PDA

View Full Version : AL v NL


AJTrenkle
07-14-2006, 04:56 PM
Working on some posts on my site about why the AL has dominated the NL so much lately... Anyone have thoughts about this? With, I think, 10 ASG wins in a row now it is really getting to be something.

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2006, 04:58 PM
Working on some posts on my site about why the AL has dominated the NL so much lately... Anyone have thoughts about this? With, I think, 10 ASG wins in a row now it is really getting to be something.The AL has better players.:redneck

Seriously, these things go in cycles. It wasn't so long ago that the NL dominated.

PKalltheway
07-14-2006, 05:21 PM
The AL has better players.:redneck

Seriously, these things go in cycles. It wasn't so long ago that the NL dominated.
He's right. Between 1962 and 1987, the AL won the All-Star game just three times (1971, 1983, 1986).:o: The NL actually has the all time lead in All-Star victories and the AL would have to win another five in a row just to tie the all time lead, which may or may not happen. The AL is due to have some sort of dominance now.:cool: Plus the AL has actually won 9 in a row instead of 10.

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2006, 05:29 PM
He's right. Between 1962 and 1987, the AL won the All-Star game just three times (1971, 1983, 1986).:o: The NL actually has the all time lead in All-Star victories and the AL would have to win another five in a row just to tie the all time lead, which may or may not happen. The AL is due to have some sort of dominance now.:cool: Plus the AL has actually won 9 in a row instead of 10.Depends on how you count. They're undefeated in the last 10, but they haven't won 9 in a row. There was that *$*&@!#$(&%#@* tie.

Fake Chet Lemon
07-14-2006, 05:34 PM
The AL has better players.:redneck

Seriously, these things go in cycles. It wasn't so long ago that the NL dominated.

I don't buy the cycle theory, because that means the NL will dominate the AL in the near future. That won't happen. The AL was slow to bring black players aboard. Limiting their talent pool cost them and the residual effects hurt them into the 70's. Those days are over forever.

The DH assures AL dominance. You have to build a pitching staff in the AL that can handle pitching to dominant DH lead lineups. Therefore the AL will always seek the best pitching. Pitching as always is the secret to baseball success.

Sounds strange, but the DH leads to better pitchers, which leads to a better league. Why is the AL Central baseball's best division? Three reasons: Pitching, pitching and lastly, pitching.

Ol' No. 2
07-14-2006, 05:43 PM
I don't buy the cycle theory, because that means the NL will dominate the AL in the near future. That won't happen. The AL was slow to bring black players aboard. Limiting their talent pool cost them and the residual effects hurt them into the 70's. Those days are over forever.

The DH assures AL dominance. You have to build a pitching staff in the AL that can handle pitching to dominant DH lead lineups. Therefore the AL will always seek the best pitching. Pitching as always is the secret to baseball success.

Sounds strange, but the DH leads to better pitchers, which leads to a better league. Why is the AL Central baseball's best division? Three reasons: Pitching, pitching and lastly, pitching.Nonsense. The NL dominated well into the '80's, long after the DH was instituted and long, long after both leagues were fully integrated. The cycle will turn again. It doesn't have to be the NEAR future. The NL dominated for the better part of three decades.

CADIEUXGR
07-14-2006, 06:20 PM
No question that THE AL DOMINATED THE ENTIRE NL - especially the Central division.:bandance:

ChiSoxLifer
07-14-2006, 07:18 PM
Working on some posts on my site about why the AL has dominated the NL so much lately... Anyone have thoughts about this? With, I think, 10 ASG wins in a row now it is really getting to be something.


talent

TDog
07-15-2006, 01:29 AM
No question that THE AL DOMINATED THE ENTIRE NL - especially the Central division.:bandance:

I was reading that the AL Central at the break had the best inter-division record in baseball. That includes NL games as well as games against the AL East and West. I don't remember the number, but I think it was like .591. The NL Central had the worst inter-division record in baseball at .422 percent.

CallMeNuts
07-15-2006, 09:30 AM
Working on some posts on my site about why the AL has dominated the NL so much lately... Anyone have thoughts about this? With, I think, 10 ASG wins in a row now it is really getting to be something.

Steinbrenner is the reason. Teams will spend more money only when they need to be more competitive. The Yankees set the bar so high that everybody else in the AL needs to spend more to have a chance of getting to the World Series. And as other teams improve, even the mid tier teams needed to step up to be more competitive.

WSox597
07-15-2006, 09:42 AM
And as other teams improve, even the mid tier teams needed to step up to be more competitive.

I hope KC steps it up this weekend.

You may have a point about Steinbrenner. His money being thrown around with great abandon has changed things.

Johnny Mostil
07-15-2006, 11:19 AM
As I recall, Phil Rogers did a fairly good article looking at all the possible reasons in the Tribune's season preview section. Unfortunately, I couldn't find that on-line.

Regardless, I can't recall a league dominating like this since the NL did from '79 to '82 (toward the end of its long All-Star Game run, and when its teams won four straight World Series)--or after the DH and Steinbrenner had their first effects. Interleague play, of course, makes it easier to track these things now than then . . .

soxfanreggie
07-15-2006, 12:12 PM
I agree with the Yankees part. The AL probably has what...5 of the top 7 spending teams. With the Yankees, Red Sox, White Sox, Angels, Toronto, etc. shelling out big money, we should have better players.

It could also be because of the quality managers like Ozzie Guillen putting together a great team. When people asked me why MB was selected, I told them Ozzie wants to win the game and that they should watch out because he would with his team. This proved it.

vegyrex
07-15-2006, 01:15 PM
I don't buy the cycle theory, because that means the NL will dominate the AL in the near future.

Its no theory, its a fact. In the ASG the AL dominated in the 30's and 40's. The shift started happening in the 50's. The NL thoroughly dominated in the 60's and 70's. In the 80's another shift happened going the AL's way. Now the AL has been dominating since the 90's.

In the World Series the AL has been more consistant. They've managed to edge out the NL in nearly every decade except the 1960's and 80's.

AJTrenkle
07-16-2006, 02:15 PM
Tried to find that Rogers article and also had trouble, I do remember it too. Put a post up a couple of days ago on this. The first thing I was looking at to try and explain it in a structural way was to look at the wealth of the teams. Actually, in almost every division, the NL has the richer teams as calculated by Forbes last year:

NL East:
Mets: 505M (3rd) Phillies: 392M (7th) Braves: 382M (8th) Nationals: 310M (16th), Marlins 206M (26th)
AL East:
Red Sox 563M (2) Yankees 950M (1) Orioles 341M (12th) Blue Jays 214M (24th) Devil Rays 176M (30th)


NL Central
Cubs 398M-6th, Cardinals 370M-10th, Astros 357M-11th, Reds 255M-21, Brewers 208M 25th, Pirates 218M-23rd.
AL Central
Indians 319M-15, White Sox 262-20, Tigers 239-22, Royals 187-27, Twins 178-29


The NL West:
Dodgers 424M-4th, Giants 381M-9, Padres 329-13th, Colorado 290-18, Diamondbacks 286M-19
The AL West:
Seattle 415M-5th, Texas 326-14, LAA 294M-17, Oakland 185-28

TDog
07-16-2006, 06:25 PM
Its no theory, its a fact. In the ASG the AL dominated in the 30's and 40's. The shift started happening in the 50's. The NL thoroughly dominated in the 60's and 70's. In the 80's another shift happened going the AL's way. Now the AL has been dominating since the 90's.

In the World Series the AL has been more consistant. They've managed to edge out the NL in nearly every decade except the 1960's and 80's.

The AL gets a boost in the World Series from the Yankees dynasties. There also is reason for the All-Star Game having a dominant league. At the beginning, the Yankees made the AL more competitive because teams had to get better to have any hope of beating the Yankees. Of course, that changed when the NL was quicker to integrate, changing its style of play. When the AL first went to the DH, the NL was still getting the better of the young talent. The AL was graying with the DH often former NL standouts who would have otherwise been out of the game.

The AL right now has a higher standard than the NL. The team from the Central or East that falls short of the postseason would stack up well against any team in the NL. It is a cycle, but not one you can set your clock by. This cycle will continue until the NL improves. I don't know when that will be.