialization.
   119. Morty Causa Posted: November 20, 2011 at 06:45 PM (#3997935)
Right, everybody has to take his turn pitching, catching, and playing shortstop.

It would be a very interesting game if everyone had to play every position, i.e., each inning you rotate one spot defensively.


I wish they would do stuff like this in spring training. And more. Just for the fun of it, and I bet the players would get a kick out of it, but also because it would stir up interest--give the press stuff to write about. And a spirit of experimentation and innovation would encourage improving the game. I bet a lot of pitchers would love to, say, play shortstop or centerfield. Spring training isn't very serious anyway; this would do much to make it a kid's game. Baseball is about staying a kid as an adult. (Football is about pretending you're an adult when you're a kid.) Baseball at the pro level needs to own up to this.
   120. Jim Wisinski Posted: November 20, 2011 at 06:55 PM (#3997941)
So then attendance next year will be what? 2,066,500?


I'm sure it'll drop some, the team was terrible and isn't likely to be significantly better next season. They may well be last in the league if the Marlins get a good boost from their new park since the Nationals and Pirates might go up some too. The people who are actually loyal to the team will still show up though and they'll get the people that go just to see baseball and the groups. Once the team is good again then everything will go back to normal. It's the reality of sports.
   121. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 20, 2011 at 07:00 PM (#3997944)
Ending two-platoon football and unlimited subs would end the scourge of 320 lbers in the game, which can only be a good thing.

I would absolutely love to see a return to one platoon college football, for all the reasons laid out in that 1954 Crimson editorial.

Just a few days ago, the University of Maryland decided to drop 8 sports from their intercollegiate program, involving hundreds of athletes, resulting in a total saving of between $3.5M and $5M.

All this while the total salaries paid to two football head coaches (Randy Edsall and Ralph Friedgen, who's still being paid after being fired) amounts to $4M. Seriously, this #### is just totally out of whack.
   122. Baldrick Posted: November 20, 2011 at 07:10 PM (#3997951)
I grew up in Seattle in the 80s and 90s, so of course my understanding of the DH is influenced by Edgar Martinez, who is my all-time favorite player. Maybe this means my opinion has no validity outside of my own experience. But here is my one comment anyways:

One side of this debate contains people making claims that the other form is not really baseball at all, is analogous to cheating on your spouse, is a total corruption, etc. It also contains people being totally reasonable. But are there any crazy statements from the 'pro-DH' crowd? I guess you could call 'the DH is inevitable for both leagues' a bit extreme. But is anyone even really supporting that? Or is it just a predictive claim?

I'm genuinely curious. I think it's an interesting circumstance.
   123. Random Transaction Generator Posted: November 20, 2011 at 07:41 PM (#3997968)
While I'll always cheer for the Blue Jays, I'm now slotting the Astros in as my default #2 team for whom to cheer.
I would love to seem them squeak into the playoffs in 2013 and watch as all the "Their dead to me!" anti-fans start cheering for them again, while avoiding any/all online indication of support.

I got the same fun out of watching all my "I'm never watching baseball/hockey!" friends start cheering for their favourite teams about 1 month into each season.
   124. McCoy Posted: November 20, 2011 at 08:12 PM (#3997985)
All this while the total salaries paid to two football head coaches (Randy Edsall and Ralph Friedgen, who's still being paid after being fired) amounts to $4M. Seriously, this #### is just totally out of whack.

And it wouldn't be so bad if Maryland football didn't suck so much.
   125. base ball chick Posted: November 20, 2011 at 08:58 PM (#3997996)
Fancy Pants Handle hanging at half-mast Posted: November 20, 2011 at 06:16 AM (#3997811)

I just find it interesting that BBC, of all people, is perfectly happy to treat AL fans as second class citizens. I mean, apparently we can't even get to seperate but equal...


- my dear man,
second class citizens? that is MY fault?
if i was powerful enough to have started all the DH nonsense in the first place, i would certainly have had the power to have stopped it before it could begin.
- if you WANT to like DH ball, help yourself. it doesn't make you a second class citizen, nor me to treat you like one.
- for goodness sakes, i have friends on this here board who like to watch all KINDS of things that, in my opinion, would be my idea of hellfire's torture to watch (say, for example, nekkid women doing various things....)

jim W,

you want to believe that no astros fan except for me can tell the difference between DH ball and baseball and cares enough about it to refuse to watch the astros play DH ball, help your self. you haven't talked to astros fans, you haven't read the letters I've gotten, you don't know how many people are refusing to re-up EXPENSIVE season tix. you want to think it ONLY has to do with the team sucking, like i said, help yourself. why you think i'm i liar i do not get - unless it is the usual man thing about how women don't have no mind to make up.

note that i have said over and over that people will indeed go to the stadium - best i can tell, MOST people who go to the stadium don't know anything about the game, don't CARE anything about the game and half the time, don't even know who is playing. they aren't even getting 10K people in the actual seats/game - paid attendance has to do with the corporate tix and you know it
   126. base ball chick Posted: November 20, 2011 at 09:00 PM (#3997999)
McCoy Posted: November 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM (#3997902)

So then attendance next year will be what? 2,066,500?

Bold declaritive statements about the future are always amusing.


- do you mean PAID attendance or actual butts in seats? tax deduction seats don't care what is happening on the field. they don't even care if every game is forfeit
   127. base ball chick Posted: November 20, 2011 at 09:05 PM (#3998000)
Random Transaction Generator Posted: November 20, 2011 at 02:41 PM (#3997968)

While I'll always cheer for the Blue Jays, I'm now slotting the Astros in as my default #2 team for whom to cheer.


- help your self. i couldn't get anyone to root for them when we were still in the NL

I would love to seem them squeak into the playoffs in 2013 and watch as all the "Their dead to me!" anti-fans start cheering for them again, while avoiding any/all online indication of support.

- well i can't speak for other people whose purpose in life is to cheer for whoever the winner is, but i swear it won't be ME cheering for ANY AL team. and you would prove lik HOW that all of the people like me are gutless liars, like HOW???? and no you can NOT use my refusal to cheer for C8bs as proof of anything except good sense.
   128. "RMc", the superbatsman Posted: November 20, 2011 at 09:05 PM (#3998001)
most of the REAL astros fans have left, and the rest will be leaving at the end of the year

"No true Astros fan would watch DH-ball!"
   129. jmp Posted: November 20, 2011 at 09:25 PM (#3998008)
why you think i'm i liar i do not get


You've shown in this thread that your hyperbole clouds the truth. You proclaim that you don't/won't watch a team that uses a DH, but later reveal that yes, you will watch the WS when teams use the DH (and not just your team, but other teams as well).

There's no particular reason to think that every interaction you've had with people who are upset about this represents what they will actually do. Many are venting, and will eventually root for the local team, because that's what lots of baseball fans do.

It's like when Billy Packer didn't believe college basketball ratings, because everyone he ever ran into in an airport or restaurant wanted to talk about college basketball. He couldn't quite grasp the notion that ice skating fans wouldn't go out of their way to interact with him.
   130. Shredder Posted: November 20, 2011 at 09:47 PM (#3998013)
The argument against the DH is that he doesn't play defense AND there is no consequence
No, that's AN argument, and perhaps it's YOUR argument, but that's not the argument that Lisa is making.

And count me in with the people who say that the crap about "it's your right to like something, even though doing so makes you a total ####### moron" is getting pretty old. Apparently it's the new "no offense, but...."
   131. vortex of dissipation Posted: November 20, 2011 at 10:11 PM (#3998018)
I'm a Reds fan, and have been since 1970. I live in the Seattle area, so I've also rooted for the Mariners as a distinct second option since their inception, but I'm first and foremost a Reds fan. I've attended every interleague game the Reds have ever played in Seattle, and rooted for Cincinnati. I think it's probably the fact that there is still a different identity between the AL and NL that allows me to reconcile rooting for two teams; I can't imagine rooting for two different EPL, NFL, or NHL teams.

Given that, I've been thinking exactly what it would take for me to stop rooting for the Reds. I honestly believe there's only one thing - the team would have to be involved in something like the Black Sox scandal, a team-wide throwing of games, especially World Series games. And that would cripple my faith in not just the Reds, but baseball as a whole. (And before anyone mentions Pete Rose, I hate his actions to the core of my soul, and feel that he blackened the name of my team. But he was just one person, and it certainly wasn't a team-wide scheme to throw games.)

Aside from that, I can't see anything that would cause me to lose my fandom. A Reds move to the AL? I'd hate it, because I'm a NL fan, and always have been, but I'd adjust. I prefer the NL game, but I don't hate the DH. In fact I like having one league use it and the other not, because it creates a tangible difference between the leagues, which is good. But I've lived in Seattle for all of Edgar's career, so how could I really hate the DH?

Relocation? That would also suck, but I've never actually been to Cincinnati. I'm sure that if I lived there and attended the games it would make a huge difference, but I've followed them from 2,000 miles away for 40 years. From a practical standpoint, it wouldn't affect me that much.

Bad owner? I'd dislike him/her, but it wouldn't make me abandon the team. I rooted for them in the latter years of Marge's ownership...

So basically, that's it. If my team violates the concept of honest play, I'm outta here. Otherwise, I'll be a fan for life.
   132. base ball chick Posted: November 20, 2011 at 10:16 PM (#3998023)
jmp

i never heard of billy packer before, sorry. if someone's who live is subject X and he never hears/talks about anything else, no wonder his thinking is skewed

- i am talking about ASTROS fans, you know, all of us who have been rooting for the team thru good times and bad, some even since the first year of the colt 45s - not whoever who happens to get the cable and notices that the local team is winning and wants to cheer for whatever sport that happens to be.

and shredder,

what makes you a total moron is your stupid statement that i think that your liking something i don't makes you a total moron. i don't care what you or anyone else likes. it's YOUR opinion. you think that i think that everyone on this planet who likes any sport/activity i don't is a "total moron"?

come off it.

we have a very deep, unbridgeable, fundamental disagreement. you can't change my mind and i can't change yours. the name caller around here is YOU, not me.
   133. Shredder Posted: November 20, 2011 at 10:29 PM (#3998025)
we have a very deep, unbridgeable, fundamental disagreement. you can't change my mind and i can't change yours. the name caller around here is YOU, not me.
Give me ####### break. What do you think people hear when you say "it's your right like something that I believe is so fundamentally wrong that I refuse to acknowledge its existence"? Its one thing say "feel free to like whatever you want", it's another to say "like whatever you want, even though what you like is stupid."
   134. Joe Kehoskie Posted: November 20, 2011 at 10:59 PM (#3998034)
I'm curious how many angry Astros fans are truly anti-DH and how many are simply angry that MLB strong-armed their team (again), adding further insult to prior MLB-related injuries like the roof during the World Series, the "home" games being moved to Milwaukee because of Hurricane Ike, etc.

As I've said several times, I don't like the way the Astros were steamrolled here, but it's hard for me to get my mind around the idea of people boycotting the team, supporting some other team, etc. Unless people have erroneously convinced themselves that Crane was the villain here, it seems like having your team get the shaft would be a reason to rally around the team rather than the opposite.
   135. Blastin Posted: November 20, 2011 at 11:04 PM (#3998035)
I'm just pleased I'm not the only one who is standing up not so much for the DH (which, really, is fine; I like it because I like Jim Thome and Edgar and Frank Thomas, but whatever), but for not being nastily (and this #### gets NASTY) dismissed just for being fans of AL teams.

The condescension from (some) NL fans is really hard to take sometimes. Telling me that what I love ISN'T REAL is ridiculous.

"I like this and don't like that for these reasons." Fine.

"I like this and that thing you like is bullshit and beneath what I like?" Nonsense. Can it, people. We're huge baseball fans, just like you.
   136. Blastin Posted: November 20, 2011 at 11:06 PM (#3998036)
And count me in with the people who say that the crap about "it's your right to like something, even though doing so makes you a total ####### moron" is getting pretty old. Apparently it's the new "no offense, but...."


Completely agreed. People have some extremely high horses about the DH.
   137. Blastin Posted: November 20, 2011 at 11:13 PM (#3998039)
Think of it this way. There are legitimate arguments to make for, say, veganism. (Not that I am making one, I love my pizza.) In fact, it has some of the same elements (so-called purity and the like). If you want to explain why this diet works for you, and why you might want to give it a try, fine.

But when you see someone enjoying a slice of pizza and you tell them they're not actually eating food and that what they're doing is stupid, give what they're doing derisive nicknames, you can't hide behind "well that's just my opinion." Fact is, you're being a jerk, regardless of the validity of your argument (because your tactics and tone have buried it).

And again, I happen to like my pizza, but my cousin's a vegan chef and makes good food. So, like the NL, I can SEE what you're saying. But my cousin doesn't look down on me for liking different things.

NL and AL fans have no need for mutual rancor. We like different types of the same game, and some of us (myself included) just like the whole damn thing.
   138. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 20, 2011 at 11:42 PM (#3998058)
I am nearly certain that Lisa would be on the other side of this argument if Houston had been awarded an AL franchise in 1961 instead of an NL franchise in 1962, and it was an NL franchise in DFW that was being moved to the AL in 2013.

And that's why it's just ridiculous that these things get so heated and personal. It's a freaking game.
   139. Something Other Posted: November 21, 2011 at 01:13 AM (#3998097)
Right, everybody has to take his turn pitching, catching, and playing shortstop.

It would be a very interesting game if everyone had to play every position, i.e., each inning you rotate one spot defensively.
It would be terrific if the sport had started out this way, but now? It's asking for a lot of hurt. In 2010 the Mets tried Daniel Murphy, a reasonably agile fellow, at 2B. And that was in the minors, with less at stake. Within five seconds he was injured and out for the season. In 2011, having learned their lesson, they tried it again. This time Murphy lasted a little longer before on a very similar play he was injured and again was lost for the rest of the season. Undaunted, the Mets seem happy to give this brilliant plan at least one more shot in 2012 because, I guess, you can never tear your ACL often enough.

I think it'd be a blast if baseball had started out this way. Then the game would have evolved to suit those rules. With current rosters, though? It'd look like one of those Bugs Bunny cartoons where the guys with the stretchers can't run fast enough to keep up with all the injuries. Maybe rugby, where everyone expects to visit the hospital after the game anyway?
   140. TerpNats Posted: November 21, 2011 at 01:57 AM (#3998118)
It would be a very interesting game if everyone had to play every position, i.e., each inning you rotate one spot defensively.
A la volleyball.

One obvious problem is that left-handed players would be at a severe disadvantage, having to play four innings at positions they aren't physically suited for given the nature of the game (second base, shortstop, third base, catcher). Eventually, baseball strategists would discover what innings it would be most advantageous (or least dangerous) to play them. Or, perhaps, baseball would alter the rotation rule so that any lefties would be restricted to the outfield, first base and pitcher in the rotation.

If Alexander Cartwright had stipulated some sort of position rotation among the rules in the mid-19th century, baseball history would be considerably different.
   141. PreservedFish Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:19 AM (#3998136)
I'm just pleased I'm not the only one who is standing up not so much for the DH (which, really, is fine; I like it because I like Jim Thome and Edgar and Frank Thomas, but whatever), but for not being nastily (and this #### gets NASTY) dismissed just for being fans of AL teams.


Couldn't agree more.

Dismissing the AL as "not baseball" is a real good way of outing one's self as a thoughtless d-bag.
   142. base ball chick Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:33 AM (#3998148)
Shredder Posted: November 20, 2011 at 05:29 PM (#3998025)

we have a very deep, unbridgeable, fundamental disagreement. you can't change my mind and i can't change yours. the name caller around here is YOU, not me.

Give me ####### break. What do you think people hear when you say "it's your right like something that I believe is so fundamentally wrong that I refuse to acknowledge its existence"?


- i hear stuff like this all the time from all the atheists/anti-christians here on this here board.
- and this is NOT what i'm saying

Its one thing say "feel free to like whatever you want", it's another to say "like whatever you want, even though what you like is stupid."

- that is correct, AND i said the first and not the second.

what is really pissing you off is that i said, and i believe, that DH ball is NOT baseball any more than softball is baseball. YOU believe that it IS real baseball, and nothing you can say or do will get me to agree with that. you wanna believe that, you wanna watch that, go right ahead. it doesn't make you "moron" it means you have different beliefs about what exactly constitutes baseball.

but just like with all religious disagreements, i will say - you are entitled to YOUR religious beliefs up to the point where you think that i have no right to exist as a follower of MY religious beliefs. meaning that when you take away my team by turning it into DH ball, don't screech when i refuse to watch it or agree that is is baseball.

and i gotta say, that at least in the DH ball part of the WS, the DH team sure does do a HECK of a lot of sac-bunting, so let's stop pretending this is a NL only tactic, shall we?
   143. Blastin Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:40 AM (#3998160)
i hear stuff like this all the time from all the atheists/anti-christians here on this here board.


And it's wrong when they do that (I'm an atheist myself but I have enough religious family members that I choose to leave you guys be so long as you leave me be).

But.. just because people are jerks to you sometimes doesn't mean you're not being one. People who dismiss your religious beliefs rudely are being jerks. Like you are right now. You know the old saying about "two wrongs."

And I do not care in the slightest if you watch your Astros in 2013. But don't look down on us for watching our AL teams. It's not up to you to decide what is or isn't baseball: that's not a matter of opinion. There is no such thing as a belief that the DH is "not baseball." There is a preference, or a resistance to it, buuut it's been baseball for decades (before it came to the AL). It's fine if you don't want to accept it or if you don't like it, but it just is.

But it's your right to not watch it, sure.
   144. base ball chick Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:42 AM (#3998164)
Joe Kehoskie Posted: November 20, 2011 at 05:59 PM (#3998034)

I'm curious how many angry Astros fans are truly anti-DH and how many are simply angry that MLB strong-armed their team (again), adding further insult to prior MLB-related injuries like the roof during the World Series, the "home" games being moved to Milwaukee because of Hurricane Ike, etc.


- real astros fans, not just whoever drops into the stadium to talk about golf games/wedding plans, etc?
- like i said, everyone i know/have talked to with 2 exceptions are truly anti-DH and are refusing to have anything whatsoever to do with the team again. including refusing to buy season tickets, subscribe to astros blogs/chron feeds, etc.
- this includes my mother, who says she stayed through a game while in labor, barely making it to the hospital. this includes her friends, 2 of whom have COMPLETE scorecards of every game since the Colt 45s started. this includes quite a few old time astros fans who have read my blog basically since i got started in june 04, one of whom said, and i quote - baseball in houston is dead. He's anotherr guy who has rooted for the team since Day 1.


As I've said several times, I don't like the way the Astros were steamrolled here, but it's hard for me to get my mind around the idea of people boycotting the team, supporting some other team, etc. Unless people have erroneously convinced themselves that Crane was the villain here, it seems like having your team get the shaft would be a reason to rally around the team rather than the opposite.

- crane is in fact just as much as villain as mclane and selig, let's not pretend otherwise. i hope the racist, war profiteeering SOB gets hit by a bus right along with selig.


- you guys all think i am a liar and gutless coward and don't mean a word i say and like any stupid pink hat will come running back the minute they start winning. and you think i'm only gonna get to wiggle out of it because this team isn't gonna win jack spit for decades
   145. base ball chick Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:51 AM (#3998177)
Blastin Posted: November 20, 2011 at 09:40 PM (#3998160)

But don't look down on us for watching our AL teams.

- i just can NOT get this clear: I DO NOT LOOK DOWN ON YOU FOR WATCHING DH BALL OR ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO WATCH. and to be honest here, there are a LOT more things that guys around here watch that i think are a LOT closer to "moronic" to watch than DH ball (say, the 2 grrrls and a cup video...)

like i keep saying, what you are maddest about is that i won't agree that DH ball is baseball. i am not mad at ALL that you prefer to watch it.

i AM mad, however, at those who insist that whatever kind of performance that is put out by my former team, going under the name of baseball, is something that i should watch and support simply because it calls itself "astros" and is played in the same city as my former team.
   146. base ball chick Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:54 AM (#3998179)
cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 20, 2011 at 06:42 PM (#3998058)

I am nearly certain that Lisa would be on the other side of this argument if Houston had been awarded an AL franchise in 1961 instead of an NL franchise in 1962, and it was an NL franchise in DFW that was being moved to the AL in 2013.


- why would i be on the other side of the argument? i'm not getting this. you think my mama would have raised me to be a DH ball fan? please. her home town is dallas - we would have been fans of the dallas team.

and if my mama had for some unknowable reason, raised me as a DH ball fan, why on EARTH would i care what happened to some NL franchise team?
   147. Blastin Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:55 AM (#3998180)
I don't care if you watch it. That's your business.



...but it's baseball. :)

Anyway, so long as you don't think we're any lesser than you.

There are others on the thread who've been more elitist about it. There's been some jerkiness around this issue and I think it'd be best if we didn't engage in that.
   148. Heinie Mantush (Krusty) Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:57 AM (#3998182)
1) I think of the DH as being in kind high fructose corn syrup or automatic transmissions. It just doesn't taste as good as sugar, and it's not as fun as a stick. But, you know, I won't turn down a CTS-V if it's mated to a six speed cvt.

2) I'll accept the DH when it inevitably comes to the NL, just the same as people accepted the 10" mound. Speaking of which, why isn't there more outcry for a 15" mound? I'm serious, btw. 15" worked for a century.

3) Conspiracy moment that I've brought up in other threads: I think the DH coming to the NL is just the latest step in MLB's continued footballization. Eventurally, there will be a fielding squad and a hitting squad. Starters will be expected to last 3-4 innings, and will just be a part of a pitching battery - a set of relievers masquerading as a staff. That game will still be baseball, but it will barely be recognizable.
   149. Blastin Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:03 AM (#3998192)
1) I think of the DH as being in kind high fructose corn syrup or automatic transmissions. It just doesn't taste as good as sugar, and it's not as fun as a stick. But, you know, I won't turn down a CTS-V if it's mated to a six speed cvt.


As we've had this discussion outside of this site, I will re-iterate what I said about automatic: I'm a city boy and I hate driving. Give me automatic. Heh.


But, yech, HFCS.
   150. billyjack Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:06 AM (#3998195)
I think Houston should stay in the NL.
I think Milwaukee should move to the AL Central.
I think KC should go to the AL West.
I love the DH.
I think Selig is an idiot.
I sympathize with Astros fans.
But I think it's weird that the Astros, who are directly to blame for the abomination that is "Astroturf", which athletes and fans were subjected to for 30 yrs, have fans that preach baseball purity... wtf...? Astroturf... destroyed athletes careers, knees (Andre Dawson, etc), turf toe, turned 3 hop singles past 2b-men into wall triples, bloop hits into triples after rf-ers charge in too much...
   151. billyjack Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:09 AM (#3998197)
...And half the freakin National League had Astroturf back in the day...!
   152. Avoid Running At All Times- S. Paige Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:13 AM (#3998200)
One of the problem I have with bbc's argument at this moment is that she claims the Astros were playing "real" baseball last year because they were in the NL. That wasn't real baseball.

The best version of baseball is the one played by very skilled and talented baseball teams, DH or no DH. Put another way, thank god when a baseball game is on television, I am not restricted by some weird dogma that requires I turn it off. If I did that, at the very least I wouldn't be able to see a player such as Evan Longoria or Jacoby Ellsbury or Robinson Cano or there are so many others (and in the NL too!), demonstrate his genius in the field.
   153. Blastin Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:22 AM (#3998213)
But I think it's weird that the Astros, who are directly to blame for the abomination that is "Astroturf", which athletes and fans were subjected to for 30 yrs, have fans that preach baseball purity... wtf...? Astroturf... destroyed athletes careers, knees (Andre Dawson, etc), turf toe, turned 3 hop singles past 2b-men into wall triples, bloop hits into triples after rf-ers charge in too much..


Heh. It's true. I think it's all baseball, but the "this is NOT baseball" thing doesn't hold much water especially when this is true.

I mean, we all agree that playing games at the Trop is terrible to this day.
   154. Joe Kehoskie Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:43 AM (#3998244)
crane is in fact just as much as villain as mclane and selig, let's not pretend otherwise.

If Crane was part of some plot all along to realign the Astros out of the N.L., then I might agree. But it's hard to imagine he wanted this. Why would he want more games on the West Coast (esp. with the new RSN), a potentially smaller TV territory, a tougher path to the playoffs (due to NYY and BOS in A.L.), the added expense of the DH, etc.?

As far as I can tell, Crane's choices were to play a rigged game of chicken with MLB or to walk away. If he did the latter, he would have been a local hero in Houston for a while, but by Opening Day most people would have forgotten his name. And then MLB would have leveraged the next buyer(s) into moving, until someone eventually agreed to it.

i hope the racist, war profiteeering SOB gets hit by a bus right along with selig.

The "racist" stuff is tricky business. At first glance, the EEOC business seemed troubling, but the Astros sale was pending for six months and I never saw a single quote from anyone who confirmed such allegations. The "war profiteering" allegations seemed even weaker. It's been a while since I read about that, but I believe the DOJ issued a 100- or 150-page indictment in which Crane's name appeared zero times. As I recall, two guys in some office in the Middle East were prosecuted and that was it.

Again, I know the Astros/A.L. wound is fresh. I don't know Crane and there aren't many people in big business who could be mistaken for Mr. Rogers, but it seems like most of the "character" stuff originated with MLB to help jam realignment through. As I've said several times, a person would have to suspend disbelief to believe Crane had unapprovable character in August but suddenly had approvable character in November.
   155. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:44 AM (#3998246)
But I think it's weird that the Astros, who are directly to blame for the abomination that is "Astroturf", which athletes and fans were subjected to for 30 yrs, have fans that preach baseball purity... wtf...? Astroturf... destroyed athletes careers, knees (Andre Dawson, etc), turf toe, turned 3 hop singles past 2b-men into wall triples, bloop hits into triples after rf-ers charge in too much..

Much as I hate steroids, if all players were using steroids without any long range health problems, I'd much rather watch a game under those conditions than a game on ####### Astroturf. An Astroturf bounce is about as natural as Donald Trump's hair.
   156. base ball chick Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:09 AM (#3998278)
hey don't go blaming ME for that stupid turf just because engineers had no idea how to make a retractable roof BITGOD. and seeing as how the astros had the only domed stadium, don't blame US for open field stadiums installing turf.

i will NOT accept the DH if/when it comes to the NL, which i am sure is not real too far off. agree with krusty about the footballization coming and coming within the next 10 years or so. football makes more money and baseball could do a lot better with the gamblers if it got more footbaly. nake it nice and chopped up for the TV with lots of instant replays, too. put in prostitutes jumping around on the dugouts and that should help a lot too!!!!!

i quit watching MusicTV when they stopped playing music and i will stop watching MLB when they stop playing baseball. sometimes, times change and you don't like what happens and you have to find something else to do with your time.

shrug

joe,

crane wanted a ML team to pump up his penis and the 50 mill a year. simple as that. he has hired a BASKETBALL person to run the baseball team - you think he has ANY intention of winning? you think he cares even a teensy bit??

the racism stuff is all true and an incredible number of files requested by the EEOC were destroyed. you didn't get quotes because the houston media played like 3 monkeys and the national media didn't give 2 spits. and don't tell me crane was shocked SHOCKED to find out his top guys were engaged in war profiteering. remember, this is a guy who MLB didn't want anything to do with when the cubs and rangers were for sale. suddenly he's just peachy?

please

selig knew crane doesn't have any money or any backing and isn't gonna spend any money on the team - one good thing. a cheap terrible team is a wonderful thing - holds down salaries so that the owners get more. and so he didn't have to do any persuading to get crane to come and get his giant profits while screwing the astros fans. what does he care about astros fans?

doesn't bother HIM one bit to destroy baseball in houston. like i keep saying, you don't NEED fans to make a huge profit. see jeffrey loria.
   157. Lassus Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:10 AM (#3998280)
It would be a very interesting game if everyone had to play every position, i.e., each inning you rotate one spot defensively.

I strongly support this plan. No, seriously.
   158. Blastin Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:18 AM (#3998286)
put in prostitutes jumping around on the dugouts and that should help a lot too!!!!!


I see no need for cheerleaders in baseball, but I also see no need to demean them.
   159. Avoid Running At All Times- S. Paige Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:22 AM (#3998290)
put in prostitutes jumping around on the dugouts and that should help a lot too!!!!!


A Phillie Phanatic blow job has got to be quite an experience.
   160. Joe Kehoskie Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:45 AM (#3998310)
he has hired a BASKETBALL person to run the baseball team - you think he has ANY intention of winning? you think he cares even a teensy bit??

I was surprised by George Postolos' involvement in the Crane deal because I had been reading that he wanted to buy an NBA team. But he seems to be respected in the sports business, and it's unclear how much he'll be involved in actual baseball operations.

As for Crane's desire to win, I guess it's possible he just wants to line his pockets, but it's hard to imagine he wants to walk around Houston as the owner of a perennial last-place team. I might believe it if he was an absentee owner who lived 1,000 miles away, but that's not the case. It's not like winning and making money are mutually exclusive. Houston is a big market and MMP is a good ballpark.

the racism stuff is all true and an incredible number of files requested by the EEOC were destroyed. you didn't get quotes because the houston media played like 3 monkeys and the national media didn't give 2 spits.

These days, with blogs and Twitter, you don't need the national media or even the local media, but I didn't see anyone, anywhere, publish a firsthand account. Not even the Houston Press ran anything. Again, I don't know Crane, but it's weak sauce for the media to talk about "allegations" for months and months without any corroboration. Either they're true or untrue.

remember, this is a guy who MLB didn't want anything to do with when the cubs and rangers were for sale. suddenly he's just peachy?

Knowing how MLB works, I wouldn't be surprised if McLane bad-mouthed Crane during the Cubs and Rangers sales just to keep him in the mix to buy the Astros, which McLane obviously had become desperate to sell. I suspect Uncle D. is a little more cutthroat than he likes to let on.
   161. base ball chick Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:12 AM (#3998316)
joe

according to crane, he's going to be the right hand man.

i can't see why drayton wanted to keep crane around when he had so many other bidders - unless he knew that crane would agreee to pay non-existant money and the others wouldn't

you can't get firsthand accounts when all the files have been shredded
   162. Shredder Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:28 AM (#3998318)
I DO NOT LOOK DOWN ON YOU FOR WATCHING DH BALL
I don't think you realize the inherent contradiction in this statement. Just calling it "DH ball" is incredibly condescending. It's like commenting on someone's taste in music and saying "I don't care if you choose to listen to dogsh*t". It's insulting, whether you know you're doing it or not.
   163. Joe Kehoskie Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:38 AM (#3998320)
according to crane, he's going to be the right hand man.

Crane said Postolos would be CEO. Most or all teams have a CEO above the GM, but they don't typically micromanage the bb ops. I guess we'll have to wait and see what kind of hierarchy Crane & Co. put in place.

you can't get firsthand accounts when all the files have been shredded

Sure you can. Unless all of the people involved have died or moved far from Houston, it would have been easy for people to come forward. But I didn't see a single quote, named or unnamed.
   164. Blastin Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:43 AM (#3998322)
I don't think you realize the inherent contradiction in this statement. Just calling it "DH ball" is incredibly condescending. It's like commenting on someone's taste in music and saying "I don't care if you choose to listen to dogsh*t". It's insulting, whether you know you're doing it or not.


Ding ding ding.
   165. McCoy Posted: November 21, 2011 at 07:42 AM (#3998332)
Not that there is anything wrong with that.
   166. bumpis hound Posted: November 21, 2011 at 07:49 AM (#3998333)
Dismissing the AL as "not baseball" is a real good way of outing one's self as a thoughtless d-bag.

Sure glad someone decided to claim the high ground. Just be sure to shake it off when yr done pissing on those who don't buy into yr BS wholesale.

Look, there's a fundamental misapprehension going on here. Wild card, steroids, AstroTurf, et al are matters of the *tenor* of the game. Manners of expression, etc. The DH is a matter of changing the *essence* of the game. It degrades what is a fundamental balance in the way the game is conducted. Sorry if you can't see that, AL Fan, but that's on you, not me, or anyone else who doesn't want to shrug away a beautiful thing getting degraded.

I mean, it's Stockholm Syndrome for real. The most vituperative people here--the ones spewing the most invective, the most "sorry you must not have heard me GET OUT OF MY WAY, only a d-bag wouldnt buy into my brilliant little worldview" types--are the DH apologists. As far a i can tell, these discussions only erupt when the latest round of "why dont these idiot NL fans finally buy into the DH" sentiments pop up...which is all too often nowadays. I am firm in my stance that the DH is an aberration--if not abomination--but you know what? I really don't care if it's there--it's nice having variety & contrast. Just leave it there--no expansion into the NL. The notion that the DH is a type of "progress" or "efficiency" is odious, and I resent those who somehow think to state otherwise is somehow not to be allowed, especially in such a notorious den of deep thinkers as to be found around here.
   167. Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: November 21, 2011 at 11:45 AM (#3998342)
I've come to like Lisa, a lot, over the years, despite comments like this:

there are a LOT more things that guys around here watch that i think are a LOT closer to "moronic" to watch than DH ball (say, the 2 grrrls and a cup video...)

Lisa, this trotting out "men are filthy animals" is your "nuclear option". It's wrong of you to do that. You really should stop it, because it's a gross exaggeration, and in most cases regarding people here, I would bet, not true. All it is is a "sleight of hand" designed to distract from the weakness of your argument. Maybe you have a better argument than the one you're making. Find it, because this other nonsense, these drawing ridiculous parallels that serve no other purpose than to shame people without them deserving to be shamed, is beneath you.
   168. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: November 21, 2011 at 12:14 PM (#3998345)
Belated congratulations to the 2005 Astros, champions of baseball.

A Phillie Phanatic blow job has got to be quite an experience.

Once you go green, you never feel clean.
   169. Blastin Posted: November 21, 2011 at 12:23 PM (#3998348)
The argument here isn't really between NL and AL baseball. (I think that's pure opinion, and that this "purity" stuff is gross.)

The argument we're having, those of us who support AL teams, is whether or not we deserve to be derided for being fans of a league that has been deemed lesser than the other. As was said above, calling it anything other than baseball is condescending and nasty, and uncalled for.

Speaking only for myself, I can say: I have no reason to want you guys to prefer the AL. I want you guys not to be dicks about your preference.

Find it, because this other nonsense, these drawing ridiculous parallels that serve no other purpose than to shame people without them deserving to be shamed, is beneath you.


Along with the cheerleaders = prostitutes stuff, it's all just a distraction. Lisa, saying "DH ball" is a condescending thing to do. And that's all I want acknowledged.
   170. "RMc", the superbatsman Posted: November 21, 2011 at 01:22 PM (#3998365)
I mean, it's Stockholm Syndrome for real. The most vituperative people here--the ones spewing the most invective, the most "sorry you must not have heard me GET OUT OF MY WAY, only a d-bag wouldnt buy into my brilliant little worldview" types--are the DH apologists.

First, the Holocaust apologists, now the DH apologists. Where will it end?!

The most "invective" -- really the only invective in this conversation -- is coming from the anti-DH types. To them, baseball is some kind of freakin' religion, and they are priests dedicated to preserving the game's "purity" -- never mind that baseball stopped being "pure" the moment the 1869 Cincinnati Red Stockings cashed their first paychecks.

I've been a Tigers fan all my life, and I started following the game just when the DH was introduced. Therefore, I root for the AL in the WS, and tend to prefer the DH game. But I'm certainly no "apologist"; I like NL ball, too, and if the DH went away, that would be fine with me. I like the fact that the leagues are different, and it would be a shame if the NL was strong-armed into taking the DH.

But, geez. It's still baseball, people. Other people aren't stupid because they prefer a slightly different version of the greatest game ever conceived by man. It's still baseball. And if you can't handle that, well, there's plenty of other sports you can watch. Take your BS holy wars somewhere else.
   171. karlmagnus Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:22 PM (#3998376)
Bbc, you should try cricket, you really should. No DH there, indeed no substitutions at all. But don't get seduced by the 20-20 rubbish, real sports take 5 days to play and quite often end in a draw.

For me as a Red Sox supporter, the stats and the business shenanigans are more fun in baseball but cricket, the game I grew up with, is more aesthetically pleasing. Ask Phil Coorey if you don't believe me.
   172. Benji Gil Gamesh VII - The Opt-Out Awakens Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:35 PM (#3998385)
It's like commenting on someone's taste in music and saying "I don't care if you choose to listen to dogsh*t
Actually, it's most similar to dismissing someone's preferred genre or band with any variation of "That's not music" rather than just saying that you don't like it, or prefer something else. And yes it's implicitly insulting.
   173. Avoid Running At All Times- S. Paige Posted: November 21, 2011 at 02:44 PM (#3998393)
AL player Don Mattingly was 50% ballplayer, 50% b.s..
   174. CrosbyBird Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:32 PM (#3998434)
No, that's AN argument, and perhaps it's YOUR argument, but that's not the argument that Lisa is making.

Fair enough. I can only make an argument for myself, not for other people.

I want to be clear. I think that the DH is a blight on baseball. It's an ugly rule that "solves" a problem that doesn't exist. I question the aesthetic sense of fans who claim to prefer it. I don't really see a polite way to tell someone that you think a particular thing that they favor is repugnant to you.

Outside of teasing, I wouldn't say DH-baseball isn't baseball, but I would absolutely say that it's not as good as baseball without the DH. I'm not in favor of putting DH-fans into internment camps or taking their children away. I don't think they are stupid fans or bad people. I just think they have bad taste.

Is that offensive?

i hear stuff like this all the time from all the atheists/anti-christians here on this here board.

Religion is an entirely different subject. There's actually a right answer to the religion question even if it is unknowable. (I don't claim to have the true answer, but merely the best approximation available to us based on the evidence.)

There are aesthetic arguments that I could make in opposition to religion, but those are incredibly low on the list. For the DH, there's nothing but aesthetic arguments.
   175. Shredder Posted: November 21, 2011 at 03:43 PM (#3998441)
I don't really see a polite way to tell someone that you think a particular thing that they favor is repugnant to you.
Well, at the risk of offending you (and this is hyperbole), I question the sanity of someone who finds a rule in a sport which creates no physical or emotional harm to someone "repugnant". It's a game.

I suppose any indication of preference is implicitly an indication of rejection of something else. That's fine. I've been through these kind of arguments with regard to music a thousand times. But there's a difference between "live and let live" and "I'll live, and you can live that filthy excuse of a rotten, wasted life you've got going."
   176. Ron J Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:02 PM (#3998458)
#112 The difference in sac bunting is almost totally down to the pitchers. Take last year. There were 1162 sacs in the NL and 534 in the AL. Of those 608 in the NL were by pitchers and 28 in the AL were by pitchers. That leaves 506 in the AL (5 by DHs) , 554 in the NL. More teams in the NL, more position player AB in the AL.

Excluding DH and pitchers, AL position players bunt (very) slightly more than NL position players but you'd never notice the difference. The manager has far more influence on this question than the league.
   177. Benji Gil Gamesh VII - The Opt-Out Awakens Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:32 PM (#3998500)
Outside of teasing, I wouldn't say DH-baseball isn't baseball, but I would absolutely say that it's not as good as baseball without the DH. I'm not in favor of putting DH-fans into internment camps or taking their children away. I don't think they are stupid fans or bad people. I just think they have bad taste.

Is that offensive?
No, it's just wrong. :)
   178. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:44 PM (#3998512)
I'm not in favor of putting DH-fans into internment camps or taking their children away. I don't think they are stupid fans or bad people. I just think they have bad taste.

I'm not quite so forgiving when it comes to the inventors of Astroturf: I'd lock them all up and throw away the keys, and make them eat their own invention three times a day.
   179. oscar madisox Posted: November 21, 2011 at 04:53 PM (#3998523)
Sorry it has taken so long to weigh in—I've been sick for a few days and just getting back into the swing of things.

I'm an Astros fan and have lived through all the tragedies (Wilson, Richard, Thon, etc.) and the playoff disappointments from the bullpen meltdowns in the 1980s to the offensive droughts of the late 1990s-2000s. I am a "real fan." I don't like the switch to the AL any more than Lisa does, but the more I think about it I just can't disavow myself from this team. I have too much invested—more than 40 years of fandom—to just give it up because they'll no longer be in the National League. And believe me, resistance to change is a strong family trait. I don't like the DH and I despise interleague play and having that every day is a travesty. But I'll get over it, and I think most fans will too.
   180. Ron J Posted: November 21, 2011 at 05:14 PM (#3998560)
I'm old enough to remember the adoption of the DH. I can remember some of the truly dumb arguments that were put forward in the early days (If there's one thing that reasonably clear it's that 3 decades of arguments haven't changed anybody's mind. They have a least fine tuned the discussion)

A personal favorite of mine was how the Orioles would be disadvantaged because Jim Palmer wouldn't get to bat anymore. You see he was such a fine athlete (for some reason his prowess at ping pong always came up) that people simply assumed he was a good hitter.
   181. CrosbyBird Posted: November 21, 2011 at 10:42 PM (#3998975)
Well, at the risk of offending you (and this is hyperbole), I question the sanity of someone who finds a rule in a sport which creates no physical or emotional harm to someone "repugnant". It's a game.

Of course, but it's a game we all take fairly seriously.

Perhaps repugnant is too strong a word. I dislike the DH about as much as I can dislike a rule in a sport that isn't enough of a problem to make me consider not watching the games. If you gave me the option to either eliminate the DH or eliminate interleague play, I would eliminate the DH without blinking, and I also really dislike interleague play.

How sanity-questioning an issue could it be for anyone who isn't taking as extreme a position as refusing to watch the sport any more?

I suppose any indication of preference is implicitly an indication of rejection of something else. That's fine. I've been through these kind of arguments with regard to music a thousand times. But there's a difference between "live and let live" and "I'll live, and you can live that filthy excuse of a rotten, wasted life you've got going."

It's not like I go out of my way to assault DH-fans. If the discussion comes up, I'll voice my opinion, but that's about it.

I think music is a great analogy. I'll listen to the music I like, and you'll listen to the music you like. If my favorite radio station is about to change from my music to your music, I reserve the right to complain about the change. If a guy says that it's not such a big deal, because after all, music is still music, I think he's the one with the problem, not me.
   182. Shredder Posted: November 21, 2011 at 10:53 PM (#3998981)
If my favorite radio station is about to change from my music to your music, I reserve the right to complain about the change. If a guy says that it's not such a big deal, because after all, music is still music, I think he's the one with the problem, not me.
Presumably people don't have the same emotional attachment to a radio station that they have to a baseball team. Hitting a different pre-set button isn't quite the same as choosing to no longer root for a team into which you've invested 10, 20, 30+ years.
   183. McCoy Posted: November 21, 2011 at 10:59 PM (#3998987)
It's more like your favorite "alternative" radio station decides to play a Hootie song once every couple of hours more than your favorite radio station changing formats completely.
   184. Monty Posted: November 21, 2011 at 11:24 PM (#3999003)
Presumably people don't have the same emotional attachment to a radio station that they have to a baseball team. Hitting a different pre-set button isn't quite the same as choosing to no longer root for a team into which you've invested 10, 20, 30+ years.


I spent the weekend in a city where I haven't lived for almost twenty years. I was quite pleased to discover that my old favorite radio station still played the same songs.

Then I realized how weird that was. They either switched to an oldies format at some point or just froze their playlist in 1993 and never updated it.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
cardsfanboy
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogUS-based pro sports leagues monitoring coronavirus outbreak
(4097 - 11:18pm, Apr 03)
Last: Kiko Sakata

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread 2020
(2025 - 11:07pm, Apr 03)
Last: If on a winter's night a traveling violation

NewsblogBaseball Question of the Day: What’s your favorite baseball movie?
(45 - 10:58pm, Apr 03)
Last: Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66)

NewsblogAn Activist and a Bookworm, Sean Doolittle Is the Conscience of Baseball
(18 - 10:57pm, Apr 03)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogAJ Reed Announces Retirement
(1 - 10:47pm, Apr 03)
Last: Ziggy is done with Dominican discotheques

NewsblogMLB reportedly discussing a 100-game season that would include a neutral-site World Series at Dodger
(32 - 9:12pm, Apr 03)
Last: Booey

NewsblogTom Brady has arrived in Tampa Bay, moving into Derek Jeter’s mansion
(21 - 9:10pm, Apr 03)
Last: Ziggy is done with Dominican discotheques

NewsblogBryce Harper, wife Kayla donate $500,000 to coronavirus relief
(16 - 9:04pm, Apr 03)
Last: SoSH U at work

NewsblogTime for the gym: JLo and ARod get a private workout sesh in at a Miami fitness club
(8 - 8:48pm, Apr 03)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

Hall of Merit2021 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(202 - 7:08pm, Apr 03)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Sox TherapyOpening Day Memories
(8 - 6:12pm, Apr 03)
Last: Jose Is Absurdly Chatty

NewsblogHow the Seattle Mariners’ Lineup Dynasty Was Assembled
(1 - 5:54pm, Apr 03)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogPosnanski: Baseball 100 Rules
(1202 - 4:42pm, Apr 03)
Last: gef, talking mongoose & vexatious litigant

NewsblogBaseball Question of the Day: What’s your favorite piece of memorabilia?
(61 - 12:53pm, Apr 03)
Last: gef, talking mongoose & vexatious litigant

NewsblogAJ Hinch, Jeff Luhnow suspensions fulfilled in 2020 even if MLB season canceled
(2 - 12:22pm, Apr 03)
Last: Mayor Blomberg

Page rendered in 0.7650 seconds
46 querie(s) executed