REMARKS: TAKE ME OUT TO THE BALLGAME -- NOT TO BATTING PRACTICE!

Fans are being drawn to baseball by the millions the past two or three years. I'm not one of them. I actually feel a bit alienated from the Grand Old Game.

Call me old-fashioned or call me a party-pooper, but I miss pitching.

Fortunately Major League baseball still manages to have at least one good pitcher in each league -- or has so far. And one good pitcher is what the American League had this year -- the remarkable Pedro Martinez. The drop-off between Martinez and the rest of the A.L. pitchers this year was ... well... was like the drop off from God, to your local pastor! My vote for A.L. Cy Young Award winner? Well, gee ... this could be tough -- Martinez (23-4, 2.07 ERA) or David Cone (12-9, 3.44 in 193.1 innings) or Mike Mussina (18-7, 3.50)? Of course Batolo Colon (if such a person exists) was 18-5 ... with a whopping 3.95 ERA.At least the National League gives a little choice as to who the top pitcher is. I'd have to go with Mike Hampton (22-4, 2.90) over Randy Johnson (17-9, 2.48) or Kevin Millwood (18-7, 2.68). The National League could be worse -- but it could be lots better, too. The number 10 man in ERA is Arizona's Omar Daal, at 3.65. I grew up playing APBA baseball, a dice and board game (now available on computer). A starter with 200 (or close) innings pitched was a Grade A if he had below a 2.50 ERA (or if he won 25 games with a higher ERA) and was Grade B between 2.50 and about. 3.50 or so. Grade C was 3.40 or 3.60 (depending on the type of season), down to about 4.00. ERAs higher than 4.00 were almost always Grade D pitchers.

Through the 1970s and 1980s it was fairly common to find 10 pitchers in each league with ERAs below 3.00 -- the equivalent of a .300 batting average. In fact, a good balance would be 10 of each in a league. The designated hitter rule has thrown the A.L off balance quite a bit -- at least statistically; it has not always been able to match this.

In the 1990s we have expansion, a poor franchise/ballpark choice, anti-pitcher attitudes and the continued DH rule (which I thought was supposed to end when Interleague play began). The game is unbalanced. Batting practice should stop before the National Anthem begins. Today it continues through the game. If it werent for Johnson, Martinez and a couple of others, there would be no marquee pitching match-ups. Teams might as well roll pitching machines out to the mound.

I have nothing against offense. It was thrilling to watch George Brett bat .390 -- and drive in 119 runs in 118 games. He was a Hall of Famer (in a not particular friendly ballpark) having his career year. But what about the past three years? Take Larry Walker -- a heck of a ballplayer. But come one!(1997 -- 46 2b, 49 HR, 130 RBI, .366) (1998 -- 46 2b, 23 HR, .363) (1999 -- 26 2b, 37 HR, .379) Like Chuck Klein of the Phillies in the late 1920s and early 1930s in the infamous Baker Bowl, Walker is putting together Hall of Fame numbers in very questionable circumstances. An outdoor ML baseball stadium should NEVER have been put in Denver -- if one HAD to be , then it should have been the biggest field in the majors. The ball flies unnaturally in that altitude and breaking pitches dont work. Add in a cozy field and the Rocks -- win or lose -- have made a mockery of Big League batting stats. Walker may have really been that good the past three years; he may not have been. No one will really know.

Look at the N.L. home run race. Even assuming that Mark and Sammy are wonder men (as they are) and putting them aside as aberrations to the norm, things are still out of control. Walker, with 37 home runs, finished 10th! Most years one or two players with 40 home runs has been normal. This year EIGHT National Leaguers hit 40. Another six hit 40 or more in the A.L. and the number 10 man (Albert Belle) likewise hit 37 -- a figure good enough to lead the league in many past seasons.

If this were a one-season thing, I would say "More power to 'em!" There have always been hitting years (1961, 1970, 1977, 1987, 1993) and pitching years (1963, 1966, 1968, 1972, 1978), but every year since and including 1993 has BEEN a record-setting offensive year. Pitching has virtually disappeared.

Why? Many blame expansion. That certainly accounts for some of the bloated offensive numbers. Many hitters are feasting on substandard pitching, due to expansion. But expanding the leagues should be allowing a few weaker hitters in, too, shouldn't it? So why are fewer and fewer pitchers able to get batters out? Part of it is the games emphasis on offense. The strike zone is constantly scrunched, putting pitchers in the defensive. The DH is an abomination to the game and creates its own uneven playing field (between batter and pitcher). Finally, the overpaid sluggers have become so effeminate that they expect (and receive!) pampering treatment from umpires.

When Bob Gibson, Gaylord Perry, Catfish Hunter and others pitched, the pitcher kept the hitter honest. Today if a pitcher manages to nick a few players (which is easy to do if one pitches inside today, the way so many players lunge into the ball), they are branded "head hunters" and virtually black-balled. Just a few years ago that was Mr. Martinez' only claim to fame. Yet he held his ground, maintained control of the inside part of the plate, and became a dominating pitcher.

Is there a point to all this bellyaching? Only that it takes a lot of the fun out of baseball for the intelligent fan. How good is Nomar Garciaparra? Alex Rodriguez? Derek Jeter? I don't know, but when half the shortstops in the league are batting. 340 with 35 home runs, I smell something peculiar in Denmark!