There aren’t that many of those these days anyway. More and more teams rotate players through the DH spot. In fact, last season just nine players had 250 or more plate appearances as DH… and one of those was John Jaso with just 273, so it wouldn’t have been difficult to work him down to 250 if necessary. Posada appeared in about half the Yankees’ games. What it comes down to is that there were seven “full-time” DHs last season:
So basically if that rule had been in effect it may have had the effect of getting guys like David Ortiz and Jorge Posada out of baseball, but wouldn’t have changed anything about how the game is actually played.
In fact, it’s pretty much a waste of time to argue against the DH rule these days. It’s not going away. The DH has been implemented almost universally throughout baseball. All levels of amateur ball use a DH (though sometimes at that level the designated hitter can hit for any player; not necessarily the pitcher), college, most pro leagues around the world. Pitchers still hit in some minor league games when they happen to be between two NL affiliates but only when both managers agree to it.
It actually seems that if anything were to change regarding the DH in Major League Baseball, it’d be more likely that the NL would adopt it than that the AL would abandon it.
Football players should rotate positions, like in volleyball. After every play, each player shifts over one position to take different responsibilities. Why is it that some players never have to throw a pass, snap the ball, or pass block? They should all be eager to do all those things!
Basketball comes close, with the same types of offense/defense trade-offs that baseball has. Even to the point where if you have a strong offensive player that is weak on defense the opponent will target that player (not unlike issuing an intentional walk to face the pitcher).
As mentioned, cricket has this requirement - everybody bats and everybody plays defense (and quite a few bowl as well).
In fact, other than football, I can’t think of a sport that allows you to cover up an individual player’s deficiency through substitution like the DH does. And obviously football’s start/stop individual play nature allows this. I’m pretty sure even kicking specialists in rugby have to stay on the field for open play, right?
While i realize that specialization isn’t going away in football and baseball, it’s worth recognizing that these sports constitute the exception, rather than the rule, in the world of sports.
Yes, but don’t all these other sports have unlimited substitution? Watch the end of a basketball game how every other trip down the other end of the floor a team will sub in a guy or two for defensive or offensive purposes. Hockey has line changes. Baseball’s structure is somewhat unique in that once a player is out of the game, he’s out for good.
Under FIFA rules, no more than three players may be substituted in a soccer game, and once replaced, a substituted player takes no further part in the match.
Pitchers should hit, just as much as catchers should hit, and shortstops should hit, and baseball players should hit. They aren’t auto outs by any stretch.
Just this year, Matt Cain of the Giants nearly had a perfect game, allowing no walks and only 1 hit against the Pirates. The one hit? James McDonald, the pitcher.
It would be nice if they could but the fact remains pitchers have been incompetent hitters for generations.
Fifty years ago the World Champions were the Yankees, again. Their pitchers:
Ralph Terry, .189, no homers
Whitey Ford, .118, no homers
Bill Stafford, .218, no homers
Jim Bouton, .063, no homers
Rollie Sheldon, .077, no homers… you get the picture
From 1960 to 1964 the Yankees won the pennant every year and their pitchers collectively hit about .140 and hit a grand total of two home runs. This was the GOOD team.
…but that makes it all the more interesting when the pitcher is good.
The DH just feels inorganic. It’s a clear addition to a game that’s otherwise pretty clean in terms of structure. There’s nothing in the game itself that argues for having this one guy that can bat for the pitcher. It’s just pitchers as a group aren’t good hitters.
In soccer and hockey, goalkeeper is effectively a different sport from any other position, and there is nothing to force someone to switch grom goalie to another position.
In baseball, pitcher is effectively a different sport from any other position, and there is nothing to force someone to switch from pitcher to another position.
(To be clear, I don’t think this is strictly true, but it’s about as true as it is in the preceding.)
Take the best hitting pitchers that you know of and let’s see if, over their career, they are even an average hitter. I’d bet you can’t find 3 pitchers in the last 100 years who have posted an OPS+ over 100, while pitching.
Note, feel free to pick Babe Ruth first, then try and find 2 more.
I am convinced that while people have been arguing about the DH for almost 40 years, not a single person has ever changed their opinion on the subject.
I pulled the numbers for Ruth and Ankiel, and calculated their OPS+ as pitchers and as non-pitchers. The result, and my take on pitchers at the plate, pitching takes about 50 points off of your OPS+. Which results in most pitchers being absolute rubbish at the plate, even if they have the natural talent to be a better than average hitter.
Ruth 151 to 208
Ankiel 40 to 95
Thanks to Baseball Reference for making the stats available in .csv format.
Are there any other Pitchers turned Hitters out there to add to this analysis?