I’m a National league fan, so I’m not that familiar on this point. Let’s say the Cards beat the Mets, and this World Series uses the designated hitter.
If BigMac is the DH for the Cards but cannot run the bases, then a pinch runner would be put in for McGwire if he gets on base. But, does that mean he has to then leave the game if the pinch runner has been used (like is usually the case), or is it different for DH’s?
The rules were changed a number of years ago. Now, the DH is used in every World Series, when playing in the home park of the American League team.
As for McGwire: the rules specifically state that any substitute for the DH becomes the DH himself. When the DH is substituted for, he is out of the game, just like any other player.
Zev Steinhardt
If a pinch runner is used for Mac, he’s out of the game and the pinch runner becomes the DH. Also, the DH will be used in games played in the American League team’s ballpark regardless of who plays.
And as long as I have the opportunity, is it just my Cardinal bias, or does a Cardinal-Yankee World Series seem like the perfect way to end this century (or to start the next one, as the case may be).
Zev’s post has a time stamp 3 minutes before mine, but I swear I didn’t take that long to write it.
Actually the perfect way to end this century is for the Cardinals to beat the Yankees.
Thanks guys. I suppose this is easier to answer than the 5 ways to get on base w/o a hit.
As other posters have pointed out, any player who is replaced for any reason is out of the game, period. Big Mac can’t be pinch run for and come back in.
DH’s ARE different, however, in that unlike other positions they are not interchangeable with other positions in the lineup.
For instance, you could move your first baseman to play left field if you so chose. However, if you change your DH to play a position, you lose the DH rule for the rest of the game. If Big Mac starts at DH and then Will Clark gets hurt and Mac moves to first base, the pitchers have to hit for the rest of the game. You can use pinch hitters as per usual, but you lose the DH position. The pitcher then bats in the place of the defensive player that was usbstituted for, (unless you effect some sort of weird double switch) so in the example above, the pitchers would begin hitting in Will Clark’s spot in the lineup. You ALSO lose the DH if the pitcher moves to a defensive role, so if Tony LaRussa goes nuts and moves Pat Hentgen from pitcher to second base, Pat has to hit and Big Mac’s out of the game.
You can’t switch the other way AT ALL; a player playing a defensive position cannot become the DH. If you want to just replace the DH the replacement has to come off the bench.
(Official rule 6.10.)
Perfect way to either start this century or end the 20th, depending on your POV, would be to get rid of the DH.
IMHO, this puts the NL team at a disadvantage. They played the whole season without having a DH, thus not structuring their team to have an extra big hitter like AL teams can. So when they play with the DH in the world series, their DH is usually a guy who just wasn’t good enough to play during the season.
The correct hypothetical example for this question would involve Edgar Martinez, since it is the Mariners that are going to the Series.
I have one reason for liking the DH- it extends the playing careers of guys who might otherwise have to shut it down due to injury or whatever. I enjoyed watching Chili Davis play for the Angels as a DH, and also appreciated his strong presence in the locker room and in the community. It would have been a shame for him to retire years ago.
Any time I can see a great player playing the sport we both love, it’s a good thing.
On the other side of the coin, should the natural selection of sports weed out those who can no longer play a position?
PS- Cards in 4, with Jim Edmonds hitting at least one game-winner.
Exactly why I don’t like the DH rule. As you mentioned later, I think that players who can no longer play the field should be weeded out. If we just want to extend playing times forever, why not a Designated Runner? You can be pinch ran for every time you reach base, without having to come out of the game. Why not a DH for the catcher’s spot? They have to work hard crouching all game.
Baseball is a total game; hit, run, and field or get out. I’m sure there are lots of players from the 1960’s and before who could have reached 3,000 hits, 500 HR’s, etc. just like players are doing today. There are so many mediocre players reaching huge milestones simply because they’ve been able to DH for the last five years of their careers that it deflates the significance. Quickly: name the only three players in history with 3000 hits and 500 homeruns. They are Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, and …
Eddie Murray?!
Does Harold Baines deserve 3000 hits? He hasn’t played the field full time since 1986! But he already has more hits than Ruth or Williams, and is two more mediocre, twilight of his career seasons away from joining the previously exclusive 3000/400 club. Baseball records are falling fast enough; let’s get rid of the DH to return some sort of reason to the game.
As I heard it once . . . “The DH is like letting someone shoot Shaq’s free throws.”
As I understand it (and correct me if I’m wrong, here), the DH can replace any single position on the team in the batting line-up. Pitchers are usually bad enough hitters and valuable enough in the field that they get the break, but if you had, say, Babe Ruth pitching, you might want to DH your catcher or some other player.
As for an AL advantage in the World Series, doesn’t it work both ways? The AL has trained and practiced for the DH, and their pitchers are worthless at the plate. Aren’t they disadvantaged by having to do without the DH some games?
No, the rule specifically says that the DH can only bat for the game pitcher.
Zev Steinhardt
In addition to being against the rules, I don’t think there is any pitcher who hits well enough to not be DH’ed for. If Rey Ordonez were healthy and Mike Hampton were pitching for the Mets, then you MIGHT consider it. However, you would really tick off the other player so much, that I doubt any manager would do it.
And if you have a player who is that a poor a hitter, he should be out of a job because NOBODY fields well enough to make up for an offensive output that is less than a catcher’s.
Actually, given every other trick he’s pulled out of his sleeve (Big Mac pinch-hitting in the first inning, having the pitcher bat 8th, etc.), this sounds exactly like something that Tony LaRussa would do.
Having the pitcher bat 8th was not intended as a slight to the guy who had to bat 9th, but rather was an attempt to get more runners on base for McGwire who was batting 3rd in 1998. It didn’t work very well because the 1998 Cardinals didn’t have anyone with high enough OBP to make it worthwhile.
You’re sure about that? I’d just like to see the quote, since I’ve NEVER heard that it was only the pitcher. I’ve always understood it to be for any player…it’s just that managers always sub for the pitcher, since they are usually the worst hitters on the team. I wouldn’t see any reason for this not to be the case. If you have a great hitting pitcher, why wouldn’t you be able to use the DH for another player? It’s not a disadvantage if the pitcher hits .350, since there doesn’t HAVE to be a DH in the game, so why would the rule be there?
Jman
Zev’s right.
You might want to take a look at this website to see for yourself.
You don’t have to use a DH, but if you do, he’s batting for the starting pitcher.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Jman *
**
No, as BobT was kind enough to point out, it is only the pitcher. Here is the DH rule: