djvh@drutx.UUCP (VanHandelDJ) (05/10/85)
> > As far as the comment of not allowing baseball to move in the direction of > trying to spice up the offense, what of the lowering of the pitcher's mound > (was it the late sixties) in both leagues to aid the offense. I don't feel > that that was a mistake, do you Dave? > From the stats of 1968 (I believe the mound was lowered following that year) it was probably a good idea to lower the mound. The AL had only one qualifying batter over .300, and Campy Campaneris led with only 177 hits. In the NL, Gibson had a 1.12 ERA. From the overall stats, the balance appeared to be lost;there was more defense than offense. It might have been a better idea to wait another year, though, since the 1967 records look OK. I have to agree with those of you who are against artificial turf and such. I miss the days when all firstbasemen were slow, overweight home run hitters. In my book, that type of player is still more valuable than a speedy singles hitter. I also dislike seeing stadiums "cloned" from city to city. It's more fun watching teams built for their home park. Please don't ever take away Fenway or Wrigley. Dave Van Handel