DH To National League
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
DH To National League
Maybe there's no Panic In Detroit over this, but there appears to be a little Panic In The Burgh.
DH To National League
I've read this whole thread, and I'll just say this...everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Fine. But for me, the DH is less exciting baseball. It's more checkers and less chess. I get that some people think this is great. You're entitled to your opinion, too. But I don't. I don't think it will ruin the game. But I do think it will make it more boring. I think what was formerly NL baseball was better than the AL.
As someone who is a fan of the Pirates (Or am I? I'm not really sure at the moment.), this is doubly bad for the Pirates. It's just one more regular position where the Bucs will try to scrape by with a washed up vet (think Jeromy Burnitz) or a young player trying to catch on.
I have no confidence that anything from this new CBA will do anything to benefit the fans of baseball. The owners and players will both get some concessions, and in the end, nothing will be done for fans in small market cities. Or fans in Iowa where six teams are still blacked out.
I can count on one hand the number of MLB games I've watched, combined, in two years. I used to watch that many a week. But if the Pirates aren't competitive, have no real shot of ever being competitive, and I believe that MLB just took a major step backward in terms of the strategic element of its product in favor of ensuring more offense, I'm wondering why I should come back.
As someone who is a fan of the Pirates (Or am I? I'm not really sure at the moment.), this is doubly bad for the Pirates. It's just one more regular position where the Bucs will try to scrape by with a washed up vet (think Jeromy Burnitz) or a young player trying to catch on.
I have no confidence that anything from this new CBA will do anything to benefit the fans of baseball. The owners and players will both get some concessions, and in the end, nothing will be done for fans in small market cities. Or fans in Iowa where six teams are still blacked out.
I can count on one hand the number of MLB games I've watched, combined, in two years. I used to watch that many a week. But if the Pirates aren't competitive, have no real shot of ever being competitive, and I believe that MLB just took a major step backward in terms of the strategic element of its product in favor of ensuring more offense, I'm wondering why I should come back.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
DH To National League
You and I cancel each other out. Excitement for me is seeing the finest pitchers face the finest hitters. I enjoy suspense more than surprise. Boredom is seeing pitchers flailing like they're blindly waving divining rods out there. I'll leave it at that because we can go on an on in an endless loop. Probably already have.
As for the type of guy the team will probably use, I'll agree with Doc's predictions in the past on that.
Some teams use a full-time DH, and that was the case for almost every team for a long time.
Doc has written- and, I agree with him- that the Bucs will do what maybe about half of AL teams have done more recently- use the fourth outfielder to help keep them fresh. As with so many other things, we shall see.....
While I agree with you that our DH might not match the quality expected of some other teams because of their experience and compensation, we have to accept that regardless of who's up there at bat, much to my dismay.
As for the type of guy the team will probably use, I'll agree with Doc's predictions in the past on that.
Some teams use a full-time DH, and that was the case for almost every team for a long time.
Doc has written- and, I agree with him- that the Bucs will do what maybe about half of AL teams have done more recently- use the fourth outfielder to help keep them fresh. As with so many other things, we shall see.....
While I agree with you that our DH might not match the quality expected of some other teams because of their experience and compensation, we have to accept that regardless of who's up there at bat, much to my dismay.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
DH To National League
785E5F485E4E3D0 wrote:
What it comes down to for me is that every player in the line-up was meant to both play in the field and hit. Changing that incredibly important rule was too much for me.
Baseball has always been a game of give and take. You put up with a poor fielder because you want his bat in the lineup. Or a light hitting SS like Mark Belanger is worth a spot in the lineup because his defense is so good. A Russell Martin hitting .226 in 2013 is worth his weight in gold because of what he does for the pitchers. And a pitcher's value on the mound is worth his weak bat in the lineup. And players who excel both in the field and at bat are special. But I suspect there will come a day far into the future when there are both offensive and defensive platoons in baseball. The principle is the same. [highlight][/highlight]Why make players bat whose value is primarily defense. [highlight][/highlight]
This is the crux of it for me. If the DH is such a good idea then why not continue in that vein and have designated runners and fielders, too? A fundamental part of the game is that all of the players have to hit and play in the field. Teams have to live and die with the weak bat or glove as a result. That’s a major consideration that helps make the game better than any other.
I don't remember it, but didn't having offensive and defensive players ruin football? From what I've read in the 1950's only two or three players could be subbed for and then by late 1950's early 1960's two platoons came in. I am pretty sure by time AFL started it was offensive and defensive players.
I don't view football and baseball as being equivalent and think baseball needs to stop at DH.
I know there were two-way players in the early days of the NFL but I don’t know if there were rules regulating how many guys could play both ways. The coaches may have decided that the game was becoming so rough that they had to get their players off the field to limit injuries.
Baseball’s rule about players not being able to return once they’re removed from the game leads to important strategical decisions that impact probably every game. And of course, the opposite decision - not removing a player because the manager doesn’t want to lose him - is jus as critical. It’s what helps to make baseball so special.
What it comes down to for me is that every player in the line-up was meant to both play in the field and hit. Changing that incredibly important rule was too much for me.
Baseball has always been a game of give and take. You put up with a poor fielder because you want his bat in the lineup. Or a light hitting SS like Mark Belanger is worth a spot in the lineup because his defense is so good. A Russell Martin hitting .226 in 2013 is worth his weight in gold because of what he does for the pitchers. And a pitcher's value on the mound is worth his weak bat in the lineup. And players who excel both in the field and at bat are special. But I suspect there will come a day far into the future when there are both offensive and defensive platoons in baseball. The principle is the same. [highlight][/highlight]Why make players bat whose value is primarily defense. [highlight][/highlight]
This is the crux of it for me. If the DH is such a good idea then why not continue in that vein and have designated runners and fielders, too? A fundamental part of the game is that all of the players have to hit and play in the field. Teams have to live and die with the weak bat or glove as a result. That’s a major consideration that helps make the game better than any other.
I don't remember it, but didn't having offensive and defensive players ruin football? From what I've read in the 1950's only two or three players could be subbed for and then by late 1950's early 1960's two platoons came in. I am pretty sure by time AFL started it was offensive and defensive players.
I don't view football and baseball as being equivalent and think baseball needs to stop at DH.
I know there were two-way players in the early days of the NFL but I don’t know if there were rules regulating how many guys could play both ways. The coaches may have decided that the game was becoming so rough that they had to get their players off the field to limit injuries.
Baseball’s rule about players not being able to return once they’re removed from the game leads to important strategical decisions that impact probably every game. And of course, the opposite decision - not removing a player because the manager doesn’t want to lose him - is jus as critical. It’s what helps to make baseball so special.
DH To National League
I find the whole DH thing puzzling. The players association is said to favor it because it creates one more job, but I'm not seeing that. Unless they increase the roster size (and I've seen nothing about that), they are still at 26. All they are doing is switching hitter for a pitcher. What teams will then do is make pitching (aside from the main guys) a part-time job - shuffling players from AAA when they need some innings, then back again while another guy comes up. There's already enough of that going on for me.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
DH To National League
66647E786E0B0 wrote: I find the whole DH thing puzzling. The players association is said to favor it because it creates one more job, but I'm not seeing that. Unless they increase the roster size (and I've seen nothing about that), they are still at 26. All they are doing is switching hitter for a pitcher. What teams will then do is make pitching (aside from the main guys) a part-time job - shuffling players from AAA when they need some innings, then back again while another guy comes up. There's already enough of that going on for me.
Good point. The players want the DH because some of the teams, the wealthy ones, will add an accomplished hitter, which will increase payments to players at least for those teams. They’re not concerned with better competition on the field. Their intent is to drive up salaries.
Good point. The players want the DH because some of the teams, the wealthy ones, will add an accomplished hitter, which will increase payments to players at least for those teams. They’re not concerned with better competition on the field. Their intent is to drive up salaries.
-
skinnyhorse
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:19 am
DH To National League
712731252A30202B263103242E222A2F6D20430 wrote: I find the whole DH thing puzzling. The players association is said to favor it because it creates one more job, but I'm not seeing that. Unless they increase the roster size (and I've seen nothing about that), they are still at 26. All they are doing is switching hitter for a pitcher. What teams will then do is make pitching (aside from the main guys) a part-time job - shuffling players from AAA when they need some innings, then back again while another guy comes up. There's already enough of that going on for me.
Good point. The players want the DH because some of the teams, the wealthy ones, will add an accomplished hitter, which will increase payments to players at least for those teams. They’re not concerned with better competition on the field. Their intent is to drive up salaries.
Just another example of the union and large market teams increasing their chances to win while small market teams become less competitive. Why will the small market teams like the Pirates not stand their ground. Soooooo frustrating.
Good point. The players want the DH because some of the teams, the wealthy ones, will add an accomplished hitter, which will increase payments to players at least for those teams. They’re not concerned with better competition on the field. Their intent is to drive up salaries.
Just another example of the union and large market teams increasing their chances to win while small market teams become less competitive. Why will the small market teams like the Pirates not stand their ground. Soooooo frustrating.
DH To National League
Last season only 8 players had over 300 at bats at dh. 12 had 160 or more.
A couple of the older players earning high salaries weren't so good at it either.
Miguel Cabrea only had a 701 ops as did Mitch Moreland.
Shea Ohtani was best dh and 24 year old Yordan Alvarez was second best (getting close to minimum wage)
Stanton, Nelson Cruz and J.D. Martinez are the other highly paid dhers.
https://www.mlb.com/stats/?position=DH
A couple of the older players earning high salaries weren't so good at it either.
Miguel Cabrea only had a 701 ops as did Mitch Moreland.
Shea Ohtani was best dh and 24 year old Yordan Alvarez was second best (getting close to minimum wage)
Stanton, Nelson Cruz and J.D. Martinez are the other highly paid dhers.
https://www.mlb.com/stats/?position=DH
-
Bobster21
DH To National League
466061766070030 wrote: Last season only 8 players had over 300 at bats at dh. 12 had 160 or more.
A couple of the older players earning high salaries weren't so good at it either.
Miguel Cabrea only had a 701 ops as did Mitch Moreland.
Shea Ohtani was best dh and 24 year old Yordan Alvarez was second best (getting close to minimum wage)
Stanton, Nelson Cruz and J.D. Martinez are the other highly paid dhers.
https://www.mlb.com/stats/?position=DH
The White Sox had 2 players who combined for 400 ABs at DH and neither did much of anything else. So that's 9 of 15 AL teams (60%) who had players specializing as a DH. Some teams prefer a DH who can play a position as needed but most use a one-dimensional player. There is no shortage of players who can hit but can't play defense at an acceptable MLB level. But in the AL the DH is never an afterthought as it has been in the NL during interleague games when the manager looks for someone who usually rides the bench and inserts them in the lineup.
A couple of the older players earning high salaries weren't so good at it either.
Miguel Cabrea only had a 701 ops as did Mitch Moreland.
Shea Ohtani was best dh and 24 year old Yordan Alvarez was second best (getting close to minimum wage)
Stanton, Nelson Cruz and J.D. Martinez are the other highly paid dhers.
https://www.mlb.com/stats/?position=DH
The White Sox had 2 players who combined for 400 ABs at DH and neither did much of anything else. So that's 9 of 15 AL teams (60%) who had players specializing as a DH. Some teams prefer a DH who can play a position as needed but most use a one-dimensional player. There is no shortage of players who can hit but can't play defense at an acceptable MLB level. But in the AL the DH is never an afterthought as it has been in the NL during interleague games when the manager looks for someone who usually rides the bench and inserts them in the lineup.
DH To National League
634E43525544531310210 wrote: Last season only 8 players had over 300 at bats at dh. 12 had 160 or more.
A couple of the older players earning high salaries weren't so good at it either.
Miguel Cabrea only had a 701 ops as did Mitch Moreland.
Shea Ohtani was best dh and 24 year old Yordan Alvarez was second best (getting close to minimum wage)
Stanton, Nelson Cruz and J.D. Martinez are the other highly paid dhers.
https://www.mlb.com/stats/?position=DH
The White Sox had 2 players who combined for 400 ABs at DH and neither did much of anything else. So that's 9 of 15 AL teams (60%) who had players specializing as a DH. Some teams prefer a DH who can play a position as needed but most use a one-dimensional player. There is no shortage of players who can hit but can't play defense at an acceptable MLB level. But in the AL the DH is never an afterthought as it has been in the NL during interleague games when the manager looks for someone who usually rides the bench and inserts them in the lineup.
even with those two players combing for 400 at bats there are still close to 200 more to spread around.
10 players were dh in 80 or more games. Is 60% really a high number? I don't think it is compared to other positions. 27 out of 32 had players at shortstop or third for 100 or more games. For second it was 32.
I don't like the dh but it has been around along enough that it isn't going to go away. To me, the rule having pitchers face 3 at least 3 batters is even worse than the dh. I don't look the dh but have become accustomed to it. Fans that dislike it is going to be a smaller and smaller proportion of fans.
A couple of the older players earning high salaries weren't so good at it either.
Miguel Cabrea only had a 701 ops as did Mitch Moreland.
Shea Ohtani was best dh and 24 year old Yordan Alvarez was second best (getting close to minimum wage)
Stanton, Nelson Cruz and J.D. Martinez are the other highly paid dhers.
https://www.mlb.com/stats/?position=DH
The White Sox had 2 players who combined for 400 ABs at DH and neither did much of anything else. So that's 9 of 15 AL teams (60%) who had players specializing as a DH. Some teams prefer a DH who can play a position as needed but most use a one-dimensional player. There is no shortage of players who can hit but can't play defense at an acceptable MLB level. But in the AL the DH is never an afterthought as it has been in the NL during interleague games when the manager looks for someone who usually rides the bench and inserts them in the lineup.
even with those two players combing for 400 at bats there are still close to 200 more to spread around.
10 players were dh in 80 or more games. Is 60% really a high number? I don't think it is compared to other positions. 27 out of 32 had players at shortstop or third for 100 or more games. For second it was 32.
I don't like the dh but it has been around along enough that it isn't going to go away. To me, the rule having pitchers face 3 at least 3 batters is even worse than the dh. I don't look the dh but have become accustomed to it. Fans that dislike it is going to be a smaller and smaller proportion of fans.