Originally Posted by dougdirt
You are missing my point. I could care less about what the free agent do once they get to the DH role. I am saying it allows AL teams to sign guys than NL teams don't and get good production out of them for 3-5 years before they decline and become a so-so DH. NL teams aren't signing those guys as often because they can't move them to DH. They have to move them to the bench, or let them continue to play in the field where they aren't good on either side of the ball at that point. So they just don't offer as many of those guys similar contracts. Then guys sign with the AL team because they were offered 6 or 7 years instead of 4 or 5 from the NL teams.
I completely understand what you are saying, and very few AL teams are doing that with even fewer every year. They realize the value of a so so over the hill hitter is worth just about as much as just cutting the guy and going with a younger guy that can actually be rotated around in the field if needed. The value is simply not there. The A's and Tigers signed Pujols and Fielder to massive, long term contracts because they have the money. They are not justifying it with "well, he can become a DH." They simply wanted the guy and paid him what it would take because they could. In the Tiger's case, they got desperate when Victor Martinez got hurt and shelled out whatever it took to get Fielder. He was expected to sign with the Dodgers until that point, and many in the Dodgers front office thought it was pretty much a done deal. Let's also just ignore the fact the Marlins reportedly offered more to Pujols than the Angels.
The value of a so so over the hill DH is so minimal it makes little to no difference in the contract that gets offered to free agents.
At this point, we can just agree to disagree. Yet very little backs up your assertion, and if AL teams are doing it they are going it based on a fallacy, not an actual advantage.