Ok. Rick Wise career BA = .195. Avg. HRs over 162 game season = 5.
Bibby: BA = .148, Avg. HRs over 162 games = 2
Robinson: BA = .231, Avg. HRs over 162 games = 4
Ok, Robinson was a half-ways respectable hitter, but none of these guys really justifies the argument that pitchers deserve to hit because they once had skills.
I actually don’t mind that the NL keeps their pitchers in the batting lineup. For one thing, it puts them at a (minor) disadvantage in the World Series.
You think so? I guess it does for NL teams that don’t have a legitimate player to use as a DH. But every now and then you get an AL manager that can’t seem to figure out how to manage around the pitcher’s spot (cough Ron Washington cough).
I agree that either way it’s a minor concern.
Are any of you anti-DH folks younger than the DH rule? IMO, anti-DHers (of which I am not) believe DH baseball isn’t “real baseball” and are old enough to remember pre-DH.
I am younger than the DH rule and prefer NL ball, if that’s what you are asking.
Yeah, my team is the Red Sox, so I’d rather not be able to play David Ortiz an entire game, but have his bat available for pinch hitting in the late innings on the road than have to put my 9th best legitimate hitter in the lineup on the road. But yes, some AL managers completely foul it up when it comes to managing the pitcher’s spot in the lineup.
We just argue this point with religious fervor.
I have no problem with a rule allowing Papi to bat against the Yankees at any time.
ETA: I have no problem with hitting Yankees with the bat at any time either.
Not only am I younger than the DH rule (born in 1978), but I grew up with an AL team (California/Anaheim Angels) as my favorite. I grew up on DH baseball, but when I moved for college, I started following the Giants and I’ve come to find the NL style of ball wildly more appealing.
Gotta agree. The DH rule reduced the American League to not much better than Little League.
Yup, that’s my question. Jas-you live in an NL city? (I live near Boston)
Considering the way the AL has dominated MLB, I really don’t think NL fans want to argue that the AL is Little League.
Home of the World Champion St. Louis Cardinals. 
Although I grew up in KC and lived in Boston for awhile, so I’ve watched both flavors.
Say what? Since the DH rule (1973) the AL has won 21 titles, the NL 17 (including 3 of the last 4). That’s not much domination.
Countdown to inter-league play records in 3…2…1…
I doubt anyone would seriously argue that the NL is currently stronger than the AL. However, the relative strengths of the leagues have very little to do with the presence or absence of a designated hitter.
Well, that NL has the WS Champs and you can’t take that away from me! (Although you can, apparently, take away the Hall of Fame first-baseman…).
More to do with payrolls for most of the time after the split. But the AL does attract the veteran pitchers, who are often the most effective.
It’s baseball. It’s better than religion. For instance, there’s hot dogs and beer. Lots of beer. Not just the half-shot of wine you get on Sunday.
However, my church serves port, not muscatel. Shit’s got a kick and is a nice eye opener on a Sunday morning.
In the 15 years of interleague play, the AL has had the winning record in 11 of them. The AL’s overall record is 1,939 - 1,773.
Fortunately, inter-league play is an even greater abomination in the eyes of God than the DH, so I can safely disregard those statistics. 
Is there anyone that thinks interleague play (that counts towards win/loss) is a good idea?
Well, it’s going to be a permanent, and full-time, feature once the Astros move to the American League, as there’ll be an odd number of teams in both leagues, and interleague play will be necessary to keep all teams playing on a more-or-less daily basis.
Bud Selig and the owners of MLB franchises that confuse “fans love weekend games in good weather and an occasional Mets/Yankees or Cubs/White Sox tilt” for “fans love inter-league play and flock to the ballpark even to watch Royals/Pirates”?