Designated Hitters?

[Kirby]

What do you think of the DH rule?
Are you a fan of the American or National League?
Do you like Interleague play?


Personally I don't care for the DH, I like the fact that pitchers suck at hitting and can be a challenge in management strategy. You just don't see pinch hitters, double switches, etc all that often in the AL.

I also don't like interleague play. I like the fact that the teams from each leage only meet during the World Series (aside from the All Star game).

 

[Canadave]

Maybe it's because I'm young enough to have grown up with it, but I like the DH rule. I know some people think it takes strategy out of the game, but personally I agree with Jim Leyland's take on the matter:

Everyone in the world disagrees with me, including some managers, but I think managing in the American League is much more difficult for that very reason (having the designated hitter). In the National League, my situation is dictated for me. If I'm behind in the game, I've got to pinch hit. I've got to take my pitcher out. In the American League, you have to zero in. You have to know exactly when to take them out of there. In the National League, that's done for you.

 

[Kirby]

^^^ I like Leyland and I think he has a great baseball mind, but I am one of those that he mentioned that disagrees with him. I've seen many games where pitchers were pulled in earlier innings in favor of a pinch hitter and then after a while all position players and bullpen pitchers were used and the game continues.

August 22nd 2000 the Rockies found themselves in that very position against the Braves. They even used the previous night's starting pitcher, and ultimately had to send Brent Mayne, an injured catcher to the mound with no prior pitching experience to pitch in the 12th inning... He got the win.

 

[Starbreaker]

I like the NL, but I enjoy seeing different teams every year.

 

[Chaos Descending]

All I can say about it is that I like the fact that there are two leagues with different rulesets, and that they exist to cater to both tastes.

I do like interleague play, but I wish that it was more of a "midseason exhibition" type thing, with no influence on the teams wins/loss records.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I think the DH is a good idea. A pitcher has a unique set of responsibilities that no other player has. Having the pitcher also be a hitter is to risk injury, and that's not good.

(FWIW, I have two favorite teams. You know which ones they are. My favoritism is to city, not league. )

As for interleague play? I could care less. I don't really *care* which leagues happen to be playing. All I do care about is whether one of my favorite teams is on the field. It's just a coincidence which leagues they are. I wouldn't care even if there were no such things as leagues. To me, league is irrelevant as far as which teams I root for.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

DH is a stupid idea. They don't have designated runners for the fat, slow players, for example. Having people who are in the field hit is part of the strategy of the game. Having a pitcher choose between bunting or free swinging (not to mention the choice between having the pitcher up there at all) adds a lot to the game. Also, early in the game, just the idea of flipping over the rotation isn't bad (so just getting to the pitcher could be noteworthy).

And, as for Leyland's comments, I couldn't disagree more. If you're behind in a close game when the pitcher is dominant, you obviously don't remove him unless the situation is extremely favorable. You also have to decide whether to leave a struggling pitcher in to get to his location in the batting order or to move him now and either lose that pitcher soon after or do a double switch. Far more strategy than "is my pitcher struggling? OK, I'll change pitchers."

That being said, I like the separateness of the league. The DH helps reinforce that (especially with Interleague Play, which I generally support, especially if it's kept as a mid-season block).

 

[Starbreaker]

I think the DH is a good idea. A pitcher has a unique set of responsibilities that no other player has. Having the pitcher also be a hitter is to risk injury, and that's not good.

Do you agree with Steinbrenner wanting a designated fielder too?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ No.

 

[Tom Servo]

DH is a stupid idea. They don't have designated runners for the fat, slow players, for example. Having people who are in the field hit is part of the strategy of the game. Having a pitcher choose between bunting or free swinging (not to mention the choice between having the pitcher up there at all) adds a lot to the game. Also, early in the game, just the idea of flipping over the rotation isn't bad (so just getting to the pitcher could be noteworthy).

And, as for Leyland's comments, I couldn't disagree more. If you're behind in a close game when the pitcher is dominant, you obviously don't remove him unless the situation is extremely favorable. You also have to decide whether to leave a struggling pitcher in to get to his location in the batting order or to move him now and either lose that pitcher soon after or do a double switch. Far more strategy than "is my pitcher struggling? OK, I'll change pitchers."

That being said, I like the separateness of the league. The DH helps reinforce that (especially with Interleague Play, which I generally support, especially if it's kept as a mid-season block).

Couldn't disagree more, and it may be because Im a fan of an AL team. However, I would rather see a pitcher face a damn good hitter, who may be fat and slow, then face another pitcher. I just don't like watching most pitchers bat, since 98% (here's looking at you Zambrano) suck at hitting. Besides the idea of strategy, and the choice of having the pitcher removed from the game for a pitch hitter, it doesn't add anything to the game for me. And likewise, if Im watching a starter mow down an opposing lineup, I don't want him to be switched out in the bottom of the eighth of a 1-0 game, just so a pinch hitter can come up and attempt to tack on another run. I would rather see the guy continue pitching.

I eventually think that the pitcher batting will be phased out of the NL. Not anytime soon, but eventually in the future.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Couldn't disagree more, and it may be because Im a fan of an AL team. However, I would rather see a pitcher face a damn good hitter, who may be fat and slow, then face another pitcher. I just don't like watching most pitchers bat, since 98% (here's looking at you Zambrano) suck at hitting. Besides the idea of strategy, and the choice of having the pitcher removed from the game for a pitch hitter, it doesn't add anything to the game for me.

My point about the fat slow guy is, if the idea is to have the best person out there at all times, fat, slow people who make it to first base should be replaced with fast runners. That way the game would have the most talented people for their tasks out at all times (afterall, a guy who is a threat to steal a base is more exciting than a guy who is guaranteed to be a double play). In the end, I don't think the reasons for the DH add up unless this adds up too.

And likewise, if Im watching a starter mow down an opposing lineup, I don't want him to be switched out in the bottom of the eighth of a 1-0 game, just so a pinch hitter can come up and attempt to tack on another run. I would rather see the guy continue pitching.

Generally speaking, if a pitcher's count is low enough and he's pitching well enough, he isn't going to be taken out if the team is up by that one run. He probably would be if the team is down the run, but I guarantee it would be an agonizing decision. That's one of the reasons I like it. Each game is different. In the AL, the only reason to take out a pitcher is if he's struggling. It makes it less challenging both for the manager and the pitcher.

I eventually think that the pitcher batting will be phased out of the NL. Not anytime soon, but eventually in the future.

I do too, but I don't think it'll be good for baseball. It'll just be to protect pitchers from risk of injury.

 

[RoJoHen]

Being from Chicago, I have to say I enjoy the Cubs/Sox series.

Designated hitters are dumb, though. If you're a professional baseball player, you need to be able to at least try to swing a bat. I don't care what position you play. Batting is part of the game.

 

[Skywalker]

I'm an AL fan and a Red Sox fan, but I do prefer the 'purer' form of baseball that's played in the NL.

 

[Kronos]

If you don't play the field you shouldn't be batting.

May as well go all out and have an Offense and a Defense.

 

[Shaw]

If you don't play the field you shouldn't be batting.

May as well go all out and have an Offense and a Defense.

Exactly!


Maybe the AL should call what they play by a new name... like Baseball Lite.

 

[Scout101]

isn't Baseball Lite when you fill 1/9th of your batting lineup with a guy batting .082 lifetime? Can't understand the appeal of spending your time watching someone bat that, if he couldn't pitch, wouldn't crack the AAA team with his bat.

 

[Icemizer]

In 2009 the batting average for pitchers was .138. Do you really want to see these guys swing a bat? They add nothing to the game standing in the box except to inflate national league pitchers stats. Two extra strikeouts per game.
N.L. fans so overrate the double switch its laughable and N.L. managers so over use it they run out of players. Then when miracles happen and a pitcher does get on base someone has to run out there and bring him a jacket so he doesnt get cold. Poor baby maybe you could also use a nice warm cup of coca too.
Give me the DH any day.

 

[Shaw]

isn't Baseball Lite when you fill 1/9th of your batting lineup with a guy batting .082 lifetime?

Well, if you don't like Baseball Lite, maybe Handicapped Baseball or Special Baseball would work better for you.

Real Baseball requires the manager of a team to weigh every players strengths and weaknesses and determine how to make the most of them to win the game.

I'm sure it won't be long before catchers have designated hitters/runners because of knee problems from their positions (I'm sure someone in the AL has already proposed this). My feeling is that if you can't play baseball well enough to make a team normally, then you shouldn't be playing baseball. It seems funny that anyone would want to change the rules to lower the standards of those who qualify as athletes in a professional sport.

Do AL pitchers have lower salaries because they work less?

 

[SmoothieX]

I'm more of an NL fan, so no I don't like the DH rule. I think if you play the field, you should be required to take your turn at the plate, and vice versa. No facts backing that up, merely my preference. I think it involves more strategy.

As for interleague play, I like it in the limited form currently used. It breaks up what can be a long, mundane season at times. On a random Tuesday in June, it's nice to occasionally see your team play Minnesota or Oakland, rather than 3 more against the Marlins. I don't think it sullies the World Series. It's analogous to interconference matchups in the NFL.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I'm sure it won't be long before catchers have designated hitters/runners because of knee problems from their positions (I'm sure someone in the AL has already proposed this).

Yeah, I've seen some catchers who are great at their position but are well below the Mendoza line when it comes to hitting (like .160). Should there be two DHs to accommodate this?