Why doesnt the NL do DH?

Who says it's better? It adds more entertainment to the game...

Start talking to real baseball fans...get the pitcher up to bat with 2 on and none out. See how they play it, that's the way real basball is played.

I'm ok with the DH too, but I see it both ways.

And get your facts correct. Lance Berkman may be making appearances at DH....but he's not by definition a DH.

The NL doesn't have a DH because they aren't stupid.

Cause it's better without the DH. It creates much more strategy and it's the way baseball is supposed to be played. Anyone who is fielding a position should have to bat regardless if they're good or not at hitting. A manager can have a pinch hitter bat for the pitcher anytime if they need more offense.

Because it makes things more interesting when a pitcher is coming up to bat with runners on base in a close game. The manager has to decide if he wants to leave the pitcher in the game if he's pitching well or take him out to score runs. It helps if the pitcher can bunt though.

You do realize of course that of the 4 players you mentioned, only 2 of them have more appearances with their respective teams at DH than they do in the field.
Konerko played 1B in 125 games this season, and was the DH 23 times. As a matter of fact he has NEVER been a full time DH, he has always had more appearances in the field as a DH.
And Kubel played 98 games in the outfield this year while being the DH in 42.

The real reason the NL does not have the DH is that, when the rule was first proposed, they did not want or need it. The AL only added that rule to increase scoring in an attempt to increase attendance because at the time the NL teams were beating the snot out of the AL teams at the gate. Not that it's made that much difference - if you look at the difference in runs scored by NL and AL teams over the last 20 years or so, it comes to roughly ..50 runs per game (total for both teams). That means that each team scores an extra run about once every 4 games, for a total of about 40 runs per season. Put simply, having a [player in your lineup who is paid ONLY to hit gets you an extra 40 runs over having a pitcher hit in that spot (and pinch hitters on occasion). Sorry, but if your DH is only accounting for 40 runs per year (look at it this way - take runs scored plus RBI and subtract number of homers to get the difference) he isn't doing very much. That would be roughly the equivalent of a player scoring 30 runs, having 20 RBI and hitting 10 homers. (30+20-10=40,)
IN other words, it don't add all that much to the overall scoring after all.
And it then eliminates a lot of strategy from the game.

In other words, the NL doesn't think it's worth changing a game meant to be played by 9 players per side who play both offense and defense that offers thousands of possible strategic moves into a game played by 10 per side, 1 of whom never has to hit and one who never has to field and has a much smaller number of strategic possibilities all for the sake of a measly 40 runs a year.

In even fewer words, they didn't feel a need to cater to the less intelligent fans.

DH is for pussy's... Just think there could be more of Roy Halladay hitting 2 run doubles in the amercian league if they had the pitcher bat

Because in the NL Parks, they don't have DH. But in the AL Parks, they have DH. When the Boston Red Sox going to play with the NL Parks, David "Big Papi" Ortiz either has to play the First Base or sitting on the dugout bench.

Because they are the senior circuit and dont want to move up with the times.

People have different opinions about DH, whether that's better or if the pitcher should bat. I like it how it is, it makes interleague games more interesting.

THEY WILL SOON..
MONEY SPEAKS.