How do you feel about the designated hitter?

[DodgerKing]

I think that it's beyond assinine that, for the last 37 years, the two leagues have played under different rules.

I personally don't care if there's a DH or not, just play by the same rules.

I actually like distinct rules.

In fact, I preferred it when the two leagues were even more distinct by never playing against each other in the regular season, using different umpire crews, using different set of rules for meetings at the mound, and having two distinct league presidents.

Baseball, unlike other sports, is made of 2 different leagues.

 

[BillD1984]

I actually like distinct rules.

In fact, I preferred it when the two leagues were even more distinct by never playing against each other in the regular season, using different umpire crews, using different set of rules for meetings at the mound, and having two distinct league presidents.

Baseball, unlike other sports, is made of 2 different leagues.

Okay fine, but whose set of rules do we use for the World Series?

 

[DodgerKing]

Okay fine, but whose set of rules do we use for the World Series?

The home team

 

[Will94]

In fact, I preferred it when the two leagues were even more distinct by never playing against each other in the regular season, using different umpire crews, using different set of rules for meetings at the mound, and having two distinct league presidents.

Baseball, unlike other sports, is made of 2 different leagues.

Amen! I remember when the National League had a reputation for a lower strike zone.

 

[DodgerKing]

Amen! I remember when the National League had a reputation for a lower strike zone.

Yep...

The AL used to use those big mattress pads as their chest protector and because of it they could not get down low enough in a crouch. The inability to get low meant they had a higher line of sight and thus called higher strikes.

 

[BillD1984]

The home team

That's EXACTLY what I don't like.

You play 162 games and up to 12 postseason games, then you get to the World Series and the rules change for one team!??

Sorry, but IMO, that's ludicrous!

 

[Jimbo]

Mixed feelings.

I hate it because it removes a good deal of strategy from the game. I love watching all the moves a manager in the NL makes in the late innings of a close game. I feel like AL fans are getting cheated when it comes to this part of the game.

On the other hand, it has extended the careers of many great players and its hard to argue that this is a bad thing.

I was on the opposite end from you in high school Sabres. I hated the DH because I was a pitcher and always had someone hit for me (because I couldn't hit very well). I would have loved to get in there and taken my cuts on the days I pitched.

It also created a way for many players that cannot field to stay in the game, BUT, many now are not a whole lot better than the pitchers hitting.

I saw a stat about a month ago, probably when the interleague stuff happened, that said the DH is only hitting about .220 ....

 

[TNGTony]

That's EXACTLY what I don't like.

You play 162 games and up to 12 postseason games, then you get to the World Series and the rules change for one team!??

Sorry, but IMO, that's ludicrous!

The rules change for BOTH teams. Each team gets home games so there is no disadvantage.

I ask all you DH proponents again, why not have a designated hitting team and a defensive team? What is the difference between having a DH for a pitcher and having a DH for a great SS with a weak bat? Or a fabulous veteran catcher with no knees left to run the bases? Or an outfielder with a rocket arm and great skills and a propensity to strike out?

Or even more outlandish... a designated runner (DR) for slow players with good bats? This is a SERIOUS question. Why not? If one is a good thing, why not the others?

This is a serious question? If you are for a pitcher's DH, how can you be against a completely different offensive team and defensive team?

"I hate seeing pitchers hit"

I hate seeing bad hitters (sub .250) try to hit and being left in the game because they are great defensive players! (not really--but it's the same silly statement)

 

[BillD1984]

The rules change for BOTH teams. Each team gets home games so there is no disadvantage.

I understand that, but I just think it's beyond silly that you play by the same rules for 6+ months (whether it's AL or NL rules), then you play the seven biggest games of the year to determine a champion of baseball and the rules change for one of the teams in all seven games.

 

[TNGTony]

Because one league has rules that make sense and the other league insists on replacing the pitcher in the batting line up instead of sticking to the rules of 9 players playing the entire game! That's why.

My questions about a DH line-up and "DR" possibilities are still on the table.

See ya
Tony

 

[BillD1984]

Because one league has rules that make sense and the other league insists on replacing the pitcher in the batting line up instead of sticking to the rules of 9 players playing the entire game! That's why.

My questions about a DH line-up and "DR" possibilities are still on the table.

See ya
Tony

I definitely see your point.

I just want to see the same rules for everybody, so when we get to the biggest stage in the sport (ie. the World Series) we have uniformity.

I was brought up a fan in an AL city, but if I HAD to choose one or the other I'd choose the NL way.

 

[rittjc]

I am for the DH. I don't want to see pitchers injure themselves (i.e. Wang-Yankees) running bases. I want to see pitchers pitch without a rally-buster hitter (i.e. the pitcher) that couldn't hit the Mendoza line in his best season.

I know all the arguments against the DH. "Everybody plays everybody hits". But, by the exact same logic you can expose another arbitrary hypocrisy and turn it around and say that everybody bats, so everybody pitches. Every player should have 1 inning of pitching. It is the same "balance" issue to the game because pitching is far more difficult than hitting. Don't punish teams with good pitchers by making them be pulled from a game to get a potential "critical hit" in a 0-0 game. It rewards poor hitters and punishes good pitchers. How is that fair? Same could be said of rotating through all specialist positions from catcher to outfielder like they do in volleyball. It makes no sense.

But, I don't want to watch football and see a QB be forced to play linebacker and the seemingly "less professional" defense that would display. Every position in football has a specialist so we don't have to see a QB trying to be a LB. It optimizes the talent that people come to see.

If you are hung up on tradition, then consider the change of tradition of raising the pitchers mound. Could Babe Ruth as fat and non-muscular as he was, hit the 98 mph fast balls we see regularly today with the higher mounds? Ask any pitcher and they say the modern speeds come from higher mounds. Babe Ruth never had to hit against rocket balls like hitters do today.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[TNGTony]

Okay so I don't want to see a rallybusting batter (if you insist...the pitcher), but what if the rallybusting batter happens to be your best player which is the first baseman that can dig out the worst thrown ball for an out every time? Why not have a DH for him too?

If you want to use the QB analogy then we can use the ENTIRE football analogy. You have an offensive line and a defensive line. In the NFL it is a very rare thing for a player to go both ways. Why not the same for baseball?

I know we "traditionalists" get crap because we want to keep the game the way it was meant to be played and not bastardized to suit the whims of those that want to make the game "exciting" by removing one of the most strategic portions of the game! And BTW the everybody hits, everybody pitches argument is ridiculous and you know it. No one has ever proposed rotating positions. The proposal is strictly that one player, the pitcher can't bat for himself!

My question stands. Some one please explain why if a DH for a pitcher is okay then why is it that a fantastic 1st baseman with a weak "rally-busting" bat should be forced to bat for himself, and why is it that a "DR" (designated runner) for a great bat with no legs not a great thing for the game?

See ya
Tony

 

[TNGTony]

BTW... If you had a player batting .338 with 27 homers in a year, wouldn't you want him to bat for himself?

Pedro Borbon 1987.

Jason Marquis had a .310 batting average in 2005.

SOME pitchers don't hit well in the majors because they are not expected to, not because you can't have pitchers with good bats! Specialization in baseball is not supposed to happen!

See ya
Tony

 

[Ramy]

The rules change for BOTH teams. Each team gets home games so there is no disadvantage.

I ask all you DH proponents again, why not have a designated hitting team and a defensive team? What is the difference between having a DH for a pitcher and having a DH for a great SS with a weak bat? Or a fabulous veteran catcher with no knees left to run the bases? Or an outfielder with a rocket arm and great skills and a propensity to strike out?

Or even more outlandish... a designated runner (DR) for slow players with good bats? This is a SERIOUS question. Why not? If one is a good thing, why not the others?

This is a serious question? If you are for a pitcher's DH, how can you be against a completely different offensive team and defensive team?

"I hate seeing pitchers hit"

I hate seeing bad hitters (sub .250) try to hit and being left in the game because they are great defensive players! (not really--but it's the same silly statement)

Babe Ruth had a designated runner at one time.

 

[jbernardi]

I'm totally against the DH. It dumbs down baseball. It removes one of the classic managerial situations. (Do I remove a pitcher who's throwing well because we need a hit here?)

 

[TNGTony]

Babe Ruth had a designated runner at one time.

A designated "pinch runner" maybe. Sammy Byrd. Once Babe came out of the game, he wasn't allowed back in. AFAIK the rest is a myth.

A designated runner would have the ability to run the bases every time, even from home plate. (Pinch runner from home plate is currently only allowed if a player hits a home run and on the way to first is injured or incapacitated --eg Faints, breaks his ankle on a gopher hole on the way to first) then the hitter could come back up and hit for himself once his turn at bat came back up.

See ya
Tony

 

[DodgerKing]

Babe Ruth had a designated runner at one time.

Babe Ruth was actually a sleak footed fast outfielder as well. Most people see his big belly and think that guy was not very athletic. The dude could actually run pretty well.

 

[Paul Wozniak]

I am for the DH. I don't want to see pitchers injure themselves (i.e. Wang-Yankees) running bases. I want to see pitchers pitch without a rally-buster hitter (i.e. the pitcher) that couldn't hit the Mendoza line in his best season.

I know all the arguments against the DH. "Everybody plays everybody hits". But, by the exact same logic you can expose another arbitrary hypocrisy and turn it around and say that everybody bats, so everybody pitches. Every player should have 1 inning of pitching. It is the same "balance" issue to the game because pitching is far more difficult than hitting. Don't punish teams with good pitchers by making them be pulled from a game to get a potential "critical hit" in a 0-0 game. It rewards poor hitters and punishes good pitchers. How is that fair? Same could be said of rotating through all specialist positions from catcher to outfielder like they do in volleyball. It makes no sense.

But, I don't want to watch football and see a QB be forced to play linebacker and the seemingly "less professional" defense that would display. Every position in football has a specialist so we don't have to see a QB trying to be a LB. It optimizes the talent that people come to see.

If you are hung up on tradition, then consider the change of tradition of raising the pitchers mound. Could Babe Ruth as fat and non-muscular as he was, hit the 98 mph fast balls we see regularly today with the higher mounds? Ask any pitcher and they say the modern speeds come from higher mounds. Babe Ruth never had to hit against rocket balls like hitters do today.

Just my 2 cents.

The mound was actually lowered 6" in the late 60's, (I believe the timeline to be somewhere about then).

 

[TheTimm]

I like the DH exactly how it is. One league with it and one league without it. People who like it can watch the league with it, people who hate it can watch the league without it. Works for me.