Why Baseball's Designated Hitter Should Be Abolished

I understand both sides of the argument, I just like pitchers hitting has become ridiculous. They are close to being automatic outs. Majority of fans prefer offense, plain and simple

For example, CC Sabathia would actually be more valuable to the Yankees without the DH because he’s such a good-hitting pitcher (.627 career OPS).

Good-hitting pitchers are pretty fun to watch. And bad-hitting pitchers are amusing, moreso than mediocre DHs that teams often resort to.

I would also add to your list: games become more of a challenge between two rosters of 25 players, since bench players are going to have to hit or pinch run or something in late innings in most every game.

I think the DH is a fine idea at developmental levels like HS and college; it gets an extra player some AB and in many cases the pitchers also spend time at a position (or even DH, where the pitcher happens to also be the best hitter on the team) so they’re not totally unprepared to hit once they enter pro ball.

strategy is not getting into 2 out rally and having the pitcher come up to weakly ground out. That is just stupid. I also don’t care about the strategy of the manager. Baseball managers are the least useful team leaders of any other sport, so lets not pretend that this would make a ton of difference. I want the best player out there in the best position. If they can’t field then the DH just helps with that. Also the MLB would never abolish the DH because players would be out of jobs (unless they agreed to up the roster count).

Also I don’t think attendance is directly connected, that sounded like a real reach. There are more ‘old school’ NL teams because the National League has been around longer, the AL teams are all modern era teams so lot of those teams are in secondary markets to fill where NL teams weren’t already located. The Cubs get a lot of attendance because of the history, not because of the lack of a DH. The White Sox history is pretty much the Black Sox and thats it. The AL also has teams like the Rays and Twins who are almost in a tertiary market its so bad.

Finally, I don’t want any of my pitchers running the bases and getting hurt. A pitcher’s #1 priority is working on pitching and taking care of their body, not running the bases and hitting. Wang’s injury should have been an indicator of just how dangerous it can be when you aren’t doing it every day. They aren’t good hitter so it isn’t worth the fuss. basically making an 8 man lineup with an automatic out is not strategy, its silly. I honestly don’t even know why the DH isn’t a permanent position by now and is still viewed as a replacement for the pitcher. You should be able to move anyone into the DH if need be without worrying about the pitcher batting.

This is all personal opinion and probably contrary to how a ton of people feel. There are equal arguments for just the opposite position. Quite frankly, this is like asking me if I want fries or onion rings. I have a preference, but sometimes I’ll go with a change of pace. Some people are diehards. In the end, there’s really not much here to say but shrug. Tomato/tomato

do you mean just in the AL or is that in all of MLB? Because if no one in the NL has done it either, that would eliminate the DH as a scapegoat. I would assume, at the risk of making an ass out of u and me, that the lower inning count is due more to the increase of bullpen use and the managerial fear of that infamous 100th pitch.

The Yankees will need that spot in the coming years for all the old men they’ll have playing for them (i.e. ARod). But in the abstract, I’ve come to prefer NL-style baseball, if only marginally.

Something also needs to be said for making headhunters like Josh Beckett have to step into the box.

Not that it will ever happen.

See: Bullpens, specialization.

I don’t see anyone doing it in the NL either.

Offense sells! Everyone is pretty much ignoring that point.

If one views baseball as the tension between hitters and pitchers than DH is the preferred style- a great AL pitcher is even greater as he faces more good hiiters.

I don’t really buy the “more strategy” argument- I don’t watch baseball to watch managerial moves.

Only thing is I would say is that both leagues have the same rules- I perfer the DH but would much perfer uniformity (and the D’Backs in the AL West and the Astros in the NL West- if we must have to odd numbered leagues).

but I actually think that there should be two DH’s in the lineup. Allow the catcher and pitcher to only focus on shutting down the opposing offense at the plate and on the base-paths. This would allow the Yankees to have the pleasure of having Martin behind the plate while never actually having him go up to bat. Montero would be the one to take the bat out of his hands of course. Oh and I am being totally serious. I could actually see Selig implementing this before he retires though. Time to go get a drink.

Here’s some classic NL strategy for you: Runner on 3rd, 2 outs, and the 8th batter in the lineup is up. If you think there’s any sort of strategy involved in what happens next, you’re fooling yourself because every single NL manager does exactly what you know is going to happen in this situation. Furthermore…

- NL baseball actually requires some strategy on the part of the managers. What a concept! Outside of deciding when and where to use certain relievers, AL managers’ strategy is pretty much just setting the lineup and the starting rotation, both of which even a casual baseball fan could do. NL managers have to monitor their starters far more closely. It’s not as simple as deciding when they’ve “lost it,” because several other factors play a part: 1) is the pitcher due to hit in the next inning, 2) is the game close, 3) do you risk a few more batters in order not to have to “waste” a reliever for just one out, 4) what about a double-switch, 5) do you use your best pinch-hitter or save him for later on?

AL Managers also have to factor in not just bullpen relievers, but if they want said hitter to face bullpen relievers, like say putting in Andruw Jones to pinch hit against someone he hits well against, or go for more reliable defense. As for the other factors, I’ll answer each one. 1) If it’s Roy Halladay or another top tier starter and he’s pitching like normal, he’s not coming out. For other pitchers, unless there pitch count is really high, they’re most likely staying in if they are pitching well. 2) Same answer as #1 3) Depends on the inning & pitch count. Most NL & AL pitchers are expected to go 6 innings. 4) Same answer as #3 5) AL Managers deal with this as well, but again it depends on the inning & pitch count.

Both AL & NL managers look at the pitch count more than other factors, which is sad mind you, but that’s the way it works. If they are pitching well, then they’re probably good for 6-7 innings. If they’re Roy Halladay and they’re pitching well, they’re probably going all 9 innings. For all this magical NL strategy, the pitching strategy is nearly the same: If he’s pitching really well, he’s staying in. If not, we’ll go to the bullpen. The only difference is that the NL managers might go to their bullpen in the 5th cause they pinch hit for him, but usually that’s only the case if the pitcher’s pitch count is high or he just isn’t pitching that well. Both leagues can be managed by a casual fan.

- In 2007, AL games lasted six minutes longer than NL games. That doesn’t seem like much on a given night, but over the course of a season, that adds up to nearly 1000 extra minutes (more than 16 hours) of AL baseball.* I personally prefer two-and-a-half hour, crisp, well-played, well-pitched contests.

Trust me when I say that NO ONE on this site looks at the time of game more than I do, and there’s little difference between NL & AL games except for Yankees & Red Sox games, and perhaps Dodger games as well sometimes. 2.5 baseball is very rare, no matter the league. Believe me, I loooooooong for those games, but if I get a 3 hour game, I’m satisfied.

- It discourages versatility in ballplayers. Why bother working on fielding when your hitting is sufficient to earn a ML paycheck? Would it not make for a more-balanced and enjoyable game to know that all nine fielders had to swing a bat, and that all nine batters had to field and throw? I mean, why not have designated runners and fielders while we’re at it?

Sure it would. The problem is that with the majority of NL teams, all nine fielders cannot hit, namely the pitcher. 95% of the time the pitcher is an automatic out, so much so that I’ve seen NL pitchers walk the 8th batter in the lineup and walk the bases loaded just to face the pitcher because he’s hands down the easiest out in the lineup. And it works the majority of the time. The excitement from the pitcher actually getting a hit in that situation is because you didn’t think he was going to, at all. To me, that’s fleeting.

- Pre-1973, pitchers had to be evaluated on more than just their arm. Hitting was a not insignificant part of a pitcher’s repertoire. A good-hitting mediocre pitcher might be more valuable than a poor-hitting above-average pitcher. For example, CC Sabathia would actually be more valuable to the Yankees without the DH because he’s such a good-hitting pitcher (.627 career OPS).

Pre-1973, pitchers could actually hit better. That’s not happening in this day and age.

- Pitchers OPS’ed a pathetic .357 in 2011. Only two positions hit better than DH’s this season, first-basemen and right fielders. It’s much tougher on pitchers to have to face “professional hitters” than other pitchers. That, in turn, puts more stress on their bodies, thereby reducing the numbers of innings they can pitch and leading to more injuries.** A pitcher hasn’t thrown 300 innings in more than 30 years. Before the DH, it was a relatively common occurrence.

And here’s the reason: Pitch count, pitch count, pitch count, pitch count, pitch count.

- Since they already have AL pitchers hitting in interleague play, why not make it universal so that they’re used to swinging a bat and and running the bases? Chien-Ming Wang had all of eight ML plate appearances before the infamous game in Houston where he injured his foot and was never the same again. MLB could have eliminated interleague play to prevent these types of injuries to pitchers, but they’ve done the opposite: increase it (with Houston’s move to the AL). Therefore, pitchers need to adjust to running and hitting, and that means eliminating the DH.

Despite my hatred of interleague, Wang’s injury was essentially a fluke. Plenty of AL pitcher who hit during interleague do not get injured, whether they get on base or not. However, interleague needs to be abolished anyway.

- While attendance across MLB has risen over the last 40 years, the teams drawing the fewest fans today are mostly in AL (i.e. DH) towns. What now, Bud? Two DH’s?

Pitcher’s hitting or DH are irrelevant to attendance. I’d venture to say that more AL teams suck more than most NL teams. The NL West race is exciting and close. The NL Central race was also exciting. LoL, with the Astros moving to the AL West, that’s not going to make the AL West anymore exciting due to the fact that for the time being, only the Angels have any legitimate shot of competing with the Rangers. Hell, the Rays are an exciting team to watch. The problem is that they’re in “old, retired, Yankees/Red Sox” fan land and have little of a fanbase of their own.

To close, neither AL or NL baseball have much strategy involved. Personally, I like the fact that both leagues are different. I thought it makes the game unique, plus it made the All-Star game and World Series more exciting. No, the problem is Bud Selig and his attempts to ruin the sport. Full DH or Full Pitcher’s Hitting wouldn’t even be a fucking issue if there was no goddamn interleague. Now it is because thanks to his dicktardedness, we’re going to see more and more of it, and it sickens me. Especially because the schedules will still not be balanced (in fact I think they’ll be even more imbalanced) and the only logical reason to move the Astros to the AL West is to try to build a rivalry between them and the Rangers AND to shove more interleague down our throats.

The fact that it can prolong some players careers, and that it makes it more likely that pitchers in particular don’t get hurt. Pitchers should focus on pitching. And the DH will allow older players who may be injury prone but still have something left with the bat to still contribute (thats where I expect A-Rod is headed in a few years).

Whats the fun of watching a pitcher walk up to the plate and look lost? Is it because it’s funny? If you want to see funny baseball, just subscribe to NESN.

Is it strategy? Well, while having no DH adds some strategy of double switching, when to bunt, when to pinch hit, ect, you also lose some of the strategy that the American League can offer. For example, in the NL it’s often easy to decide when to make pitching changes because you have to use a pinch hitter. In the AL, the use of the bullpen is very strategized and taking away the DH will take some of that away.

If there’s a change I’d want to make, it’s to add the DH to both leagues. Not to eliminate it.

Too many people only care about offense. Just listen to anybody who dislikes Soccer and eventually they’ll cry about games ending in 0-0 ties.

Strategy? Defense? American sports fans laugh at these things. Give them the big home runs and high scoring games.

It’s a shame, too. They don’t really appreciate games like AJ vs. Beckett that went into all those extra innings. One of the best games I’ve watched and it certainly wasn’t a high scoring game.

What’s so bad about six more minutes of baseball? The more the better! Also, baseball may have thrived without the DH, but it is never stronger than it is now. Besides, baseball survived and thrived with segregation, but that doesn’t mean it was a good policy. Finally, pitchers were never good hitters. In 1956, they had an OPS of .384 (those who played 90% of games as a pitcher), which wasn’t much better than last year. And, if having to face the DH puts so much stress on the arm, shouldn’t we see many more injuries in the A.L.?

Get rid of the DH? Never…I say we not only add one in the NL, but have a second one hit for the catcher!

In all seriousness, I like having a distinction between the two leagues.

I prefer not having the DH. One argument I’ve not seen much of in this discussion is the concept from even the earliest days of baseball that every player has to play both offense and defense in the game. As to the prolonging of careers, maybe those are careers that should not be prolonged. I think the people who get more of a free pass with the DH are not managers but GMs. They and to lesser extent field managers do not have to make the tough decision of when does a player’s bat not outweigh his fielding.
As an aside, I firmly believe the 2006 ALCS collapse vs the Sox doesn’t happen; because without the decision to move Ortiz to DH, the Sox don’t make the playoffs that year. Remember that decision was made after a particularly Buckneesque play by Ortiz in a game at Yankee Stadium. Note this is solely an opinion.