To DH or not to DH - that is the question

bedir than average · December 6th, 2006, 01:00 PM

This question has haunted baseball for years. Costas made it one of the centerpeices of his book, and the purists still worry about it.

Do you like the DH? Should it exist in both leagues?

******

I personally like the DH. It gave me the ability to enjoy one of the best hitters of the 90s, Mr.Edgar Martinez.. Without the American League's decision to have the DH the Mariners '95 and 2001 runs would never have happened. Those two years are the defining moments of the Seattle Mariners and Papi was a key component for both seasons. In 2001 he finished 16th in MVP and in 05 he finished 3rd. He is 227th for career MVP share and 36th for career OPS.

For me the DH debate is contained in the ability of that one player, one whose career would have been half the length it was without the DH.

MuffinMcFluffin · December 6th, 2006, 01:12 PM

I like the DH. I'm confused as to why it started, and why it's in one league and not the other... but I like it. It really makes the NL look better in ways that they have to better orient their team around the pitcher more than anything. For instance, they need a #8 hitter that isn't a double-play machine, and that can actually take a pitch. They don't get the luxury of "two leadoff hitters" in the #1 and #9 hole, so they need to orient one in the middle of the lineup somewhere to play some small ball.

It's all about emphasis and diversity. I enjoy both of those things in baseball.

Lenny · December 6th, 2006, 02:40 PM

I have very strong opinions on this one. I think if you are going to have the DH it should be in both leagues. I also think that the DH is great for improving the team, to get that one great hitter on the team. Look at what it could do for Piazza if he can get back to his old form by only having to hit. Just think if Piazza whould have converted to a DH several years ago, he might still be hitting over .300 with good power. That would be huge on any team.

However, the DH actually only helps the player, and makes the game easier to manage for the manager. What good is a player to a team that is not good enough to the team to play in the field? This is a sport, and part of any sport is the mental aspect that goes into it, and the DH takes away from that. Think of the differnces with the double switches and such that a NL manager has to do compaired to what an AL manager has to do.

I can see pluses for and agaist the DH but for me, it takes away from the game. I say get rid of it all together.

KRS-One · December 6th, 2006, 07:54 PM

I dislike the DH. It saves careers and allows for easier lineup setting, but it takes out entirely too much strategy. When's the last time you saw an AL-team do a double-switch outside of interleague or postseason play?

GerryInCS · December 6th, 2006, 10:42 PM

I hate the DH and here's why:

1. If you aren't playing on the field then you shouldn't get to bat, unless you are pinch hitting,

2. the DH position directly leads to more runs being scored as a manager does not have to worry if his pitcher can advance a runner with a bunt or lucky slap single and

3. it allows any number of washed up players (Frank Thomas and now Mike Piazza) to artificially extend their careers and bilk unsuspecting owners and GMs of millions of dollars that could be spent on younger, better baseball talent.

kfkorn · December 7th, 2006, 12:41 AM

I am split on this. At times, I like the DH. But, at other times, I dislike it. In the end, I think it should either be scrapped, or be in both leagues.

The DH definitely extends the career of baseball players, and also allows the players that are poor defensively to not have to play the field. Having the DH in just the American League makes the National League managers look better because their is more strategy involved when you have a pitcher hitting ninth, not a good hitter.

Having the DH does make both leagues look different, but I think the DH should be in both leagues or neither. And I might lean a bit toward neither since I am a Mets fan and have watched baseball, for the most part, without a DH.

WilsonC · December 11th, 2006, 09:00 AM

I don't necessarily agree with the idea that the NL has more strategy, but rather that it has different strategies resulting in more managerial moves. The key element of strategy is decision making. In some instances the NL game results in decision-making processes that are not relevant to the AL, but in many cases it actually reduces the difficulty of the decisions. Late in the game, when a manager needs to decide whether his starter has another inning in him or not, the AL manager has to evaluate the decision based entirely on his assessment of the pitching situation, whereas the NL manager may have an his decision made for him based on the batting order. How often do we hear managers being second guessed for pinch hitting for a pitcher in the 7th, compared to a straight pitching change?

The difference is that managing in the AL is about maximizing your advantages and managing in the NL is about minimizing your weaknesses. That the double switch is a fancier tactic than a straight pitching change doesn't necessarily make it a more intricate decision. Choosing when to bunt or pinch hit, however, is a more intricate decision when you're dealing with actual hitters than with pitchers who are not professional-caliber hitters.

Myself, I prefer having the DH. It extends careers, which I have no issues with, but most importantly it elevates both the offensive and the defensive caliber of play. That said, I think the best solution is as it is now; there is enough of a division on the preferences of fans that it makes sense to have both styles of play.

Zen653 · December 11th, 2006, 10:29 AM

I like the DH rule and I love the fact that only one league has it. You end up with the best of both worlds - two different brands of baseball. One for the purists, one for those who enjoy watching an Edgar Martinez or a David Ortiz extend their careers.

I'd keep the rule just as it is - no DH in the NL parks, DH in the AL parks. Both styles of play have their plusses and minuses, so let's allow both of them to remain active. I actually get a kick out of watching American League pitchers bat during interleague play and/or the World Series. I remember Josh Beckett homering in Philadelphia last year. I think that was the highlight of his year.

steeplechase3k · December 11th, 2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zen653

I'd keep the rule just as it is - no DH in the NL parks, DH in the AL parks. .

I'd switch it (in interleague has to continue, that's another debate). In the NL parks, play with the DH, in the AL parks, pitchers hit. That gives home fans more variety.

JoeCoolMan24 · December 11th, 2006, 02:34 PM

I like the DH. Not just because my fav. team is in the AL, but because it provides diversity, and different approaches. It gives more players a chance to play, and as they all say, "Homeruns are sexy", and DH's are the main source for HR's, so thats why they are so loved. Makes interleague play really enjoyable in NL parks watching the AL pitchers flail their bat around, and then struggle to run 90 feet. Its very entertaining.

TonyBagO'Donuts · December 12th, 2006, 12:49 AM

The DH was instituted for American League teams whos paltry offensive numbers were affecting their attendance numbers. For all we know, the DH may have saved baseball. So keep it like it is.

DiamondDave · December 12th, 2006, 07:57 AM

I detest a pitcher batting... with very few exceptions, pitchers suck at the hitting aspect of baseball... 5th inning... 1-1 game... 2 outs... runner at 3rd, and who comes up but the SP... inning over, time to go take a leek and get another beer

DH's, generally, are horrid fielders... sometimes they are older guys with worse knees... sometimes just a 1Bman or whatever who needs a slight rest for 1 game... sometimes a way to ease a player back in after a lengthy injury... but IMHO it adds much more to the game than a career .111 hitting SP striking out on 3 pitches

BigBadBlueBird · December 20th, 2006, 05:07 PM

I prefer no DH.

I'm not sure what John F's position is on this... has anyone thought to ask him?

Marinerjim11 · December 23rd, 2006, 10:36 AM

I like the DH I would much rather see a guy like Edgar Martinez when he was playing or Big Papi then watching a pitcher trying to hit... Yeah there are a few pitchers that know which end of the bat to hold onto but those guys are few and far between.

Rice4HoF · December 28th, 2006, 10:24 PM

I'm a purist. And I love the DH!

I also believe, contrary to most people, that the DH makes the game a lot tougher to manage for a manager. Fans say there is more strategy in NL games, but I don't believe there is. Late in the game, down by a run, with the pitcher coming up to bat, it's not "strategy" to pinch hit for him. It's common sense, and it often makes the manager's job easier. I believe there are a lot tougher decisions to be made in the AL with respect to when to pull a starter, than in the NL.

December 6th, 2006, 01:00 PM	#1 (permalink)
bedir than average Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,258	To DH or not to DH - that is the question This question has haunted baseball for years. Costas made it one of the centerpeices of his book, and the purists still worry about it. Do you like the DH? Should it exist in both leagues? ****** I personally like the DH. It gave me the ability to enjoy one of the best hitters of the 90s, Mr.Edgar Martinez.. Without the American League's decision to have the DH the Mariners '95 and 2001 runs would never have happened. Those two years are the defining moments of the Seattle Mariners and Papi was a key component for both seasons. In 2001 he finished 16th in MVP and in 05 he finished 3rd. He is 227th for career MVP share and 36th for career OPS. For me the DH debate is contained in the ability of that one player, one whose career would have been half the length it was without the DH. __________________ I'm sorry I left for a while. I needed a vaction, and then work changed substantially. I'm over 50 hour weeks, plus two hours a day of commuting time. A few weeks ago I launched my own blog about Seattle Sounders FC and Life in Puget Sound. I won't be by these parts often as my focus has changed. Sorry about the unannounced retirement.

December 6th, 2006, 01:12 PM	#2 (permalink)
MuffinMcFluffin Moderator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 586	I like the DH. I'm confused as to why it started, and why it's in one league and not the other... but I like it. It really makes the NL look better in ways that they have to better orient their team around the pitcher more than anything. For instance, they need a #8 hitter that isn't a double-play machine, and that can actually take a pitch. They don't get the luxury of "two leadoff hitters" in the #1 and #9 hole, so they need to orient one in the middle of the lineup somewhere to play some small ball. It's all about emphasis and diversity. I enjoy both of those things in baseball. __________________

December 6th, 2006, 07:54 PM	#4 (permalink)
KRS-One Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Just South of Baltimore, MD Posts: 185	I dislike the DH. It saves careers and allows for easier lineup setting, but it takes out entirely too much strategy. When's the last time you saw an AL-team do a double-switch outside of interleague or postseason play? __________________ Orioles-Ravens-Wizards-Terps How could colonized minds lead to such uncivilized times? Maybe the tribes were harmonious and you were erroneous.

December 6th, 2006, 02:40 PM	#3 (permalink)
Lenny Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 240	I have very strong opinions on this one. I think if you are going to have the DH it should be in both leagues. I also think that the DH is great for improving the team, to get that one great hitter on the team. Look at what it could do for Piazza if he can get back to his old form by only having to hit. Just think if Piazza whould have converted to a DH several years ago, he might still be hitting over .300 with good power. That would be huge on any team. However, the DH actually only helps the player, and makes the game easier to manage for the manager. What good is a player to a team that is not good enough to the team to play in the field? This is a sport, and part of any sport is the mental aspect that goes into it, and the DH takes away from that. Think of the differnces with the double switches and such that a NL manager has to do compaired to what an AL manager has to do. I can see pluses for and agaist the DH but for me, it takes away from the game. I say get rid of it all together.

December 6th, 2006, 10:42 PM	#5 (permalink)
GerryInCS New Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Colorado Springs Posts: 635	I hate the DH and here's why: 1. If you aren't playing on the field then you shouldn't get to bat, unless you are pinch hitting, 2. the DH position directly leads to more runs being scored as a manager does not have to worry if his pitcher can advance a runner with a bunt or lucky slap single and 3. it allows any number of washed up players (Frank Thomas and now Mike Piazza) to artificially extend their careers and bilk unsuspecting owners and GMs of millions of dollars that could be spent on younger, better baseball talent.

December 7th, 2006, 12:41 AM	#6 (permalink)
kfkorn Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 305	I am split on this. At times, I like the DH. But, at other times, I dislike it. In the end, I think it should either be scrapped, or be in both leagues. The DH definitely extends the career of baseball players, and also allows the players that are poor defensively to not have to play the field. Having the DH in just the American League makes the National League managers look better because their is more strategy involved when you have a pitcher hitting ninth, not a good hitter. Having the DH does make both leagues look different, but I think the DH should be in both leagues or neither. And I might lean a bit toward neither since I am a Mets fan and have watched baseball, for the most part, without a DH.

December 11th, 2006, 09:00 AM	#7 (permalink)
WilsonC Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 121	I don't necessarily agree with the idea that the NL has more strategy, but rather that it has different strategies resulting in more managerial moves. The key element of strategy is decision making. In some instances the NL game results in decision-making processes that are not relevant to the AL, but in many cases it actually reduces the difficulty of the decisions. Late in the game, when a manager needs to decide whether his starter has another inning in him or not, the AL manager has to evaluate the decision based entirely on his assessment of the pitching situation, whereas the NL manager may have an his decision made for him based on the batting order. How often do we hear managers being second guessed for pinch hitting for a pitcher in the 7th, compared to a straight pitching change? The difference is that managing in the AL is about maximizing your advantages and managing in the NL is about minimizing your weaknesses. That the double switch is a fancier tactic than a straight pitching change doesn't necessarily make it a more intricate decision. Choosing when to bunt or pinch hit, however, is a more intricate decision when you're dealing with actual hitters than with pitchers who are not professional-caliber hitters. Myself, I prefer having the DH. It extends careers, which I have no issues with, but most importantly it elevates both the offensive and the defensive caliber of play. That said, I think the best solution is as it is now; there is enough of a division on the preferences of fans that it makes sense to have both styles of play.

December 11th, 2006, 10:29 AM	#8 (permalink)
Zen653 Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 7,274	I like the DH rule and I love the fact that only one league has it. You end up with the best of both worlds - two different brands of baseball. One for the purists, one for those who enjoy watching an Edgar Martinez or a David Ortiz extend their careers. I'd keep the rule just as it is - no DH in the NL parks, DH in the AL parks. Both styles of play have their plusses and minuses, so let's allow both of them to remain active. I actually get a kick out of watching American League pitchers bat during interleague play and/or the World Series. I remember Josh Beckett homering in Philadelphia last year. I think that was the highlight of his year.

December 11th, 2006, 02:34 PM	#10 (permalink)
JoeCoolMan24 Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 38	I like the DH. Not just because my fav. team is in the AL, but because it provides diversity, and different approaches. It gives more players a chance to play, and as they all say, "Homeruns are sexy", and DH's are the main source for HR's, so thats why they are so loved. Makes interleague play really enjoyable in NL parks watching the AL pitchers flail their bat around, and then struggle to run 90 feet. Its very entertaining.

December 12th, 2006, 12:49 AM	#11 (permalink)
TonyBagO'Donuts Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 65	The DH was instituted for American League teams whos paltry offensive numbers were affecting their attendance numbers. For all we know, the DH may have saved baseball. So keep it like it is.

December 12th, 2006, 07:57 AM	#12 (permalink)
DiamondDave Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: MD, on the Potomac River Posts: 5,390	I detest a pitcher batting... with very few exceptions, pitchers suck at the hitting aspect of baseball... 5th inning... 1-1 game... 2 outs... runner at 3rd, and who comes up but the SP... inning over, time to go take a leek and get another beer DH's, generally, are horrid fielders... sometimes they are older guys with worse knees... sometimes just a 1Bman or whatever who needs a slight rest for 1 game... sometimes a way to ease a player back in after a lengthy injury... but IMHO it adds much more to the game than a career .111 hitting SP striking out on 3 pitches

December 20th, 2006, 05:07 PM	#13 (permalink)
BigBadBlueBird AKA: Keith, SteibFan, E5 and Snakeeye Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 38	I prefer no DH. I'm not sure what John F's position is on this... has anyone thought to ask him?

December 23rd, 2006, 10:36 AM	#14 (permalink)
Marinerjim11 Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 25	I like the DH I would much rather see a guy like Edgar Martinez when he was playing or Big Papi then watching a pitcher trying to hit... Yeah there are a few pitchers that know which end of the bat to hold onto but those guys are few and far between.

December 28th, 2006, 10:24 PM	#15 (permalink)
Rice4HoF Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Calgary, Canada Posts: 60	I'm a purist. And I love the DH! I also believe, contrary to most people, that the DH makes the game a lot tougher to manage for a manager. Fans say there is more strategy in NL games, but I don't believe there is. Late in the game, down by a run, with the pitcher coming up to bat, it's not "strategy" to pinch hit for him. It's common sense, and it often makes the manager's job easier. I believe there are a lot tougher decisions to be made in the AL with respect to when to pull a starter, than in the NL.