Amen to that. I think interleague play spoils the World Series if the two teams have met in the regular season. The schedule is way too unbalanced and it sucks that you only visit your non-division rivals in your league only one series per year.
The NL has the DH, they just call them pinch hitters. When the game is close in the last few innings, suddenly the pitchers don’t bat any more.
I’m fine leaving things the way they are, but I’m not buying “strategy” as an NL feature. It’s the same boring and predictable moves every game. Whoopee.
A PH is ~hugely~ different from a DH. This is true in both leagues.
I believe that’s called hyperbole. Fact is, though, in the AL they never trust the pitchers to bat and in the NL they never trust the pitcher to bat when it matters.
Early innings do count. And in any case, the mechanics and effects of pitchers not batting are different.
It’s true that the final results, in terms of RS/RA, and W/L, work out to be similar. That’s pretty much Darwinian. But the interest in baseball isn’t the final scores, it’s how you get there. “The same boring and predictable moves every game”? With DHs everywhere, this inevitably becomes more true.
With the increased roles of relief and specialty pitchers, that argument has become increasingly irrelevant. As RickJay mentioned - the double switch hasn’t had a meaningful impact in baseball in a long time. And its mechanics are no more complicated or interesting than the 6th inning “which hat is the baseball under?!?” scoreboard game.
It has nothing to do with whether you think executing a double switch is challenging for the manager, or interesting to watch, in itself. My point is that it places a different set of mandates on game and roster management, and this has all kinds of ripple effects. If these manager and GM mandates were standardized across MLB, teams and games would become less diverse.
Maybe this is the fundamental difference. I don’t watch baseball to see the coaches. Coaching strategy belongs in the background for me. I generally watch to see throw, hit, field, not coaching. (Yes, there can be exceptions, but almost never are those exceptions to do with pitching management for me.)
And double switching, well, it’s just not particularly interesting. It gets an announcement at the ballpark, or on TV, but lord, I can’t remember the last time I thought “Oh, that double switch was really intriguing! How clever!” or “This game needs a double switch to keep it interesting.”
How would we determine who gets white in the chess match?
I know the OFFICIAL reason the DH was added. My point was that the union didn’t object because a lot of high-salaried veterans would stick around a few more seasons, which would increase average player salaries.
Or what he said.
Also, after 1968, they lowered the mound to make it even harder on the pitchers.
I often wonder what someone like Randy Johnson would look like to a hitter on the higher mound… terrifying?
One of the Unit’s overhand fastballs would probably look like an inbound meteorite strike. Probably a dinosaur killer.
And strangely enough, dinosaurs evolved into birds.
Absolutely. The idea that the DH eliminates some element of strategy is ridiculous. Do you leave in a hot starter to face David Ortiz late in the game with runners on or do you call in the lefty specialist? How do you pitch him? All of this is so much more interesting than the best executed double switch.
I wholehartedly agree that having two different systems of rules offer a greater range of diversity, if you will, which is why I like it. I am similarly fond of baseball parks having different field dimensions.
[QUOTE=crypto]
I know the OFFICIAL reason the DH was added. My point was that the union didn’t object because a lot of high-salaried veterans would stick around a few more seasons, which would increase average player salaries.
[/QUOTE]
Well, you should have said that, instead of “everyone knew it was a union move to save a high salaried veteran from losing his job due to weakening fielding performance.” It may be that the union had no objection to it, but your original statement was simply not correct.
How did you feel about one of Manfred’s earlier floated ideas, banning defensive shifts?
Like that one, this one has now been walked back.
But without the DH, you can have that, plus the question of which other player you take off the field. Games have, occasionally, been won and lost on that decision.
It’s not a huge deal, in itself, and things don’t always align to make it meaningful. But that’s true of every aspect of the game. Sometimes one starter is just way off his game, and nothing else that either team does really ‘matters.’ And sometimes it rains.
My two cents:
It would not make baseball better. It would make baseball worse. I have always preferred there to be tradeoffs in sports. Want to put Great-Hit-No-Field’s bat in the lineup? Great–but then you have to play him somewhere on the field; you can’t just have his bat. Where will you play him? At what point, if ever, will you remove him for a defensive replacement? How good does his hitting have to be to justify the poor fielding? Are you willing to live with Dr. Stoneglove at first base and just tell your shortstop that every single one of his throws had better be on target? Are you willing to put Mr. Statue in left and slot a rabbit on a bicycle with a butterfly net into center? To me, part of what makes baseball fun is the strategic thinking based on the reality that some players who are great at X are lousy at Y. How do you maximize the advantage without having the disadvantage kill you? --By having the DH rule (and yes, I know many teams rotate people in and out, and the full-time DH represented by Martinez, Butler, Ortiz is relatively uncommon) you remove this from the equation.
No, I don’t come to the games to watch the managerial wheels spin, but it’s an important part of my enjoyment of the games. I’m very glad the most recent news suggests that the DH may not be encroaching just yet.
I think that idea was stupid as hell. 
I’m one of those in the minority that doesn’t care one way or the other, but thinks the leagues should be aligned.
Have it, or don’t have it, across all baseball.
If you don’t care, why do you care that both leagues should do it the same way?