Why The NL Should Add The DH
When was the last time you watched an NFL game, saw the kicker come out for the point after attempt, and said to yourself "boy, I'd like to see that guy try to play left tackle"?
When was the last time you watched an NBA game, and saw 5'5, 135 lb Earl Boykins and said, "boy, I'd sure love to see him try to guard Lebron James"?
If you've ever said either of these things, then I can't give you a hard time if you enjoy watching National League pitchers walk up to the plate and flail helplessly at the opposing pitcher's offerings. But if you haven't, and I suspect most of you haven't, then I really can't buy your argument against the DH.
You heard the other side of this argument yesterday, but as much as I like Travis, I have to disagree wholeheartedly. The DH is a wonderful thing, and after universal instant replay, it's the one thing that Major League Baseball needs to institute immediately.
Why?
My rebuttal to Travis's points:
Baseball was doing fine before the DH - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. You could use this to argue against every major innovation that's happened in the game over the past century. MLB was doing fine before interleague play. MLB was doing fine before the Wild Card. MLB was doing fine before night games. MLB was doing fine before they started allowing pitchers to throw overhand in 1884. You get my point. Just because baseball was doing well doesn't mean it was perfect, so this argument doesn't really stand out in my book.
NL baseball requires strategy thanks to the pitchers hitting. While this statement is accurate, I'll qualify it with two words - Tony LaRussa.
It discourages versatility in players (why learn how to field?). The reality is that, rightly or wrongly, hitting has almost always trumped fielding in the eyes of most teams, and there have always been good hit/no field players in MLB, DH or no DH. Manny Ramirez and Gary Sheffield are the two worst defensive players I can think of who've played recently, and they both spent significant time in the NL. Heck, there's a 50/50 chance that some NL team is going to give themselves the chance this offseason to let Prince Fielder play the field when he's a 350 lb 36-year old. If defensive versatility really mattered to teams, the landscape of baseball would look much, much different, DH or no DH.
Pre-1973, pitchers could add value through their hitting. It's true that pitchers only OPSed .357 in 2011, but in the 20 years before the DH, they only managed to OPS above .500 once. .500 is better than .357, but they both stink. In some isolated cases, a good hitting pitcher could approach league-average at the plate and add value, but this is rare. Since 1973, only 10 NL starting pitchers have managed to post an OPS+ of 100 in a season, making this event just slightly less rare than a perfect game.
Hit batters have increased since pitchers don't fear retribution. Perhaps this is true, but maybe the increase has been mitigated by skittish umpires who warn both teams after a breaking ball clearly gets away from the pitcher accidentally and hits the batter. In any event, hitters now wear body armor, so the likelihood of sustaining real, bodily pain from a pitch is pretty slim anyway.
The argument for uniformity. Chien-Ming Wang got hurt running the bases in an interleague game. With more interleague games on the schedule, I suppose you could argue that pitchers need more practice at the plate and on the bases; I'd argue the opposite, and say that we should eliminate the possibility of this type of injury ever happening to any pitcher. Uniformity is uniformity.
The lowest drawing teams are in the AL - coincidence? Do the A's and Rays draw small crowds because they have a DH, or is it because they play in awful stadiums? Do the Orioles draw small crowds because of the DH, or is it because they haven't had a winning season in 14 years? Did the Phillies lead the majors in attendance last season because their fans enjoyed watching Cliff Lee and Roy Halladay bunt?
I'll leave you with this point. Ivan Nova had to bat in two interleague games this past season, and prior to that, his last in-game at bats came in...well, your guess is as good as mine. The Yankees signed Nova out of the Dominican Republic in 2004, and since the instructional leagues and the minors (and college, for that matter) use a DH, most pitchers who make the majors go several seasons between real at-bats, especially Latin American players who get signed while most American-born players are still in high school. Asking MLB pitchers to be good hitters under these circumstances is kind of like asking top hitting prospects to suddenly start pitching once they reach the majors. It just doesn't make sense.
21 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I understand, but disagree.
Like I wrote, I didn’t expect most people to agree with me. The DH is what we know.
But I’ll reiterate a few points: I know pitchers suck at hitting, but where do you draw the line at “designated” players? Why not D-fielders, or D-runners, or even 2 DHs? Why should Russell Martin be in the every day lineup when loads of other guys could hit better?
Pitchers will still find a way to get injured with a DH. Colon got hurt running to cover 1B. I believe training to run and hit might get them into better overall shape rather than working purely on pitching. I’d like to see AL vs. NL pitcher injuries from 1973 on.
No, the DH is not causing fans to avoid those AL teams like TB and Oakland, but my point was that it certainly wasn’t drawing them in either.
I know pitchers suck at hitting, but where do you draw the line at "designated" players? Why not D-fielders, or D-runners, or even 2 DHs? Why should Russell Martin be in the every day lineup when loads of other guys could hit better?
For now (who knows with Selig), they have drawn the line at pitcher’s not hitting. There are lots of good hitting fielders out there, so fielders who do not hit can be replaced, like they are in pinch-hitting situations. Same with pinch-runners as well. That’s the same strategy used for both AL and NL managers.
There are practically no good hitting pitchers. Sure, maybe there are some good hitting pitchers out there who hit slightly better than they pitch, but if that’s the case than then the games are going to be longer because you’ll have a pitcher pitching worse and hitting better, which will most likely account for the 6 minute difference. That’s why they focus on their pitching rather than their hitting, no matter whether it’s in the AL or NL. Do the Phillies really give a fuck about Halladay or Lee’s average or on base percentage, or do they focus more on their K’s and 9 inning shutout gems? What really amazes me is the idea that NL games end quicker, when the only reason they do is because there’s a guaranteed out in the lineup.
LoL, as for Martin, why do you think I want Montero behind the plate so much?
Pitchers will still find a way to get injured with a DH. Colon got hurt running to cover 1B. I believe training to run and hit might get them into better overall shape rather than working purely on pitching. I’d like to see AL vs. NL pitcher injuries from 1973 on.
If pitchers will get injured with or without the DH, that makes said point irrelevant to the matter at hand. Pitchers train to run regardless, cause they still have to field the ball. Having them train to hit will do nothing to increase or decrease injury, not to mention that NL managers don’t give a shit about their pitchers hitting anyway. That’s why they’re trained to bunt a lot more than they are to hit, because a lot of times they want the pitcher safe and sound back in the dugout.
No, the DH is not causing fans to avoid those AL teams like TB and Oakland, but my point was that it certainly wasn’t drawing them in either.
Again if it’s neither helping nor hurting these teams to draw in fans, then said point is irrelevant. It means that there inability to draw fans is due to an entirely different reason and has nothing to do with pitcher’s hitting or having a DH.
"WHO WOULD LEAD?! THE CLOWN?!"
by I'mGivingYouARaise on Nov 29, 2011 2:50 PM EST up reply actions
Rebuttal
fielders who do not hit can be replaced, like they are in pinch-hitting situations.
But managers do have to “suffer” with their hitting at least a few times, and the pinch-hitter doesn’t hit for them throughout the game like a DH. That’s the strategy. Go with the defense-first or offense-first player? Do you want Ozzie Smith’s superior D and sub-par bat or Derek Jeter’s great bat and poor fielding?
There are practically no good hitting pitchers.
Ok, let’s say there are none: so what? Why is there this belief that all nine hitters have to be great? Anyway, pitchers don’t entirely suck at hitting. Good athletes are good athletes. They can have good hitting seasons. In 2010, Yovani Gallardo OPS’d .837 and Dan Haren .902. They wouldn’t do it over 500 AB, but some probably could hit decently enough if they had more practice.
That’s why they’re trained to bunt a lot more than they are to hit, because a lot of times they want the pitcher safe and sound back in the dugout.
They also know the team has a better chance to win if he gets a bunt down than to swing away. But as for injuries, what do players do to improve their stamina and pitching: they pitch; hitting: they hit, running: they run; fielding: they field, etc. It’s not irrelevant. There’s this belief that pitchers would fall all over themselves if they swung a bat. With more practice, they wouldn’t.
there inability to draw fans is due to an entirely different reason and has nothing to do with pitcher’s hitting or having a DH.
And I’m saying one of the big reasons the DH was started was to increase revenue through increased attendance. It’s not the primary reason Oakland and Tampa Bay aren’t drawing, but the DH seems to not be making any difference. So why is it there?
by Travis G on Nov 29, 2011 7:16 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't mind them being separate at all
However, any time AL vs NL exists (IL play, WS, AS) the DH should be used. It’s not fair that AL pitchers should have to risk injury nor does it make sense that since colleges also use DH, meaning more minimal ABs for pitchers, that these pitchers have to hit. Bottom line is this. I like watching pitchers pitch and hitters hit. Unfortunately, baseball has become about specialization. 1 inning closers and set up men, middle and long relievers. Nothing wrong with the DH. I’ve grown up with Mantle and Maris and Murcer. I would just like to see the games be equal when AL plays NL.
Most important point
I’ll leave you with this point. Ivan Nova had to bat in two interleague games this past season, and prior to that, his last in-game at bats came in…well, your guess is as good as mine. The Yankees signed Nova out of the Dominican Republic in 2004, and since the instructional leagues and the minors (and college, for that matter) use a DH, most pitchers who make the majors go several seasons between real at-bats, especially Latin American players who get signed while most American-born players are still in high school. Asking MLB pitchers to be good hitters under these circumstances is kind of like asking top hitting prospects to suddenly start pitching once they reach the majors. It just doesn’t make sense.
No training = No point.
"Don't you think it's strange that you'll make more money than President Hoover this year?"
"Why not? I had a better year than he did." - G.H. Ruth
That's exactly what I thought too
The idiot formerly known as pkyankeefan! Now in Technicolour!
by Hasan Paliwala on Nov 29, 2011 3:21 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I am old enough to remember baseball in the 1960s, and it wasn't pretty.
It isn’t pretty now, either, but for different reasons. The DH has definitely taken the AL game up a notch. Pitchers who can hit or run still do so from time to time in American League games, and giving up the DH to bring that player into the game happens as well. These are all strategies that don’t come into play in the National League. As simplistic as some fans imagine AL ball to be, those same people can still be heard berating the managers for an inability to manage a game correctly.
I guess I’m just tired of seeing pitchers bat in NL games with runners on 2nd and 3rd in the 2nd inning and strike out.
by designatedquitter on Nov 29, 2011 4:26 PM EST reply actions
Agree
I started following baseball in 1949, and I cannot recall any instance of a pitcher making a team or becoming a starter because he was a better hitter than another pitcher. A pitcher’s hitting ability has never been that important, so taking hitting away from pitchers also shouldn’t be important either.
Mickey C
When was the last time you watched an NFL game, saw the kicker come out for the point after attempt, and said to yourself “boy, I’d like to see that guy try to play left tackle”?
When was the last time you watched an NBA game, and saw 5’5, 135 lb Earl Boykins and said, “boy, I’d sure love to see him try to guard Lebron James”?
In basketball, it’s not like Earl Boykins can play offense and then say, “Hold on, let me get off the court really quick so some one else can guard LeBron.”
In football, no one plays on both sides of th eball.
I understand what you’re saying, but I don’t see how these are good comparisons.
For the record, I hate the lack of a DH. Just saying, if eight players have to play the field and hit, why shouldn’t all nine?
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Nov 29, 2011 5:54 PM EST reply actions
If baseball
were like football, the hitters, pitchers and fielders would all be separate. Rosters would contain 50 players. Games might last 4+ hours because no one would worry about a hitter’s defense. It would all be David Ortizes and Jim Thomes and Vlad Guerreros and so on. I like that players have to play offense and defense. There’s just something intellectually more enjoyable about it.
I agree, I like that players play both ways. There definitely is something more intellctually enjoyable. I just hate that some of them (pitchers) are just so bad on offense.
But then again, like you and others have pointed out, why not just designate a fielder for the Jason Giambis of the world if we can designate a hitter for the pitcher?
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
Follow me on Twitter @frankiecamp48
by Frank Campagnola on Nov 29, 2011 7:29 PM EST up reply actions
Obviously the DH works within the pre-existing confines of the 25 man MLB roster, and that’s why the AL owners created it (as opposed to creating designated hitters AND designated fielders AND designated runners).
I think my last paragraph is really the point, though. If pitchers had to hit throughout college, the instructional leagues, and the minors, then I could live with them hitting in the majors. But Ivan Nova probably went 8 years between real at-bats, and Roy Halladay probably went 14 years without getting more than 9 real at-bats in a season. Watching these guys come to the plate under those circumstance is just absurd.
Jesus Montero has to be a full-time catcher, or the Yankees have to trade him. One or the other. Based on the age and contracts of the other players on this team, that's the only place he fits long-term on the Yankees roster.
I agree
as i mentioned yesterday, GMs and Field Managers always had to balance a players hitting vs his defense. Hitting, as someone mentioned earlier, usually trumps fielding, but often there comes a point at which a player’s lack of defensive skill outweighs his hitting prowess. With the DH, manager does not have to make that choice.
"I don't want one of those guys who'll drive in two but let in three every game." Casey Stengel
by tnredneckyankeesfan on Nov 29, 2011 7:29 PM EST up reply actions
So, arbitrary rules being more symmetric trumps an obvious and simple way to substitute good play for terrible play?
Baseball Statistics and Acronyms Explained
Follow me on the tweetbox - @LordDuggan12
The first comment (mine) answers your first question- Lou Groza was the Cleveland Browns kicker and offensive tackle.
Julian Edelman of the Patriots plays offense, defense (cornerback) and kick returns (runback and defense of same). Other than that, he hardly does anything
by designatedquitter on Nov 30, 2011 10:26 AM EST up reply actions
Couple of points to consider
the DH does not necessarily have to hit for the pitcher. 99.99999% of the time they will. We could have a situation where CC hits and the DH bats for Pena in a game.
NL is not the only place the DH is not used. I know in Southern League (AA League) if both teams are NL affiliates then they play by NL rules. If either team is an AL affiliate then AL rules are used regardless of who is the home team. I’m not sure if the same applies to all minor leagues.
"I don't want one of those guys who'll drive in two but let in three every game." Casey Stengel
by tnredneckyankeesfan on Nov 29, 2011 7:08 PM EST reply actions
I say let the NL keep on keepin' on
I like that there’s still some real distinction between the style of the two leagues. A little variety keeps things interesting

by 



































