National League or American League?

[DooDooBird]

which do you prefer?

i find the NL to be more interesting. you know, managers actually have to make decisions regarding the no 9. spot in the lineup late in the game. and there's always more interesting team matchups in this league.

the AL is just too bland. too much bad defense. not enough strategy for my liking.

[bigmike]

The AL is not a worse defensive league than the NL.

[Scott Weber]

The AL is a better defensive league because they can DH their poor fielders. They're stuck playing the field in the NL - guys like Adam Dunn shouldn't be in the field.

[bigmike]

Backing up Scott's claim, here's a look at fielding (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pGshF__k8q9duTZ0jOESyMg), by total UZR which is in runs, from 2008. Bolded numbers on the right are the sums for each league. NL = -13 runs fielding as a league. AL = +12.

Add in the DH, the AL has the better offense. No wonder the AL is a superior league.

[J.C.]

NL. Biased because my team plays in the league, but I also like the added strategy.

[acfrue]

NL. Biased because my team plays in the league, but I also like the added strategy.

Pretty much exactly what I was going to say. I'm biased and I like strategy.

[heyxnightmarex]

NL. Biased because my team plays in the league, but I also like the added strategy.

this

[QuikTrig]

NL because of my team. and just the teams in general. i feel like the NL are the ugly girls at schools that end up really pretty, while the AL are the plastics that end up a lot less pretty without makeup. wow, that may be the gayest comparison i've ever made and i will probably delete it within the hour. :mellow:

[fluke182]

NL because of my team. and just the teams in general. i feel like the NL are the ugly girls at schools that end up really pretty, while the AL are the plastics that end up a lot less pretty without makeup. wow, that may be the gayest comparison i've ever made and i will probably delete it within the hour. :mellow:
Quoted for eternity.

Also, AL because they are filled with more interesting teams. Even the crappy teams are full of intrigue - Baltimore has a ton of interesting youngsters, Toronto could be good if a lot of things go their way, the Royals have Butler, Gordon, and Hochevar looking to take the leap, the Mariners are my favorite team, the Rangers have a ton of awesome catchers and a really interesting offense, the A's have 300k interesting pitchers plus one of the best pure hitters in the game.

The NL's bad teams are just not that interesting. The NL West teams are equally uninteresting and the Pirates and Reds are going to be abysmal.

I do have a weird fascination with the NL East though, even to the point where I think the Nationals could be sneaky good offensively. If they can find out some way to play all of their OF/1B position players - which they can't - they would be fantastic. Dukes, Milledge, Dunn, Johnson, and Willingham are all very solid, plus Kearns and Wily Mo Pena are decent bats off the bench, I see Ryan Zimmerman having a really nice year, and Cristian Guzman is pretty quality. Wow. I can't believe I'm starting to coerce myself into thinking the Nationals may be good offensively. Too bad their pitching is amazingly terrible.

[DooDooBird]

it just seems like NL has better and more interesting matchups/rivalries than the AL. Braves/Mets, Mets/Phillies, Cubs/Cards, Dodgers/Giants, etc... for the most part, these games usually turn out interesting and are meaningful as far as the fan base is concerned.

the AL has what? rivalries that consist of the Yanks and BoSox. every now and then you can throw the Rays in the mix. yeah, that's shitty.

i will agree on one thing mentioned earlier though... the Pirates and the Reds make the NL look bad. i just dont understand how a franchise (pirates) can be so bad for so long! get some DECENT fucking players and you should be able to at least stay above .500!

[Scott Weber]

it just seems like NL has better and more interesting matchups/rivalries than the AL. Braves/Mets, Mets/Phillies, Cubs/Cards, Dodgers/Giants, etc... for the most part, these games usually turn out interesting and are meaningful as far as the fan base is concerned.

the AL has what? rivalries that consist of the Yanks and BoSox. every now and then you can throw the Rays in the mix. yeah, that's shitty.

i will agree on one thing mentioned earlier though... the Pirates and the Reds make the NL look bad. i just dont understand how a franchise (pirates) can be so bad for so long! get some DECENT fucking players and you should be able to at least stay above .500!
....yeah, you don't know much about AL baseball do you?

[uchiha]

While my team plays in the NL, if there were two games on TV, each from a different league.. I'd probably watch the AL game because I feel like I am always watching NL teams play. I am intrigued by teams that I rarely get a chance to see, which doesn't consist of the six or so teams that they constantly televise games for.

[Broken Parachute]

NL. Biased because my team plays in the league, but I also like the added strategy.This is my answer.

....yeah, you don't know much about AL baseball do you?He doesn't know much about baseball in general I'd be willing to bet.

[wesgemm08]

AL... though in the NL you'll get to see Daniel Cabrera continue his fantastic hitting numbers. (0-14 14 K's)

[uchiha]

AL... though in the NL you'll get to see Daniel Cabrera continue his fantastic hitting numbers. (0-14 14 K's)

lol wow, even I might be able to manage a ground out in 14 at bats

[Spicoli hey bud]

Yeah but the NL has the NL West.

[Flags of Dawn]

guys, all you need to do is get decent players and you can stay above .500. I'm going to email this strategy to all the front offices in baseball and start the bidding at 100k a year.

[kshtoinks12]

AL, not really interested in watching pitchers hit.

[DooDooBird]

....yeah, you don't know much about AL baseball do you?

i know plenty about it. i just don't like it as much as the NL. i'm sorry that bothers you.

do i care about the AL East as much as ESPN? no.
do i really give a shit about the White Sox and Twins battling it out for the AL Central? no.
is the AL West all that much better than the NL West? no.

i don't hate the AL... the teams just don't interest me. the matchups aren't intriguing. the DH makes the game boring.

maybe I'm a little biased because my favorite players growing up usually represented the NL... Tony Gwynn, Fred McGriff, Jeff Bagwell, Greg Maddux, Ozzie Smith, Ryne Sandburg

except for Griffey, Thomas, and Ripken i really didn't have any favorites from the AL

[Scott Weber]

i know plenty about it. i just don't like it as much as the NL. i'm sorry that bothers you.

do i care about the AL East as much as ESPN? no.
do i really give a shit about the White Sox and Twins battling it out for the AL Central? no.
is the AL West all that much better than the NL West? no.

i don't hate the AL... the teams just don't interest me. the matchups aren't intriguing. the DH makes the game boring.

maybe I'm a little biased because my favorite players growing up usually represented the NL... Tony Gwynn, Fred McGriff, Jeff Bagwell, Greg Maddux, Ozzie Smith, Ryne Sandburg

except for Griffey, Thomas, and Ripken i really didn't have any favorites from the AL
So....you're biased. Got it.

[rcrook]

how can you not care about the al east?

[Scott Weber]

I can appreciate the added strategy of the pitcher hitting the NL, but I don't find pinch hitting and double switches to be even remotely advanced strategic decisions....and watching pitchers hit is usually pretty pathetic and hard to watch. I don't really prefer one league over the other, though I do find AL baseball to be a lot less sloppy.

[rcrook]

I feel all the double switches and what not makes national league games longer than al games.

[acfrue]

I can appreciate the added strategy of the pitcher hitting the NL, but I don't find pinch hitting and double switches to be even remotely advanced strategic decisions....and watching pitchers hit is usually pretty pathetic and hard to watch. I don't really prefer one league over the other, though I do find AL baseball to be a lot less sloppy.

I agree that pitchers hitting is usually pathetic, but I love it when Zambrano comes to the plate, he always tries to swing for the fences. Micah Owings is pretty interesting to watch at the plate too.

[DooDooBird]

So....you're biased. Got it.

so what if I am? i have my reasons. why are you getting all pissy about it? isn't everyone biased? i didn't start this thread to argue with the moderator... i just wanted to see which league people preferred and why.

i like both leagues... but given a choice between watching an NL game or an AL game... i'll take an NL game. or an interleague game in a NL ballpark.

[bigmike]

No, everyone is not biased. Just the shitty fans are.

[zubinmoosa]

Al

[QuikTrig]

I agree that pitchers hitting is usually pathetic, but I love it when Zambrano comes to the plate, he always tries to swing for the fences. Micah Owings is pretty interesting to watch at the plate too.

pitchers homerun derby at the all-star game, ftw.

imagine randy johnson vs brett myers, swinging for the fences. it'd be so entertaining.

[CubbyNick42]

I can appreciate the added strategy of the pitcher hitting the NL, but I don't find pinch hitting and double switches to be even remotely advanced strategic decisions....and watching pitchers hit is usually pretty pathetic and hard to watch. I don't really prefer one league over the other, though I do find AL baseball to be a lot less sloppy.
In George Will's Men At Work, Tony LaRussa makes a pretty solid case that the AL is actually the more strategically-advanced league because, as a manager, you have to be so much more judicious as to when you make your moves. Most elements of strategy in the NL are predicated around that pitcher's slot in the batting order, so in effect, you have a reminder built into the lineup that often nudges a manager into making a move.

That being said, I just don't like the designated hitter. The nine guys in the lineup should be the same nine guys in the field. Just because pitchers are generally bad at hitting shouldn't excuse them from the task.

[bigmike]

Jim Leyland has also said that the NL is the easier league in which to manage. That "everyone knows when to bunt, double switch, pinch hit" and what not.

Also, I just want to see the best players possible doing their tasks. I want to see the best hitters available hit, the best fielders field, and the best pitchers pitch. The DH gives me that.

[Scott Weber]

so what if I am? i have my reasons. why are you getting all pissy about it? isn't everyone biased? i didn't start this thread to argue with the moderator... i just wanted to see which league people preferred and why.

i like both leagues... but given a choice between watching an NL game or an AL game... i'll take an NL game. or an interleague game in a NL ballpark.
Me being a mod doesn't have anything to do with it. I just would never say "I don't care about this division" or anything like that. I'm not biased like that.

[ForlrnPerplxity]

In George Will's Men At Work, Tony LaRussa makes a pretty solid case that the AL is actually the more strategically-advanced league because, as a manager, you have to be so much more judicious as to when you make your moves. Most elements of strategy in the NL are predicated around that pitcher's slot in the batting order, so in effect, you have a reminder built into the lineup that often nudges a manager into making a move.

That being said, I just don't like the designated hitter. The nine guys in the lineup should be the same nine guys in the field. Just because pitchers are generally bad at hitting shouldn't excuse them from the task.
I don't like getting in this AL > NL or NL > AL argument. Not very many people look at it objectively. But the funny thing with La Russa and Men at Work, he basically completely changed his tune about the NL once coming to the NL and managing for the Cardinals.

I agree with you about the Designated Hitter.

[Smithers]

I can appreciate the added strategy of the pitcher hitting the NL, but I don't find pinch hitting and double switches to be even remotely advanced strategic decisions....and watching pitchers hit is usually pretty pathetic and hard to watch. I don't really prefer one league over the other, though I do find AL baseball to be a lot less sloppy.
agreed. i can't stand watching pitchers hit and with free agency like it is, not too many pitchers have been hitting for 5+ years anymore, so it's even worse. also, to me the pitcher hitting ruins some good baseball situations, like walking the 8th guy to get to the pitcher.

[thesafeword]

I like the NL and AL East.