Baseball: The DH?

[RickJay]

Ah, yes, the anti-DH arguments come out of the woodwork.

*Originally posted by Opus1 *

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.

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.

Players who can’t play the field are playing the field right now. Do you really think Frank Thomas will lose a major league job if they dump the DH rule?

The notion that all DHs are guys who would be out of the league were it not for the DH is demonstrably false. Frank Thomas would still be playing. Harold Baines is the exception, not the rule.

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.

First off, a designated runner isn’t exactly the same thing, and would require more substantive rule changes. Secondly, if baserunning were that complicated a skill set, I WOULD see some value in it.

The reason the DH makes sense and a DR doesn’t is that we have an entire class of ballplayer (pitchers) for whom hitting skills are so unimportant that they develop no skill in the area. Making them hit is like making all the position players take a turn pitching; over the course of history they have become completely different types of athlete. There’s a good reason why we make hitters run the bases - it’s not a specialized skill with an entirely different class of player (Vince Coleman be damned.)

Remember, baseball’s a game, not a natural law. The rules can and SHOULD be changed in any way that improves the overall aesthetic appeal of the game, providing it remains fair. If the DH prevents us from watching guys fall down trying to swing the bat, that’s a legitimate point in its favor.

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?!

Your first assertion is utter nonsense; NO mediocre players are reaching huge milestones. Harold Baines is a good player and let’s bear in mind he’s still an outside shot to get 3,000 hits. (He now seems to be out of a job; I don’t think he’ll make 3,000.) What other mediocrities are closing in on 3,000 hits?

As to Eddie Murray belonging to that club, nobody seriously believes Eddie Murray is equivalent to Willie Mays - let’s bear in mind Aaron is more than 200 homers ahead and Mays is 150+ homers ahead - and anyway, picking two numbers and suggesting Eddie Murray is now in a class with Hank Aaron is silly; you’re deliberately choosing two numbers to make a point and ignoring dozens of other facts. Are we to believe that Eric Davis is a greater player than Babe Ruth because he stole more bases, or that Greg Luzinski was a better player than Ty Cobb because he hit more than twice as many homers?

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,

Sure, and Joe Carter had more RBIs than Jackie Robinson. Anyone think Joe Carter was a better player than Robinson?

Babe Ruth and Ted Williams do not have especially high career hit totals for Hall of Famers, because they walked a lot. They aren’t in the HoF for their hit totals. Who cares if Harold Baines has more hits? So does Al Oliver.

If the DH rule was allowing Baines to approach 5,000 hits or something I’d see your point, but he’s in the general vicinity of guys like Vada Pinson. I mean, big deal.

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. **

What records are DHs breaking? I don’t recall any DHs breaking any major records. I don’t see many records being broken at all, actually.

[manhattan]

Folks, could we take the argument over the DH rule over to IMHO please?

[TheThill]

I beg to differ. The best way to turn the century would be a Subway Series.

As for the DH, as strange as it may be, the AL/NL split is a good compromise and keeps the traditional difference between the leagues alive, which is good for traditionalists too in a way.

[PatrickM]

*Originally posted by Oblong *
**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. **

Sorry, but the NL is NOT at a disadvantage. Structuring the roster is not a big deal. The AL is at a disadvantage when their really inept hitting pitchers have to bat. Most NL teams have a player who can readily fill the DH slot for 3 or 4 games, usually a 4th outfielder with a sizable number of ABs who wouldn’t get to play much in the World Series otherwise.

[Soup]

The lack of a DH in NL parks obviously hasn’t been much of a factor in the World Series. The Yankees seem to have coped.

I found the NL playoffs last year to be more exciting BECAUSE there was no DH. Added a level of strategy that’s sadly missing in AL games. I’m convinced, let’s get rid of it! And throw out the wild card while you’re at it.

[Soup]

zev -

I see that the rules state that the DH bats for the pitcher. Was it this way since it’s inception? I’m sure I remember hearing that the DH could be used for ANY position. Could the rule have been modified recently?

[zev_steinhardt]

*Originally posted by Soup *
**zev -

I see that the rules state that the DH bats for the pitcher. Was it this way since it’s inception? I’m sure I remember hearing that the DH could be used for ANY position. Could the rule have been modified recently? **

Yes, the rule was always that the DH bats for the pitcher.

Only one aspect of the DH was changed since it’s inception. That change is known as the Earl Weaver Rule.

Weaver used to be in the habit of naming a pitcher who was not going to play that day in the DH slot. He would then “replace” his DH with a batter, depending on the situation when the DH slot came up. Steve Stone was a favorite of his to use as the “starting DH.”

To counteract this, the Earl Weaver Rule states that the starting DH named in the batting order MUST come to bat at least once (unless the opposing team changes pitchers).

Other than this, however, the DH rule has been unchanged since 1973.

Zev Steinhardt

[BobT]

In the offseason of 1972, there was also a debate whether or not the DH could EVER play in the field during a game. Ultimately, it was decided to allow the DH to go into the field, but then the pitcher is required to bat in the replaced player’s slot for the rest of the game.

[ElvisL1ves]

If the DH is pinch-run for, his pinch runner doesn’t necessarily become the new DH. The manager could make a double switch, with a pinch-hitter for the new batter or a pinch-runner for another runner becoming the new DH instead

A small point, but I insist. Anyway, the DH rule has allowed American League managers to forget how to make double switches anyway. But the other posters are right - if you leave the game, you’re gone (and let’s ignore the special rules for the All-Star Game and catchers, shall we?).

[zev_steinhardt]

*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves *
**If the DH is pinch-run for, his pinch runner doesn’t necessarily become the new DH. The manager could make a double switch, with a pinch-hitter for the new batter or a pinch-runner for another runner becoming the new DH instead

**

No, ElivisL1ves, I’m afraid you’re wrong. Look at the rule I posted above.

A pinch runner for a DH becomes the DH himself. See this quote from the rule.

Any substitute hitter for a Designated Hitter becomes the Designated Hitter.

Also, the DH is locked into his spot in the batting order. He cannot be “double switched.” Here is the relevant quote from the rules.

A Designated Hitter is “locked” into the batting order. No multiple substitutions may be made that will alter the batting rotation of the Designated Hitter.

Zev Steinhardt

[Nanook_of_the_North_Shore]

*Originally posted by EJsGirl *
**PS- Cards in 4, with Jim Edmonds hitting at least one game-winner.
**

I hope you didn’t point any money on that prediction

I’m goin Mets in 6.