Designated Hitter Rule

[SoCalDukeFan]

I personally don't like it and I also don't like having the leagues play different rules.

How would you vote?

[kmspeaks]

Let the pitchers hit. Make the managers think.

[YourLandlord]

Let the pitchers hit. Make the managers think.

...because navigating a double-switch is SO intellectually challenging.

The DH is a weird rule, but a good rule. Why would you want inferior players performing in a game? It would be like forcing the QB to play a defensive position.

No one wants to put up with the horrific experience of seeing pitchers hit. And really, what is baseball but a business that provides entertainment? Why would you want to see 1/9th of the season involve pitchers "hitting"? Or, if not pitchers, then some random bench pinch-hitter?

Plus, ask Yankees fans after Wang got hurt running the bases. The pitcher is a unique position, and baseball is unlike other sports. There really isn't a reason the pitcher (a defensive player) should have to perform also as an offensive player. Football has offense and defense, hockey has offensemen and defensemen, basketball has players that rarely look to score but play hard defense. Why should baseball be any different?

[hc5duke]

It would be like forcing the QB to play a defensive position. There really isn't a reason the pitcher (a defensive player) should have to perform also as an offensive player.
good call. let's have 9 players on offense and 9 on defense for baseball. a pitcher is as much a defensive player as a catcher, infielders, or outfielders - when the team is playing defense


baseball is unlike other sports. [other sports comparisons] Why should baseball be any different?
contradiction.


basketball has players that rarely look to score but play hard defense.
but they are still in the game when the team plays offense. i'm guessing you had someone like bruce bowen in mind - it's not like he plays tough d on kobe then sits down while ginobili is subbed in after each change of possession.

[YourLandlord]

good call. let's have 9 players on offense and 9 on defense for baseball. a pitcher is as much a defensive player as a catcher, infielders, or outfielders - when the team is playing defense


you must hate football then.

[Jim3k]

you must hate football then.

I wanna go back to 11 players. Make them play both ways. QBs are nothing more than DBs.

(Well, that was pretty close to the way it was when I was in school in the early 60's. True, some substitutions were allowed, but it was limited.)

Eleven on eleven. That's the way football ought to be! May the toughest men win! (Or something like that...)

I'm trying to turn back the clock...uuughh!....hmmn....won't go that direction....maybe I need to rethink.

[JasonEvans]

Compairsons to other sports make no sense. Each sport is different.

That said, I see no reason why pitchers should be so special but other position players are not. Pitching is not appreciably more specialized than catching, for example. If the other guys all hit, so should the pitcher.

The fact that pitchers tend to be mediocre-bad hitters is their fault. It is certainly not universal. There are a number of pitchers who are fine hitters, often better than some of their positions players. Rick Ankiel is a great example of a kid who worked so hard at his hitting that he became a hitter instead of a pitcher. If the pitchers were required to bat always, in every minor league too, then I bet they'd get better at it.

--Jason "they will never get rid of the DH-- the Players Assoc will not allow it" Evans

[DukieInKansas]

Let the pitchers hit. Make the managers think.

I like the occasional 20 inning game where the manager is trying to figure out who is left to play.

I'm in favor of getting rid of the DH rule. Of course, my early years were spent in NL cities, so that may play a role in it. I did enjoy teasing my 12 year old nephew by constantly asking him where the DH stood on the field. :D

[missfinch]

...because navigating a double-switch is SO intellectually challenging.

The DH is a weird rule, but a good rule. Why would you want inferior players performing in a game? It would be like forcing the QB to play a defensive position.

No one wants to put up with the horrific experience of seeing pitchers hit. And really, what is baseball but a business that provides entertainment? Why would you want to see 1/9th of the season involve pitchers "hitting"? Or, if not pitchers, then some random bench pinch-hitter?

Plus, ask Yankees fans after Wang got hurt running the bases. The pitcher is a unique position, and baseball is unlike other sports. There really isn't a reason the pitcher (a defensive player) should have to perform also as an offensive player. Football has offense and defense, hockey has offensemen and defensemen, basketball has players that rarely look to score but play hard defense. Why should baseball be any different?

How about the horrific experience of watching Shaq shoot free throws? Would you be in favor of a designated free throw shooter?

[TheRose77]

I like it the way it is. But then I'm a Yankee girl. I get to see great hitters, and a few times a year I get to see Andy Pettitte hit. It's a win-win for me.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

If the National League doesn't want to use the DH, then let them not use the DH. Let the American League use it, even in interleague play. That should carry over to the World Series - in either park. Let the Yankees use the DH in the National League park. If the NL team doesn't want to, that's their choice, but don't penalize the Yankees for playing the way they want to. And yeah, Wang's injury is the crux, or crutch :D, of the matter.

[YourLandlord]

And yeah, Wang's injury is the crux, or crotch :D, of the matter.

1234

[elvis14]

Let the pitchers hit. Make the managers think.

Either your a ball player or your not. Pitchers need to hit. When you have a pitcher who can actually hit it's a huge bonus.

elvis (CF, lead off hitter)

[OZZIE4DUKE]

And yeah, Wang's injury is the crux, or crutch :D, of the matter.


Originally Posted by OZZIE4DUKE http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?p=344982#post344982)
And yeah, Wang's injury is the crux, or crotch :D, of the matter.

And now you're changing my words? WTF?:eek:

[hurleyfor3]

I prefer to keep it the way it is and watch everyone else debate it.

[weezie]

Keep things as they are. It gives me time to head to the ladies room or take a nap when your NL pitchers are at the plate.

Merry Christmas, you nuts!

[Mal]

Jason's right, of course. The only change that will even be considered in the current environment is the imposition of the DH on the NL. Getting rid of it in the AL is a complete non-starter in the real world.

Here in the internet, however, I'm fully on board with abolishing it. The concept of the designated hitter is a crime against the game of baseball. Bull Durham quote] "A good friend of mine used to say, this is a very simple game: you throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball." The "position" of DH takes away two of the three basic elements of the game from the "player" acting as such. That's a joke.

I think comparing to other sports is, in fact, worthwhile here. I dislike that football has become so specialized, for example, and see the DH as a step in that direction. Admittedly, football is in some sense more analogous to baseball than other sports, in that the transition from playing offense to playing defense is, like baseball but unlike basketball, hockey, soccer and the like, rules based and not instantaneous and possession based (except for fumbles and interceptions). That said, then hc5's tongue-in-cheek idea of 9 offensive players and 9 defensive would be the appropriate response if we want to emulate football. Nobody wants that.

To go further afield, look at other sports with varying degrees of specialization. One lame thing about lacrosse, for example, is that at any given time a number of the players are standing around doing nothing while the ball's on the other end of the field - they don't even cross the half-field line. That's more drastic than in soccer, where, granted, the stopper's not integrally involved in offensive sets, but at least they provide support to the midfielders in building an attack. So it's more tolerable there. And it's more tolerable yet in hockey, where defensemen come forward fairly often, run the point when the puck's successfully transitioned into the offensive zone, and even skate on the power play.

Anyway, everyone should have to play offense and defense, as far as I'm concerned. That's part of what makes baseball and basketball so great. You can value players on the overall package of different skills they bring to the table, not just one.

Also, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains. Think about that for a while. :)

[kmspeaks]

Jason's right, of course. The only change that will even be considered in the current environment is the imposition of the DH on the NL. Getting rid of it in the AL is a complete non-starter in the real world.

Here in the internet, however, I'm fully on board with abolishing it. The concept of the designated hitter is a crime against the game of baseball. Bull Durham quote] "A good friend of mine used to say, this is a very simple game: you throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball." The "position" of DH takes away two of the three basic elements of the game from the "player" acting as such. That's a joke.

I think comparing to other sports is, in fact, worthwhile here. I dislike that football has become so specialized, for example, and see the DH as a step in that direction. Admittedly, football is in some sense more analogous to baseball than other sports, in that the transition from playing offense to playing defense is, like baseball but unlike basketball, hockey, soccer and the like, rules based and not instantaneous and possession based (except for fumbles and interceptions). That said, then hc5's tongue-in-cheek idea of 9 offensive players and 9 defensive would be the appropriate response if we want to emulate football. Nobody wants that.

To go further afield, look at other sports with varying degrees of specialization. One lame thing about lacrosse, for example, is that at any given time a number of the players are standing around doing nothing while the ball's on the other end of the field - they don't even cross the half-field line. That's more drastic than in soccer, where, granted, the stopper's not integrally involved in offensive sets, but at least they provide support to the midfielders in building an attack. So it's more tolerable there. And it's more tolerable yet in hockey, where defensemen come forward fairly often, run the point when the puck's successfully transitioned into the offensive zone, and even skate on the power play.

Anyway, everyone should have to play offense and defense, as far as I'm concerned. That's part of what makes baseball and basketball so great. You can value players on the overall package of different skills they bring to the table, not just one.

Also, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains. Think about that for a while. :)

I love the Bull Durham quotes :) and I agree about too much specialization being a bad thing. What happened to the idea of a 5 tool player anyway?

[Mcluhan]

I don't think they should trot Redick out to shoot free throws for Dwight Howard and I don't think they should trot out a DH to hit for a pitcher.

Really: Did the 1955 series suffer because the pitchers hit? Was baseball incomplete before 1973?

[YmoBeThere]

The DH has gotta go!

[Welcome2DaSlopes]

The DH has gotta go!

THIS.....