Will MLB ever get one set of rules?

• hasbeen

  

  se-alum;1393735 wrote:Bottom of the 6th, your team is down 2-0, there's one out and a runner on 2nd, and the pitcher is due up. In the NL, the manager has to make the decision as to whether or not he should pull his pitcher, who is throwing well, to try to get the runs because the offense is struggling. This is not a decision that has to ever be made in the AL. There is no way there is more strategy if you use a DH. Yea, maybe you have to decide whether to bunt or not, but you still don't have the added decision of pulling a pitcher who has been throwing well.

  
  Do you pull Verlander when you know he gets stronger later in the game or do you let him hit?
• karen lotz

  

  se-alum;1393735 wrote:Bottom of the 6th, your team is down 2-0, there's one out and a runner on 2nd, and the pitcher is due up. In the NL, the manager has to make the decision as to whether or not he should pull his pitcher, who is throwing well, to try to get the runs because the offense is struggling. This is not a decision that has to ever be made in the AL. There is no way there is more strategy if you use a DH. Yea, maybe you have to decide whether to bunt or not, but you still don't have the added decision of pulling a pitcher who has been throwing well.

  
  

  Jim Leyland wrote:Obvious strategy is obvious

  
  oh.
• fan_from_texas

  se-alum;1393735 wrote:Bottom of the 6th, your team is down 2-0, there's one out and a runner on 2nd, and the pitcher is due up. In the NL, the manager has to make the decision as to whether or not he should pull his pitcher, who is throwing well, to try to get the runs because the offense is struggling. This is not a decision that has to ever be made in the AL. There is no way there is more strategy if you use a DH. Yea, maybe you have to decide whether to bunt or not, but you still don't have the added decision of pulling a pitcher who has been throwing well.

  
  This topic has been debated on here ad nauseum, and it's not worthwhile to argue it again. People either get the concept of the statistical analysis or they don't, and if they don't, 200 posts won't convince them.
  
  The summary: if strategy is demonstrated through taking certain actions, as opposed to determining when to take those actions, the DH would decrease strategy. But that's not how we define strategy, and we see significantly higher decisional variance in the AL, confirming that it's more strategic.
• se-alum

  

  hasbeen;1393739 wrote:Do you pull Verlander when you know he gets stronger later in the game or do you let him hit?

  No reason to pull Verlander, he has no affect on your offense.
• sleeper

  

  The "strategy" argument is retarded.
• Ironman92

  

  Classyposter58;1393691 wrote:Jim Leyland has stated multiple times that the NL is easy strategy. It's obvious what to do in situation

  
  Hence all his WS titles as a NL manager
• hasbeen

  

  se-alum;1393771 wrote:No reason to pull Verlander, he has no affect on your offense.

  
  Assuming he's on an NL team.
• Classyposter58

  

  Ironman92;1393841 wrote:Hence all his WS titles as a NL manager

  Won with Florida in '97 and Pittsburgh was division champs in 1990, 1991 and 1992. Definitely powerhouse franchises
• Rotinaj

  

  Classyposter58;1394561 wrote:Won with Florida in '97 and Pittsburgh was division champs in 1990, 1991 and 1992. Definitely powerhouse franchises

  Those teams were stacked. Dusty Baker is the only guy who would of done less with those teams.