Evidence That the NL Is Getting Better than the AL?

Best BA
AL: Milton Bradley (.337) --> Joe Mauer (.335) --> Hideki Matsui (.332)
NL: Chipper Jones (.421) --> Lance Berkman (.377) --> Albert Pujols (.357)

* Pitching staffs aren't necessarily better in the AL

Best ERA
AL: Cliff Lee (2.45) --> Shaun Marcum (2.52) --> Daisuke Matsuzaka (2.53)
NL: Edinson Volquez (1.32) --> Tim Lincecum (2.15) --> Carlos Zambrano (2.51)

* Lineups are better in the AL, but look at the ages of the pitchers (AL: 29, 26, 27 --> NL: 24, 23, 26). Who else thinks the NL pitchers will hold up better?

Most HR
AL: Josh Hamilton (17) --> Carlos Quentin (16) --> Milton Bradley (13)
NL: Chase Utley (21) --> Dan Uggla (17) --> Lance Berkman (17)

* Where has the power gone? Uggla is the only one who doesn't hit in a hitter's park.

Runs Scored
AL avg.: 281.2
NL avg.: 284.6

This is pretty raw data, but they are interesting data points nonetheless. In an age when the AL is supposed to be the bad boys with sticks, they are a full 3.4 runs per game per team behind the NL. Why? 1) Baseball is cyclical and the AL can't continue to dominate forever; 2) The NL is giving more jobs to younger players who are less likely to break down and are on their way up not down like most veterans (AL avg. age:28.9, NL avg. age: 29.2 --> This reason seems to be a fallacy); 3) Baseball is cyclical and the AL can't continue to dominate forever. I think it's 1 and 3, but a lot of people seem to give credence to 2. I think mainly due to the Diamondbacks, people think the NL is much younger, but it's actually the AL who is a half year younger. Granted, I don't know the average age of starters. However, more AL teams have gone into rebuilding mode, and therefore, their teams are younger. That leads me to my last point. Because more AL teams are rebuilding, they are worse teams ... for now. It'll be interesting to see who wins Interleague Play, the All-Star Game, and the World Series.