The Holtonian

The AL is the superior league right now because AL pitchers have to be better to win games. They don't have the luxury of pitching to pitchers, and instead have to face people like David Ortiz and Jim Thome in the DH slot. Pitchers are simply trained to pitch better in the AL. As a possible result, since the DH was instituted in 1973, the AL has won 19 of 32 World Series.

Yes, having the pitcher hit is the "more historical" thing to do, but it makes the game needlessly complicated, tortures fans by having them watch "professionals" hit badly and, again, waters down the effectiveness of NL pitchers. Back when pitchers COULD ACTUALLY HIT, it made more sense. Pitchers are no longer trained to do that in the minors or college, either, and are essentially giving their NL couterparts easy outs.

BTW: Yes, I am a lifelong Red Sox and AL fan, but I dare say that this year's Red Sox team might be even better than the 2004 team, especially if they add just a little middle inning bullpen depth.

Bill that argument is weak, so weak and I'm tired of hearing. DON"T BRING THAT WEAK TOT ACTION! The AL pitchers are better because they have one more batter to face who is a professional batter? If you want to AL eras are higher than NL becasue they have to face one more batter than I'll give you that. If anything it would make sense that AL Pitchers are worse b/c they have to face one more batter not the opposite. But they're better right now in essence because of the AL being smart and following in my mind the ways of the Braves and having a strong minor leage system. I think the days of piecing together the championship teams maybe going away.

You can't build a yankees championship with over the hill stars.

The past three WS have proven the benefits of a strong system where players have risen through the ranks... its also proven that a key trade can make a difference in the Red Sox case (Shilling was key).

There are some amazing hitting pitchers, Marquis is one to be aware of.

My new emerging problem with the DH is Barry Bonds. Him being a DH will allow him the freedom to break Aaron's record. All he has to do is take his crutches and hobble up to the plate, swing the juiced induced arms, hit a homer... hobble around the bases and sit down. That in no way is A. sporty B. athleticism in its true form. He basically becomes a freak show, which he already is.

Also the AL has a lame/unfair advantage of interleague. An NL team can't have a player on its roster soley devoted to DH. They can't have a Frank Thomas, Thome, Ortiz, Giambi etc because these guys can't field so they're use is limited to clutch situations which you can't have a huge power hitter who only hits every 5 games or so. No instead the NL has to rely on guys like Juan Rodriguez, So Taguchi, John Mabry, Julio Franco, etc... guys who can get up and bat and then take the field.... really these are true men... unlike your sissy DHs who are only half men b/c they only play half the game.

Nevertheless as a redsox hater (Ihate theyanks too as well as most of the AL), i have to conceed they are sick this year. I say they convert Wells to a middle relief guy if/when he gets back off his butt. I think they need to ring in one more bat or one more ace to pull it all together. they need a smoltz, (pick a cards pitcher), soriano... soriano would be key b/c of the mental edge it'd give the sox.

Having a pitcher's slot come up every nine hitters gives a pitcher a break. He can walk a #8 hitter. He can pitch around a #8 hitter. Even the GOOD hitting pitchers aren't REALLY all THAT good, and still -- if they're a starter -- only get to hit once every five days.

You might call DH's "sissies" but I don't make the rules. I like watching DH's hit more than pitchers, sue me. Baseball is a game and much of it is entertainment, and it's more entertaining to watch David Ortiz hit a homer than it is to watch Matt Morris strikeout, bunt a runner over or ground out to second. It's also more fun to watch Mike Mussina strike out David Ortiz than it is to watch Mike Mussina strike out Matt Morris. It's more of a challenge and, thus, worth more.

I'll stick by my logic: AL pitchers have get out more -- and better -- hitters in order ot be successful. Because of that fact, when they face the NL, they have an edge.

Your Barry Bonds argument is another entire discussion. What makes you so sure any AL team would even TAKE him after this year? I think the guy is -- potentially if not already -- a cancer to the game.

I disagree that having the pitcher bat makes the game "needlessly complicated" or is a wasted/boring at-bat. Sure, most of the time the pitcher gets out. But whether the pitcher contributes to the game in his at-bat or not, his presence makes the game more complex and intriguing. And when he does contribute- oh, boy. Give me a Jason Marquis suicide squeeze over an Ortiz homerun any day (just saw an Ortiz grand slam at Fenway last week, and it was spectacular, btw). Such small, sacrificial, exciting plays should entertain a true baseball fan as much as powerful ones.

Also, no one has questioned the principle of the DH rule. It's only fair that every player should contribute to both offense and defense. Give me another sport where this isn't the case (not football - that's obvious, and even then you have your turnovers; and I might concede goalies, but even they can jumpstart an offensive run). This is the traditional argument, I know, but I've never heard a good argument against it. Of course AL pitchers are more effective and more challenged. But you could just as easily say that NL teams are more challenged than AL teams because they have to deal with the pitcher's spot in the batting order. They have to produce something with it. It works both ways. What matters more is the principle.

Holtonian, I agree with you that the Cards lack heart. They also lack motivation, which is connected. Certainly not for lack of star power. They clearly have the offensive talent necessary to win a World Series. The gaping hole is the pitching. What they need is another great starter to complement Carpenter (and, dare I say, Reyes?) and at least one other reliever, preferably two, who can guarantee victory. I've lost whatever morsel of faith I had in Izzie. If they can get some good pitchers with heart, they can get back to where they were last year - at the top of the league.

I'm an AL fan, but I enjoy watching the pitcher bunt a runner over (Garland in a recent game, e.g.) as much as I enjoy watching Thome hit a home run. Of course, that's because that's what the White Sox do all the time anyway.

What's with the "as long as Ozzie doesn't screw things up" comment? As far as the team playing baseball is concerned, Ozzie is anything but a liability. He's brilliant in close games, his players love him, and the team is playing remarkably _as a team_. Sure he tends to run at the mouth, but it really doesn't seem to bother the players at all. If anything, it keeps them out of some of the distracting spotlight.

It was fun to watch the Cards play the Sox. But to be honest, I was hoping for some closer, NL-style play, like in the third game of the series.

Also, we'll get a chance to see if your "Red beats White" theory has some validity this weekend. Should be a great series.