But the thing is my friend that even with the DH you still get fielding, hitting and running. Most of the pitchers aren't great runners, some of the DH are even better baserunners then the pitchers.

Also like I mentioned before, I bet you anything that most of the Desinated Hitters are good fielders, it's just we don't see them take the field. Some of the pitchers are really talented fielders, like Maddux, Mussina and a few others. But on the other side of the hand you have a lot of pitchers that cannot field the ball to save there lives. I also mentioned that only a select few pitchers can hit the ball. So what do you mean by it takes the purity of the game, most pitchers cant run, hit and field the ball, but the majority of the Designated hitters can.

The thing is the DH doesn't take away the respect for Gold Gloves, or good defensive players, they still get the respect they deserve. I agree the casual fan would much rather cheer for a home run hitter then a good fielder, but the DH doesn't take anything away from the good fielders in my opinion.

EDIT: For some reason, I didn't see B_R's last post.

It was pretty hard to judge this one. You both made some good arguments (and both made some arguments that weren't so good). I agree with Babe_Ruth - I like the DH rule. But I think Tyrus argued his case a little bit better.

Thanks, Wade. Well, Mr. Ruth, what topic should we start now?

Good job, even though I still believe I won this debate, Wade says you argued better then I did, so great job.

I was curious to see who you believed was the greatest pitcher of all time, maybe we can argue that? I believe its Walter Johnson by the way.

Sorry, but me too.

What do you think of steroids in baseball? Maybe we culd do that.

I think we'll have the same conclussion about it, I believe it's bad for the sport, and I totally agree with Baseball making it illegal for players to use them.

How about you?

Potential debate topics -

1. Best player at each position
2. Should the ASG determine home field advantage for the WS?
3. Should players that have played multiple years in Japan still be eligible to win our RoY award?
4. Should pitchers be eligible to win the MVP? Or is the Cy Young enough for them?
5. Should relievers be able to win the Cy Young award?

Those are all good debating topics, I especially like four and five.

I personally don't believe pitchers should win the MVP because they have there own award in the Cy Young award, I also don't believe relievers should be able to win the Cy Young award.

Thoughts Tyrus?

I'll take number 4. Because I belive that Pitchers should be able to win MVP.

MVP is designed for Most Valuable Player. It doesn't matter what you do or how you do it, if you are the most valuable and best in the league, then there's your award. The Cy Young award just allows the best pitcher to get something. It is much easier to evaluate who is the best in the league when it comes to batters, so they usually win the MVP. Unless a pitcher has a spectatuclar season, a batter will win over them because it is just easier to look at the batter's stats and evaluate using what team he was on, etc.

Even though in recent years the MVP has shifted towards the batter, pitchers should still be eligible. Batter also have awards to win other than MVP, like the Silver Slugger award. It is just an extra. The real deal is the Most VALUABLE Player; pitcher or batter.

The reason why I don't believe a pitcher should get the Most Valuable Award is because they only pitched every five days, a batter plays around 155-162 games a year. Which means that he's helping his team everyday they play, unlike the pitchers who take the mound every five days.

A Cy Young is there for a reason, it's pretty much goes to the most valuable pitcher, it's pretty much the same award as the MVP but it's only meant for Pitchers and not batters, which is why I believe the MVP should be for batters only like, Cy Young is for pitchers only.