I heard the MLB is talking about OR has already adopted the Designated Hitter (DH) rule for all the MLB, not just the American League. Is this final? And, won’t this ruin the game for a sport that flounders to draw audiences? (Why did the AL go this way in the first place?)
Of course not. It improves the game for the vast majority of the viewing public.
(If you’re going to assert an unsupported personal opinion as if it were objective fact, two can play that silly game.)
Gnoitall says: “Of course not. It improves the game for the vast majority of the viewing public.”
Can you elaborate on your position? I assume you understand the flip side regarding how the lack of a DH makes the game “spicier” in the National League?
Dear G’Tall: Any MLB baseball fan would understand what I am asking, and my statement requires no further explanation. It is empirical when watching a few AL games vs. a few NL games.
The “spicier” without the DH is the occasional use of pinch-hitters, and the (very) occasional double-switch.
OTOH, not using the DH leads to watching pitchers have to bat, most of whom are pathetic at it.
I get that some baseball purists (particularly NL purists) rail against the DH, but the additional “strategy” which making pitchers bat is, IMO, overblown, and is more than offset by how bad 95% of NL pitchers are at batting.
The DH in the NL is one more step away from how the game was played pre-1970, true, but it’s going to do less to “ruin the sport” than the slow pace of play, and the death of small-ball in favor of the Three True Outcomes (strikeouts, walks, home runs), which are now over 36% of all plate appearances (and strikeouts alone are now about 25%).
Also, yes, it’s a done deal as of today. The new CBA between MLB and the players’ association includes full-time adoption of the DH in the National League.
Yes.
No. There is no evidence at all the DH hurts attendance.
At the time the AL had really, really low offense. There just wasn’t enough scoring. The year before the AL adopted the DH the average AL team scored just 3.47 runs per game; only one team managed to break 4 runs a game.
As @kenobi_65 points out, the problems with the game today are that the type of play and pace of play are boring. There’s too many home runs and strikeouts, and the game is played very slowly. Nothing was done to help those problems.
BTW, a little context on pinch hitting, using numbers from Baseball Reference:
National League teams use pinch hitters more often than AL teams (not at all surprising) – every single NL team had more at-bats by pinch hitters than did any AL team.
The median number of pinch-hitter at-bats for NL teams in 2021 was 256, or 1.58 pinch-hitters per game. But, not every pinch-hitting situation involves replacing a pitcher. For comparative purposes, let’s look at how many pinch-hitters AL teams used; the median AL team had 78 pinch-hitter at-bats. Those AL pinch-hitters aren’t all for other hitters, since AL teams play a few games every year without the benefit of the DH (when they play in NL parks), but the math is probably close.
Subtracting 78 from 256 gives 178 “additional” pinch-hitter at-bats in for NL teams, compared to the AL, or 1.1 pinch-hitter ABs a game that are likely the result of a pinch-hitter replacing a pitcher at the plate. And, a lot of those are probably obvious strategic choices, and not a situation in which the manager is exhibiting superior strategy by choosing to pull the pitcher at that time – in other words, there’s little suspense or interest created by that move.
So, that’s essentially what you’re getting as an NL fan, without the DH – about one “different” event per game, in which a pitcher gets pulled for a pinch-hitter. In return, you are getting a couple of plate appearances for your pitchers, the vast majority of which are easy outs.
Source:
In answer to this: the AL created the designated hitter rule to increase offense, coming out of an era in the late '60s and early '70s, when pitching was dominant in the game, and batting averages were low.
In every season since the AL adopted the DH, the league-wide batting average in the AL has been higher than in the NL – that’s not surprising at all, of course, and it means that the rule had the desired effect, to increase offense.
I say this as someone who grew up in a National League city, watching NL teams, and believing with all my heart that the Designated Hitter is an abomination. But the truth is, pitchers can’t hit, and the ones who can are moved to another position before they ever get to the majors.
Case in point, Adam Wainwright of the St. Louis Cardinals is considered “a pretty good hitting pitcher.” Looking at his career stats, he has an offensive WAR of 4.4, which is pretty good. But his career batting average is .193 with 10 home runs in 846 plate appearances. Wainwright was called “a pretty good hitting pitcher” on the strength of being very good at laying down a sacrifice bunt, and having a .274 average when he actually hits the ball.
Even those of us who love the strategy of the decision whether to let the pitcher hit in the 4th or 5th inning when the team really needs a run, have to question whether it’s worth it when the odds are the pitcher will only get a hit once in every three games.
Just wait until MLB adopts the genetic modification rule in which one can clone a Designated Hitter and then have them pitch hit for catchers, shortstops, and left outfielders. You might as well offer hot dogs that aren’t made from recycled Naugahyde and pink Silly Putty.
Stranger
And, this has become increasingly true as the DH rule has been adopted in lower-level professional and amateur baseball – in the minors, the DH is universal in Rookie and single A leagues, and in AA and AAA, pitchers only have to bat when the farm teams for two NL teams are playing one another. Many MLB pitchers, when they were pitching in high school, and in the minors, may have had little chance to actually get better at batting.
Historically, I agree that when there’s any real strategy involved in pinch-hitting for your pitcher, it’s in that sort of situation. But, in both leagues, the conventional wisdom in management is now to pull the starting pitcher earlier than what was done in the past, as statistics have shown that batting averages go up with every time a pitcher goes through the opponent’s batting order.
So, unless your pitcher is absolutely cruising, the new conventional wisdom is that you probably want to pull that pitcher in the 4th or 5th, anyway, and start rotating in fresh arms from your bullpen.
And to add to this particular example, with what convinced me that DH in the NL will be OK (I was a purist before), is that Adam Wainwright missed most of a season after rupturing his Achilles running to first base after batting.
So beyond the fact that I’m no longer convinced that the “strategy” of having the pitcher bat is all that exciting, at least we won’t have superstar pitchers getting hit doing something they are manifestly terrible at.
Honestly if it lets a starter go one more inning (by not having to bat), and maybe eliminates one more pitching change, it will be more than worth it.
boooo is my response but I wasn’t asked …
OTOH, I was there when Randy Johnson hit his first and only major league home run in 2003. It felt kind of special.
Fans like to talk about how amazing it was to see Bartolo Colon hit his one and only home run, too. The price for those rare “pitcher comes through with a great hit” moments (which, I concur, are really cool) is, of course, lots and lots of feeble at-bats by pitchers, which do nothing to make the game interesting or exciting.
This is false. Executing a double-switch is not untying the Gordian Knot, it isn’t a feat of sorcery. It’s a relatively solved problem that gives people a topic to idly talk about when they don’t know anything else about the game. For every person at a ballpark I’ve overheard talk about when to pull the pitcher to get a hitter in their lineup slot, I have never overheard those same people remark on a defensive shift being employed, or note that it’s a 3-1 count. Defensive shifts have ruined a lot of the game, but they are far more impactful on the game strategically than any pinch hitter.
Yeah, no.
Let’s face reality. MLB has changed forever, and it happened many years ago. Nobody bunts anymore, which is primarily what pitchers used to do if the 7th or 8th place hitters got on base. “Small Ball” is basically dead. It’s all about home runs. It’s also safer. Quality pitchers are very valuable. Why would you risk that?
That’s what’s killing the game. Homers or bust. No offensive strategy. They might as well put the ball on tees and play home run derby. They need to deaden the ball and ban the shift.
I’m no fan of the DH and wish it had never come to pass. But the game can live without it. It can’t survive this current all-or-nothing offensive lack of strategy.