It can be argued that the DH makes the game more interesting to watch. But the same game be said about adding grenades into the game.
Why did they have to make the game more interesting? Was it really getting boring with the pitchers batting? Watching pitchers hit can be no fun. But so can watching an Astros-Cubs game last season. The game is a beautiful game, but like anything beautiful, it will always have its faults. I prefer my game to be natural and real, free of plastic surgery attempting to perfect it.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
RedFanAlways1966 (03-14-2013)
Perhaps the bottom of the 6th is a bit early. What if it were the bottom of the 7th? Does that change anything?
Plenty of managers will bunt late in the game to get the winning run on third with less than two outs. The NL manager has to decide whether he is ultimately willing to sacrifice his pitcher to increase his chances of taking the lead. If you bunt in that situation there is a very good chance the #8 hitter is walked and the pitcher is due up with the bases loaded and one out. If you are not willing to pinch hit there, then you probably should not have bunted in the first place.
Let me come at this at a different angle. Is there any scenario where you as a manager would intentionally walk the other team's #8 hitter? If so, what factors would you consider?
The game just came off the biggest offense era ever, is introducing offense really needed?
That's how the devil got in the house the 1st time.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...84/1/index.htm
1972:
The pitchers are suffocating the hitters again, driving batting averages down and throwing shutouts at an even more frequent rate than in '68. August has been a particularly bewildering month for those who assumed that the lowering of the pitching mound and tightening of the strike zone back in 1969 had accomplished for all time the purpose of equalizing offense and defense. At the end of last week, with 36 games still to be played in the month, 57 shutouts had been thrown in August alone, and there had been 59 games in which pitchers gave up four or fewer hits. There were 40 more in which one team or the other had only five hitsLee MacPhail
"There is little doubt," MacPhail said, "that the pitchers may have adapted quicker to lowering the mound than we thought they would. But many people in the game are quite conservative, and making a lot of rule changes all at once will not happen.
"Some people," says MacPhail, "have discussed an eight-man lineup as a solution to the problem because the reduced batting order would get your three, four and five hitters—your key run producers—up twice more a game in many cases. There are also those who want to limit the number of pitchers you can have on a team. This would help the hitter in that he would not be seeing so many different pitchers. I don't know that I like the idea too much. Some of the bigger heroes in the game are relief pitchers and I don't think we should lose sight of that fact."
The idea MacPhail still likes best is the "designated hitter," a man who would usually bat in place of the pitcher. "It was tried in the International League three years ago with great success," he says. "It does not mess up strategy that much, and the starting pitcher stays in the game. It is also a way to keep well-known players in baseball just to hit without requiring them to withstand the wear and tear of playing defense. I'm talking about men like Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays and maybe Henry Aaron in a couple of years.
"The one thing I am sure of is that the hitting situation is not a matter just of the National League or the American," he concluded. "It doesn't go along league lines. It's everyone's problem. I hope that we are not back to exactly where we were four years ago. But what I see of the trend I don't like."
RedFanAlways1966 (03-14-2013)
Is it okay to say that the DH was a GIMMICK when introduced? Other sports gimmicks... XFL deciding game opening possession with "who gets the ball first" and the White Sox in shorts. Next thing you know we will see Spiderman Movie logos on the bases. Keep GIMMICKS out of a great game.
Yes because grenades and above average hitters getting more PA's in lieu of automatic outs are the same thing.
Hey, at least sending the pitcher to the plate gives fans more opportunities to come to the game and not actually watch it and those PA's are legit reasons they don't have to feel guilty about or stodgy fans can mock them for....
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
Why don't we add designated runners too? Who wants to see a slow guy run the bases.
How about unlimited substitutions like basketball? That would add some excitement, eh?
Why not just bring the relief pitcher in from the bullpen in a little red clown car? The kids would love it and it would add a new level of entertainment for the casual fans who can't stand such mundane stuff as the actual strategy and tactics which evolved over the past 150 years.
After all, all that thinking can hurt your brain. I want to be entertained. Blow something up, for goodness sake!!!!
We'll go down in history as the first society that wouldn't save itself because it wasn't cost effective ~ Kurt Vonnegut
AtomicDumpling (03-14-2013),bigredmechanism (03-14-2013),OnBaseMachine (03-15-2013),Roy Tucker (03-14-2013)
Lets stop acting like we've hit our heads on something hard and lets back away from insane hyperbole for a second....
This is the baseball equivalent of a clown car: .129/.162/.165, wOBA=.149 (pitcher offense last season). And it's not lact like there are tomes of great wisdom that have been created to allow managers to compensate for having such a black hole in their lineups. What's more, given the impact the DH has had on the AL style and the resulting increase in attendance, it's pretty hard to argue that the DH has been a blight on baseball-when it's been implemented, fans have reacted positively. And frankly, it's begging the question to A) argue NL fans are smarter or more prone to be students of the game than AL fans, and B) that the majority of fans at the park are even actually watching the game at any given point in the game....
And lets state another obvious point...for as beautiful as watching Mike Leake bat like a shortstop is, you still then have to watch him pitch like a batting practice pitcher (dinger, dinger, dinger)....
Last edited by jojo; 03-14-2013 at 08:49 AM.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
Actually, I'd rather see Leake up there!
Leake is an example that shows that if a pitcher takes his BP seriously, he can be a threat with the bat and is not a black hole in the lineup. Carlos Zambrano was another example.
I remember a few years ago Randy Wolf said that before he came to the Brewers, he wouldn't see the inside of the batting cage for almost two weeks sometimes when he was with the Dodgers.
The DH is coming, though, to the NL - it's just a matter of time (probably about five years). Get used to it.
If evolution is outlawed, only outlaws will evolve!
Maybe wait to read the paper before criticizing their approach?
Why would these things disproportionately impact the AL and not the NL corresponding to the the AL instituting the DH?
Actually no. AL pitching is generally stronger. AL pitchers don't get to pad their stats by pitching to other pitchers. Generally, pitchers going from the AL to the NL have their peripherals rise while pitchers going the other way see their peripherals fall.
I really don't care for basketball much these days. What is sexy is talent. Pitchers clearly can't hit and the disparity between pitchers and league average offensive performance is gaping. We're not talking about Shaq shooting 50% from the free throw line. We're talking about a player shooting 10% meaning literally there is no reasonable expectation for acceptable success so the game actually changes to exploit this futility.
That's the NL "strategy" that many hold so dear. A relatively small set of strategem meant to exploit or compensate futility.
There is nothing wrong with that and it's reasonable for people to enjoy watching that wrinkle. But it's also reasonable for people to enjoy not having to watch futility. Clearly I watch both styles, being a fan of teams that play in both leagues.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
I know everyone is saying "oh, it's coming!" Yet what is the justification behind it? When it was introduced in the early 70's offense was way down and the AL was floundering. They needed some sort of gimmick to bring people to the ballpark. Yet baseball popularity is on the rise, and the NL beats the AL in average attendance most years (adding Houston to the AL will only make it worse). Television and radio ratings in NL towns are also consistently higher. So what benefit would NL owners see? Adding the DL would add cost and would likely not bring in any more revenue. It's no longer a novelty. People see it all the time in the AL. Maybe if the MLBPA really pushed for it, but once again, why would owners in the NL be willing to give up something that would be used as a bargaining chip in negotiations for all of MLB? No way they sign off on something where they are the only ones taking a hit.
Competition? While the AL often wins interleague, the NL has won 4 of the last 5 World Series and 7 of the last 12. So in the only interleague games that really matter, the NL competes really well.
I just don't see the reasoning behind it from the NL's perpective. Added cost for zero to minimal benefit. Why in the world would any NL owner want it?
Last edited by scott91575; 03-14-2013 at 09:33 AM.
I think, as was stated above, the competition for free agents is probably the impetus behind it. Pujols, Fielder, Hamilton all either switched to the AL or stayed in the AL. A guy like Choo is going to be a free agent after this year. He's still relatively young but he's not getting any younger. He'll have his pick of teams to go to but he's got to be thinking that getting a spot start as a DH is pretty attractive. I would also think some owners in the NL would believe that a DH may be able to lengthen the career of their stars while keeping their bats in the lineup. Of course that's always been the case but with the big money these guys are being paid these days, you have to believe they are thinking about it.
Personally, I'm against the DH.
Like I've said, the logical conclusion of the DH argument is 2 platoon baseball, i.e. a defense team and an offense team. If you are going to compensate for a lousy hitting pitcher, the what about catchers and shortstops? Late inning outfield replacements? Most players are skewed either offensively or defensively. Not that I think its going to happen, but it seems to be the issue that is being argued.
She used to wake me up with coffee ever morning
bigredmechanism (03-14-2013)
Not really. The issue, to me at least, seems to be with pitchers, their offensive abilities are never even considered. If they can pitch well, then they will play. With position players, there is at least some debate about whether their lack of hitting/fielding will determine their playing time.
...the 2-2 to Woodsen and here it comes...and it is swung on and missed! And Tom Browning has pitched a perfect game! Twenty-seven outs in a row, and he is being mobbed by his teammates, just to the thirdbase side of the mound.
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |