Has anyone else started to soften up to the DH?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

A further thing, if the DH is ok, why not courtesy runners. I've seen this used in high school leagues. Pitchers and catchers don't have to run. A courtesy runner is allowed to be inserted for that player. If it's ok to have a DH, why not a courtesy runner?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

A further thing, if the DH is ok, why not courtesy runners. I've seen this used in high school leagues. Pitchers and catchers don't have to run. A courtesy runner is allowed to be inserted for that player. If it's ok to have a DH, why not a courtesy runner?

 

Same point as above: When relative speed is no longer a factor in the selection of the players. If catchers' speed becomes so irrelevant that a catcher with literally no ability to run is considered fine, then sure.

 

Edited to add:

 

Courtesy runners aren't unheard of in MLB, though:

http://www.retrosheet.org/courtesy.htm

[FergieJ31]

Interesting discussion on both sides of the argument. I hate the DH rule but as I read this thread I started trying to think about how I'd articulate exactly why, and without references to purism or strategy. Actually Bill James demonstrated that the DH rule actually increases strategy, using standard deviation of possible game outcomes as a proxy (related to what we'd now call leverage, the LI index).

 

I also wanted to avoid waxing poetic about 'purism' - but actually I think 'symmetry' is a much better term. The DH simply destroys the symmetry of the game. The nine guys the manager slates to start a game should be forced to take the field, and those same nine guys should take their turn at bat. Not eight.

 

Here are two more reasons why I hate the DH:

 

1. The rule was introduced in 1973 because AL attendance was sagging. The purpose was to artificially spark fan interest by artificially creating more offense. Fine. The history of baseball is full of modest rule changes to increase / decrease average runs per game, e.g. lowering the mound in 1968 or others: http://www.baseball-almanac.com/rulechng.shtml

 

Take a look at these changes. The vast majority qualify as tweaks to emphasize, diminish, abolish, etc. various aspects of the game. The DH was not a tweak - it was a drastic revision. In retrospect the DH was just a stunt that boosted AL attendance short-term but did nothing to address the long-term problems with baseball economics, created in part by free agency. In fact it made things slightly worse by creating a market for all-bat no-glove sluggers.

 

2. A seldom-discussed aspect of baseball, but obvious to anyone who's played, is the occasional intimidation factor. If the pitcher doesn't have to take the batter's box he can generally take more liberties throwing inside - or just flat out throwing at guys - with relative impunity. Case in point: Roger Clemens.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

2. A seldom-discussed aspect of baseball, but obvious to anyone who's played, is the occasional intimidation factor. If the pitcher doesn't have to take the batter's box he can generally take more liberties throwing inside - or just flat out throwing at guys - with relative impunity. Case in point: Roger Clemens.

 

This has been discussed a lot, but there is no tendency for AL pitchers to hit more batters than NL pitchers, or for pitchers whose careers cross leagues to hit more when they are in the AL.