Will the DH soon be universal?

[corkedbat]

If the Reds are able to somehow extend Joey (BIG IF), Soto (unlike Yonder) might have a place - Francisco too.

http://www.cnnsi.com/2012/writers/to...&sct=hp_t11_a2

I think there are a three reasons it might happen:

1. More offense

2. Something needs to be done before the 'Stros are shipped to the AL because of all the constant interleague play.

3. It will be an easy sell to the players, as opposed to abolishing the DH.

I personally lean slightly toward doing away with the DH, but won't scream if it is adopted. I just want both leagues to have the same rules of play. In other words, I don't care what they do as long as everything is universal.

[KronoRed]

I expect it to happen, then we can get to work on the designated runner.

Somewhere Charlie Finley will smile.

[AtomicDumpling]

Pretty soon baseball will be like football. One set of players for offense, one set of players for defense. Football players used to play both offense and defense back when men were men.

Baseball was the most popular sport in the country for 100 years with no designated hitter or second-place teams winning the World Series. Why fix what is not broken? These "fixes" are not designed to make the game better, they are designed to put more money in the offshore bank accounts of the millionaire players and the billionaire owners.

If you can't hit you are not a real baseball player.

Does Kobe Bryant need a designated free throw shooter? Of course not, he is a real basketball player. He has to play offense and defense.

Does Tiger Woods need a designated putter? Of course not, he is a real golfer. He has to hit drives, chips and puts.

Does Ron Jeremy get a designated.... oh you get the idea.

[RedsBaron]

I don't like the DH (although I do believe the DH should be used in the All Star game), but no way does the players union ever agree to it being abolished. The lack of a DH puts NL teams in general, including the Reds, at a competitive disadvantage. Under these circumstances, and after 40 years, I expect that the NL will adopt the DH, and should do so.

[mattfeet]

Does Ron Jeremy get a designated.... oh you get the idea.

[AtomicDumpling]

I don't like the DH (although I do believe the DH should be used in the All Star game), but no way does the players union ever agree to it being abolished. The lack of a DH puts NL teams in general, including the Reds, at a competitive disadvantage. Under these circumstances, and after 40 years, I expect that the NL will adopt the DH, and should do so.

You make a couple good points but I have a different opinion. I am not sure the DH puts NL teams at a disadvantage. Teams budget their payroll based on how much the owner wants to spend, then the GM allocates that money to the various positions as he sees fit. DHs can be expensive, which means the AL teams have to spend big money to fill that particular position, leaving them less money to spend on the rest of the team's needs. NL teams can use the money they don't have to spend on a DH to bolster their pitching staff or another position. If the players' union feels the DH is putting more money in their pockets they are mistaken. Having the DH doesn't increase the total amount of money teams spend on players, it only affects where they spend it. The Red Sox would not lower their payroll if having David Ortiz at DH were not an option, they would just use his money to bring in another stud pitcher or upgrade somewhere else.

I think if MLB really wanted to abolish the DH they could negotiate with the union to make it happen. The DH is here to stay because the owners feel the added offense makes them more money than added strategy does. Casual fans like the DH because they think watching a pitcher bat is boring, largely because they are oblivious to the subtle strategies being employed by NL teams.

[gilpdawg]

I've always been firmly in the camp of use it in both leagues or neither one. However, the fact that pretty much all the minors use it now, makes me lean toward just get rid of the pitchers hitting. It's kind of a joke that some guys won't get their first professional at bat until they reach the major leagues. I don't agree with it, but I think they've gone too far to turn back now. Just make it universal and get on with it.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Pretty soon baseball will be like football. One set of players for offense, one set of players for defense. Football players used to play both offense and defense back when men were men.

Baseball was the most popular sport in the country for 100 years with no designated hitter or second-place teams winning the World Series. Why fix what is not broken? These "fixes" are not designed to make the game better, they are designed to put more money in the offshore bank accounts of the millionaire players and the billionaire owners.

If you can't hit you are not a real baseball player.

Does Kobe Bryant need a designated free throw shooter? Of course not, he is a real basketball player. He has to play offense and defense.

Does Tiger Woods need a designated putter? Of course not, he is a real golfer. He has to hit drives, chips and puts.

Does Ron Jeremy get a designated.... oh you get the idea.

*high five*

[dougdirt]

Does Kobe Bryant need a designated free throw shooter? Of course not, he is a real basketball player. He has to play offense and defense.

Kobe Bryant doesn't, but plenty of guys SHOULD have one. And plenty of guys are only "one way" players in the NBA. Just like in baseball. And hockey.

[membengal]

I am 41, and in the past 15 years MLB has done so much to mess up what was "traditional" that they have numbed me to further changes. The world didn't end when they went to the Wild Card format, and I guess it won't end when the NL gets the DH. I won't initially like it, but I will likely get used to it.

[westofyou]

Nope, won't happen

[Roy Tucker]

Not everything has to be symmetrical. Anomalies can and do exist. Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. I like the idiosyncrasy of pitchers hitting.

Just say no to the DH.

[IslandRed]

If you can't hit you are not a real baseball player.

In theory.

In practice? No. Being written into the batting order doesn't make a guy a hitter. Truth is, the ability to hit is, in 99-plus percent of cases, a complete non-factor in determining whether a pitcher makes the major leagues and stays in the major leagues. It's barely more relevant to his employment prospects than his ability to sing karaoke or do quadratic equations or play the lead in Fiddler On the Roof.

Having said that, I don't want to adopt the DH in the National League because I do like the strategic aspects of it, the bunting and pinch-hitting and double switches and all of it. But let's call the strategies what they are: schemes based on the fundamental premise that pitchers can't hit.

[REDREAD]

Honestly, Bud and his cronies have changed so much now, that it really makes sense to make the DH universal.

15 teams in each league (forcing interleague play) is more outrageous.
There's really no point in even having two seperate leagues anymore.
So, we might as well make the rules uniform.

Honestly, I don't get the "checkers and chess" reasoning.. Does anyone really get excited if the Reds have to use Leake as a PH? There's really not that much skill/strategy involved in doing double switches and pinch hitting.
I'd much rather protect pitchers from getting injured while batting.

Another advantage of the DH is that potentially clubs could go back to carrying 11 pitchers instead of 12. I remember as a kid, when the norm was to only carry 10 pitchers. It was nice to have a deeper bench of position players.

[WildcatFan]

I want to see anything that keeps the leagues as separate as possible. As an almost exclusively NL fan, I like the novelty of interleague play and seeing a DH in my lineup every once in a while, but I'm with IslandRed that I prefer even the small strategic considerations that come from having a pitcher hit. It's fun for me to think about and debate those moves.