Has anyone else started to soften up to the DH?

[SouthSideRyan]

f all ya'll. to me, baseball died when the batter could no longer tell the pitcher where he wanted the ball to be pitched.

 

Baseball < 1900 pretty much isn't even recognized anymore.

 

The DH has little to nothing to do with the AL/NL disparity.

[Jehrico]

I think it is inevitable that the NL gets the DH as well.

 

1) Pitchers stink at hitting and in todays game there just isn't enough time for them to work on it to stay good.

2) Pitchers are a scarce commodity and just like how the NFL keeps adding rules to baby the QB they will add rules to protect the pitcher. Not having them bat or run bases is the most logical one.

3) AL supremacy continues and a lot of people point the finger at the DH as the reason why and eventually they'll want to do something about it.

There isn't enough time for an MLB player to work on hitting? Pitchers, especially starters, only play every 5th game on the norm, with one or two short side sessions. I think they have time.

 

They haven't and they aren't going to chang any rules to baby pitchers.

 

The AL isn't supreme. It just seems that way because they have the two biggest spending teams in the game that get the most attention.

 

If the DH was inevitable in the NL for the reasons you listed, it would have already happened.

[Ender]

There isn't enough time for an MLB player to work on hitting? Pitchers, especially starters, only play every 5th game on the norm, with one or two short side sessions. I think they have time.

 

They haven't and they aren't going to chang any rules to baby pitchers.

 

The AL isn't supreme. It just seems that way because they have the two biggest spending teams in the game that get the most attention.

 

If the DH was inevitable in the NL for the reasons you listed, it would have already happened.

 

No they don't have time to work on hitting like the hitters do, they have to work on their pitching, they need to study hitters on video and they don't have time to study the pitchers who they will hit off of. They also need to rest their arms. Pitchers work on bunting and take some light batting practice, they don't have the time to really work on hitting the way a major league player needs to.

 

They have discussed many ways to protect pitchers it most certainly is something they are concerned about.

 

Yes the AL is supreme right now, they dominate interleague and it isn't just the top two teams. I think it is just cyclical but if it keeps up long enough it will help support the notion.

 

You are trying to say that because they haven't added the DH yet that there is no chance that they will ever add it at any point, I disagree with that.

[Wes Mantooth]

I hate the DH! I like it when the manager has to decide if he should pinch hit for a pitcher doing well. Or maybe leave him in, see if he can get a hit or a walk, or cause some odd error. Maybe replace him with a pinch hitter who doesn't get the job done. Then has to come out the next inning with someone else and hope they can throw strikes. I think it adds a lot more to the game than saying this is the lineup wake me when it is over.

[chuckywang]

Don't get me wrong, I like watching Z hit quite a bit. I like the strategy that not having the DH brings. However, I think that the NL getting the DH is more or less an inevitability and I used to have a problem with that. Now, I kind of like what the DH offers in terms of resting players but still keeping their bats in the lineup.

 

I'm expecting that everyone here still hates it, though.

 

I tried watching an AL game and it was just unwatchable to me. I love the huge box scores, I love the double switches, I love the strategy in the NL. Also, having the pitcher bat keeps the pitcher honest.

[CoolHandLuke]

Don't get me wrong, I like watching Z hit quite a bit. I like the strategy that not having the DH brings. However, I think that the NL getting the DH is more or less an inevitability and I used to have a problem with that. Now, I kind of like what the DH offers in terms of resting players but still keeping their bats in the lineup.

 

I'm expecting that everyone here still hates it, though.

 

I tried watching an AL game and it was just unwatchable to me. I love the huge box scores, I love the double switches, I love the strategy in the NL. Also, having the pitcher bat keeps the pitcher honest.

 

If the difference to you is enough to make the AL unwatchable then I don't think you are that much of a baseball fan.

[badnews]

I like the DH, and I find most arguments against it to be pretty reactionary nonsense.

 

A lot of times you see people get misty eyed and talk all about that superior NL "strategy." And then someone comes up with a complete load of crap example. Like: "Your pitcher is throwing a no-hitter in a 0-0 game and comes up with the bases loaded and 1 out in the 8th inning, what do you do?" And I'm thinking to myself "What is this crap? How often in the history of baseball has this happened?"

 

The DH-phobes like to think two things. One, that their reasoning is logical and not emotional, and two, NL baseball is more "pure" than AL baseball when both things are not true. Hey, let's go back to the 1883 version of baseball, that's more "pure."

 

Most pitching changes are utterly routine. The idea that there is some kind of grand chess match of strategy going on in the NL sounds like advertising copy to me. Furthermore, yes, I'd rather watch David Ortiz, Travis Hafner, and so forth, hit without the penalty of watching them have to play defense than to see Doug Davis go 0-43. Micah Owings is swell and all but the novelty factor wears off.

 

In short, the idea that the NL is some grand showcase of strategy is one of the biggest myths that still exists in baseball. When you get right down to the "strategy" that these people wax poetic about, it is usually pretty boring and mundane things. "Whoa! The pitcher used to bat 9th, now that spot is #2! This **** is totally blowing my mind! Now that is STRATERGY."

[Guest]

I like the DH, and I find most arguments against it to be pretty reactionary nonsense.

 

A lot of times you see people get misty eyed and talk all about that superior NL "strategy." And then someone comes up with a complete load of crap example. Like: "Your pitcher is throwing a no-hitter in a 0-0 game and comes up with the bases loaded and 1 out in the 8th inning, what do you do?" And I'm thinking to myself "What is this crap? How often in the history of baseball has this happened?"

 

The DH-phobes like to think two things. One, that their reasoning is logical and not emotional, and two, NL baseball is more "pure" than AL baseball when both things are not true. Hey, let's go back to the 1883 version of baseball, that's more "pure."

 

Most pitching changes are utterly routine. The idea that there is some kind of grand chess match of strategy going on in the NL sounds like advertising copy to me. Furthermore, yes, I'd rather watch David Ortiz, Travis Hafner, and so forth, hit without the penalty of watching them have to play defense than to see Doug Davis go 0-43. Micah Owings is swell and all but the novelty factor wears off.

 

In short, the idea that the NL is some grand showcase of strategy is one of the biggest myths that still exists in baseball. When you get right down to the "strategy" that these people wax poetic about, it is usually pretty boring and mundane things. "Whoa! The pitcher used to bat 9th, now that spot is #2! This **** is totally blowing my mind! Now that is STRATERGY."

Why do all of the positions you take have to be demeaning to anyone that doesn't think the same way?

 

Now, extending your logic...

 

Let's expand rosters to 35 guys and put entirely different teams out there for offense and defense. That way, we can sign Barry Bonds to hit and get Chris Walker back to play left for him. Theriot can stay at SS, but we can see Hoffpauir or Fox hit for that position instead. Wouldn't that be much more fun? Just find nine guys who can hit and nine guys who can field. Much more exciting. Why all these requirements for players who can excel at everything? They're too damn hard to find.

[FergieJ31]

No.

 

And never.

 

Yes, what he said.

 

Hockey equivalent of the DH: NHL Western Conference gets rid of the center line, Eastern Conf keeps it.

[Chocolate Milk]

What's all this talk of strategy? When the pitcher comes up late in the game, he's replaced with a pinch hitter. Usually one that hits from the opposite side of what the pitcher throws from. Early in the game with someone's on base, the pitcher is usually instructed to make an automatic out in the hopes of moving a runner up one base. In any other scenario, they just flail away at the ball and try not to get hurt. Does an interesting situation come up more than once in every 100 at bats? Is this really all that titillating to people?

[RegulusBlue]

DH = Fake Baseball

 

We're letting flawed athletes (ie: no glove) replace other flawed ballplayers (ie: can't hit) and its BS.

 

It's akin to having a big fat 45 year old man shoot free throws for the Bulls because he shoots 96% from the line, but letting him take a seat so he doesn't have to defend, run, or rebound.

 

Aren't professional athletes supposed to be superior all-around athletes, and not lumbering bigmen who can hit a ball to the moon, but can't field it? If they were good enough athletes, they'd find a position anyway. Adam Dunn, anybody?

[CoolHandLuke]

umm, I believe Adam has done exactly what you have requested from him.

[Jehrico]

What's all this talk of strategy? When the pitcher comes up late in the game, he's replaced with a pinch hitter. Usually one that hits from the opposite side of what the pitcher throws from. Early in the game with someone's on base, the pitcher is usually instructed to make an automatic out in the hopes of moving a runner up one base. In any other scenario, they just flail away at the ball and try not to get hurt. Does an interesting situation come up more than once in every 100 at bats? Is this really all that titillating to people?

How often does a manager's use of his bullpen and the doubleswitch impact who wins games? I would say that a majority of extra inning games are definitely impacted by the manager's use of the pen and bench. The bench doesn't go nearly as quickly in the AL due to the DH and the lack of double switches, like we saw in the Pittsburgh series.

[MustangMike]

I think it is inevitable that the NL gets the DH as well.

 

1) Pitchers stink at hitting and in todays game there just isn't enough time for them to work on it to stay good.

2) Pitchers are a scarce commodity and just like how the NFL keeps adding rules to baby the QB they will add rules to protect the pitcher. Not having them bat or run bases is the most logical one.

3) AL supremacy continues and a lot of people point the finger at the DH as the reason why and eventually they'll want to do something about it.

 

 

I'd like both leagues to have the same rules, its the same sport after all...and they play eachother during the year in games that count. I don't like the DH, i think if you play you should have to play defense and offense, that's the game.

I highly doubt they'll take the DH though away from the AL.

I'd like it also to be even so everyone can stop using excuses as to why one league is better than the other...if everything is the same except talent then its a good debate.

[Derwood]

I like the DH, and I find most arguments against it to be pretty reactionary nonsense.

 

A lot of times you see people get misty eyed and talk all about that superior NL "strategy." And then someone comes up with a complete load of crap example. Like: "Your pitcher is throwing a no-hitter in a 0-0 game and comes up with the bases loaded and 1 out in the 8th inning, what do you do?" And I'm thinking to myself "What is this crap? How often in the history of baseball has this happened?"

 

The DH-phobes like to think two things. One, that their reasoning is logical and not emotional, and two, NL baseball is more "pure" than AL baseball when both things are not true. Hey, let's go back to the 1883 version of baseball, that's more "pure."

 

Most pitching changes are utterly routine. The idea that there is some kind of grand chess match of strategy going on in the NL sounds like advertising copy to me. Furthermore, yes, I'd rather watch David Ortiz, Travis Hafner, and so forth, hit without the penalty of watching them have to play defense than to see Doug Davis go 0-43. Micah Owings is swell and all but the novelty factor wears off.

 

In short, the idea that the NL is some grand showcase of strategy is one of the biggest myths that still exists in baseball. When you get right down to the "strategy" that these people wax poetic about, it is usually pretty boring and mundane things. "Whoa! The pitcher used to bat 9th, now that spot is #2! This **** is totally blowing my mind! Now that is STRATERGY."

 

i bet you prefer Arena Football to the NFL too

[Hairyducked Idiot]

i bet you prefer Arena Football to the NFL too

 

Between AFL and NFL, the NFL is the one that has the best players performing at the skills they are paid for.

 

Between NL and AL, it's the AL that has the best players performing at the skills they are paid for.

[Soul]

I like the DH, and I find most arguments against it to be pretty reactionary nonsense.

 

A lot of times you see people get misty eyed and talk all about that superior NL "strategy." And then someone comes up with a complete load of crap example. Like: "Your pitcher is throwing a no-hitter in a 0-0 game and comes up with the bases loaded and 1 out in the 8th inning, what do you do?" And I'm thinking to myself "What is this crap? How often in the history of baseball has this happened?"

 

The DH-phobes like to think two things. One, that their reasoning is logical and not emotional, and two, NL baseball is more "pure" than AL baseball when both things are not true. Hey, let's go back to the 1883 version of baseball, that's more "pure."

 

Most pitching changes are utterly routine. The idea that there is some kind of grand chess match of strategy going on in the NL sounds like advertising copy to me. Furthermore, yes, I'd rather watch David Ortiz, Travis Hafner, and so forth, hit without the penalty of watching them have to play defense than to see Doug Davis go 0-43. Micah Owings is swell and all but the novelty factor wears off.

 

In short, the idea that the NL is some grand showcase of strategy is one of the biggest myths that still exists in baseball. When you get right down to the "strategy" that these people wax poetic about, it is usually pretty boring and mundane things. "Whoa! The pitcher used to bat 9th, now that spot is #2! This **** is totally blowing my mind! Now that is STRATERGY."

Why do all of the positions you take have to be demeaning to anyone that doesn't think the same way?

 

Now, extending your logic...

 

Let's expand rosters to 35 guys and put entirely different teams out there for offense and defense. That way, we can sign Barry Bonds to hit and get Chris Walker back to play left for him. Theriot can stay at SS, but we can see Hoffpauir or Fox hit for that position instead. Wouldn't that be much more fun? Just find nine guys who can hit and nine guys who can field. Much more exciting. Why all these requirements for players who can excel at everything? They're too damn hard to find.

 

Great post, IMO.

[biittner77]

The only really compelling argument for the DH is that it prevents people like Dusty Baker from overmanaging games.

 

The "I'd rather watch Travis Haffner, Frank Thomas, David Ortiz" argument ignores the fact that these guys could all play somewhere else 1st base/ LF if they had too.

 

The other part of that argument " I don't want to see a pitcher K or bunt" ignores the reality of crappy hitting MI or C that play for some AL teams who do a lot of bunting or striking out.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

At every position on a baseball roster except for one, teams must make a decision on how much defense they are willing to sacrifice for offense. That is the reason for the defensive spectrum, for the relative value of offense by position, etc. It is a fundamental decision every team must make.

 

Except for one position: Pitcher. At that position, there is no "Tradeoff." There will never be a case where team accepts an inferior pitcher becuase he's better offensively. So what's the point of making that person hit?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The other part of that argument " I don't want to see a pitcher K or bunt" ignores the reality of crappy hitting MI or C that play for some AL teams who do a lot of bunting or striking out.

 

That's some ugly equivocation. Bad-hitting MI or Cs are nowhere near the level of pitchers.

[David]

I like the DH, and I find most arguments against it to be pretty reactionary nonsense.

 

A lot of times you see people get misty eyed and talk all about that superior NL "strategy." And then someone comes up with a complete load of crap example. Like: "Your pitcher is throwing a no-hitter in a 0-0 game and comes up with the bases loaded and 1 out in the 8th inning, what do you do?" And I'm thinking to myself "What is this crap? How often in the history of baseball has this happened?"

 

The DH-phobes like to think two things. One, that their reasoning is logical and not emotional, and two, NL baseball is more "pure" than AL baseball when both things are not true. Hey, let's go back to the 1883 version of baseball, that's more "pure."

 

Most pitching changes are utterly routine. The idea that there is some kind of grand chess match of strategy going on in the NL sounds like advertising copy to me. Furthermore, yes, I'd rather watch David Ortiz, Travis Hafner, and so forth, hit without the penalty of watching them have to play defense than to see Doug Davis go 0-43. Micah Owings is swell and all but the novelty factor wears off.

 

In short, the idea that the NL is some grand showcase of strategy is one of the biggest myths that still exists in baseball. When you get right down to the "strategy" that these people wax poetic about, it is usually pretty boring and mundane things. "Whoa! The pitcher used to bat 9th, now that spot is #2! This **** is totally blowing my mind! Now that is STRATERGY."

Why do all of the positions you take have to be demeaning to anyone that doesn't think the same way?

 

Now, extending your logic...

 

Let's expand rosters to 35 guys and put entirely different teams out there for offense and defense. That way, we can sign Barry Bonds to hit and get Chris Walker back to play left for him. Theriot can stay at SS, but we can see Hoffpauir or Fox hit for that position instead. Wouldn't that be much more fun? Just find nine guys who can hit and nine guys who can field. Much more exciting. Why all these requirements for players who can excel at everything? They're too damn hard to find.

 

http://kapcsford.freeblog.hu/Files/bazer/rofl.pwnt-spray.gif

[biittner77]

f all ya'll. to me, baseball died when the batter could no longer tell the pitcher where he wanted the ball to be pitched.

 

Baseball < 1900 pretty much isn't even recognized anymore.

 

"Throw your best apple, Hurler."

 

"If that pitch were any lower, I'd have to dig to hades itself to hit the apple."

[hardcorecubfan]

Bring on the DH. Watching almost every pitcher in the National League make an automatic out is stupid. Watching dudes like Hill and Randy Johnson hit because they have to is basically a joke. I can't understand why anyone likes it. Tradition for the sake of tradition is lame.

 

It isn't that, it is the fact we like the chess match of the NL, where overall talent is important and the manager plays a hand in the games outcome, compared to the the AL that demands barely anything out of the manager and reduces one player to knowing only one skill.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Bring on the DH. Watching almost every pitcher in the National League make an automatic out is stupid. Watching dudes like Hill and Randy Johnson hit because they have to is basically a joke. I can't understand why anyone likes it. Tradition for the sake of tradition is lame.

 

It isn't that, it is the fact we like the chess match of the NL, where overall talent is important and the manager plays a hand in the games outcome, compared to the the AL that demands barely anything out of the manager and reduces one player to knowing only one skill.

 

Most "chess match" decisions in baseball are 51/49 type decisions. There are very few, if any, game-changing decisions based on matchups.

[biittner77]

The other part of that argument " I don't want to see a pitcher K or bunt" ignores the reality of crappy hitting MI or C that play for some AL teams who do a lot of bunting or striking out.

 

That's some ugly equivocation. Bad-hitting MI or Cs are nowhere near the level of pitchers.

 

You're missing the point. People say they'd rather watch Travis Hafner hit than a pitcher. A more accurate statement would be they'd rather see Henry Blanco hit than a pitcher. Of course crappy position players are still better than most pitchers but they aren't all that much fun to watch. In fact I'd rather watch a pitcher try to hit because he does it's a bonus whereas a position player ought to be able to hit. When they can't it's that much worse.