Originally Posted by jojo
I didn't bypass the primary point of discussion. I aimed directly at the heart of it. The notion that the NL is superior because it is less specialized just isn't accurate. It is just specialized in a way meant to compensate for a huge talent disparity in one spot of it's batting order.
If your point simply was that the AL uses a DH and that makes the AL different than the NL, then, I concede that point.
If you want to talk about bypassing the primary point of the discussion, post 278 largely is a hyperbolic strawman that no one in this thread has ever advocated. It certainly isn't a logical extension of the argument for the DH and frankly the sentiment represents opinion about the pinch hitter "back in the day". NL fans now cherish the notion of a pinch hitter and defensive replacement-i.e. a guy who may only bat and a guy who may only play defense as a tandem filling a single lineup spot (that math doesn't seem to add up to "nine on nine" to me)-all orchestrated often in response to using a relief specialist who may only be effective against half of a platoon because his repertoire doesn't allow him to even be a complete pitcher.
The irony is that post 278 really embodies the NL style much closer than it represents a caricature of the AL. Perhaps that's your point? You were mocking those who have argued so vehemently against the DH?
I think it is time for a thread recap. The original issue was whether or not the NL should adopt the DH. I would like to point out that this change would eliminate a choice now available to fans. If the issue was directed at abolishing the DH in the AL, that would be something different.
During this discussion some posters mentioned that they preferred DH-free baseball because of the greater complexity created in game contexts. Other posters responded critically to this assertion by arguing that the skill mismatches between pitcher vs. pitcher PAs led to a worse baseball experience than any game context could possibly compensate for.
And so comes post # 278. This was a proposal that eliminated all game contexts while greatly increasing skill exhibition. This is the central principle. It is an extreme application of the above counter-argument. So the question is, if my proposal is not “logical,” why is there a problem with someone preferring DH-free baseball because of they do not want to diminish game complexity?
Now on to your latest reply. First my post is not a “hyperbolic strawman.” I don’t think it even qualifies as hyperbole because no reality is being distorted or exaggerated. I would classify it as a mere absurdity. It is defiantly not a strawman argument because there was no attempt to represent the opponent’s perspective. If this statement does not apply to you: “For those of you obsessed with seeing more "the best versus the best" match ups,” I believe the logical thing would be to point out that is not your perspective or not to respond to the post at all. Arguing that nine versus nine baseball hasn’t existed in a century is a much better example of a strawman argument. And while you have your freshman communications textbook out, see if it qualifies as a red herring and non sequiter as well.
Now to your claim that “the notion that the NL is superior because it is less specialized just isn't accurate.” This leads me to believe that you cannot separate your opinion from objective fact. Fundamentally, you have chosen a side that is almost impossible to win. Since this is a matter of preference, you will need to show why this choice for baseball fans should be eliminated. Tough sledding there.
Through all this I think I have wasted my time in this discussion. I may be completely wrong about this, but I have come to believe your arguments actually have little to do with a passion for the game. They look like more of an attempt to be perceived as some kind of alpha intellect. I have a newborn and I am way behind on everything. I come to this board because I want to relax for a moment and enjoy baseball discussion focused on my favorite team. I will gladly debate with anyone with different opinions if they also love the game and the Reds. But I sense no such devotion in your posts. I start to feel I am in debate with no real point.
So in sum- I concede. Whatever you thought we were arguing about, it looks like you were right. I was a fool to ever challenge your keen perspective.