chuckywang
Lifer
Who has a bigger advantage?
(1) An AL team over an NL team playing in an AL ballpark
or
(2) An NL team over an AL team playing in an NL ballpark.
I think (1) is a bigger advantage due to the DH. The NL team is not built with a DH in mind, so their DH would be the best bench player. The AL team is built with a DH in mind, so they went out and got a player that knew was going to bat everyday and is of course a great hitter. Look at the 2004 World Series: For the games in Boston, you had David Ortiz as the DH vs. John Mabry as the DH for the Cardinals. Of course Boston had an advantage.
Anybody see anything wrong with this logic?
My point is this: The World Series is unfair due to the two different set of rules for the two leagues. I think the NL team should always have home field advantage to balance this out.
(1) An AL team over an NL team playing in an AL ballpark
or
(2) An NL team over an AL team playing in an NL ballpark.
I think (1) is a bigger advantage due to the DH. The NL team is not built with a DH in mind, so their DH would be the best bench player. The AL team is built with a DH in mind, so they went out and got a player that knew was going to bat everyday and is of course a great hitter. Look at the 2004 World Series: For the games in Boston, you had David Ortiz as the DH vs. John Mabry as the DH for the Cardinals. Of course Boston had an advantage.
Anybody see anything wrong with this logic?
My point is this: The World Series is unfair due to the two different set of rules for the two leagues. I think the NL team should always have home field advantage to balance this out.