No one is a "traditionalist".
Well, I'm a traditionalist, which I think means that I think changes should be made only for good reasons, rather than out of restlessness or just a desire to be first at something. My reasons for supporting implementation of the DH:
1. I think that pitchers today are probably about as bad at hitting as you could find among pro athletes;
2. Minor league horses like Cole, Taillon, Glasnow, and Keller are reaching the majors with less than 50 minor league plate appearances. I think if that number was increased to 150-200 appearances, you'd maybe squeeze an extra hit or two per year out of the most durable pitchers.
3. Pitchers can't "help themselves" anymore. The most durable pitchers used to bat 120 or more times in a season, now it's more like 80.
4. I don't see any reasonable way to improve things, because the cause of the bad hitting is on the defensive side.
No DH in NL next Year
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
No DH in NL next Year
If you like basketball and seeing replays of Shaq at the foul line.....
5. Understanding that the AL isn't reversing course, the NL adopting the DH will level the playing field. We've had asterisks without asterisks for nearly 50 years.
If there is one thing "traditionalists" enjoy > "tradition," it's statistical comparisons.
MLB is one entity, accept it or not. To have members operate under different rules makes it appear amateurish as a business. The closest thing that comes to mind is the NCAA. I'll give MLB credit. At least it doesn't vote to see who makes the playoffs.
5. Understanding that the AL isn't reversing course, the NL adopting the DH will level the playing field. We've had asterisks without asterisks for nearly 50 years.
If there is one thing "traditionalists" enjoy > "tradition," it's statistical comparisons.
MLB is one entity, accept it or not. To have members operate under different rules makes it appear amateurish as a business. The closest thing that comes to mind is the NCAA. I'll give MLB credit. At least it doesn't vote to see who makes the playoffs.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
No DH in NL next Year
604641545D51465058330 wrote: Some people like the DH, some don't like the DH, some don't care if there is a DH in the game they are watching or not.
Each has their reasons. I love reading them. I think some of them are fallacies, rooted in the theoretical and hypothetical instead of the actual and analytical. There's a lot of research not being done to back up beliefs, so to speak.
But the one that always gets me is "traditionalist". I've always bristled at the usage of that word.
Listen, if you are a lover of the no DH, National League brand of baseball based upon what you feel occurs during a game, great. Same with those that love the DH.
But please, quit using "I'm a traditionalist" as a defense for your position.
No one is a "traditionalist". You can't even define what makes one a traditionalist. If a pro and anti DH baseball fan both love day games played on the grass, "like they used to" are they both traditionalists?
Some old dead guy dug up and revived from 1919 might wonder what kind of baseball fan are you, watching all these guys playing with a ball as hard as a rock. That just makes everyone slug for the fences and takes strategy out of the game.
Let's go even further back, when that baseball fan from the 1868 wonders how that 1919 dude could even stand to watch a game that now employs "professionals". Wasn't this just a game? After all, once you bring money into the game, it's just going to lead to corruption.
You can all argue strategy till you're blue in the face. Your own personal reasons and examples are relevant, if only because you so dearly believe them, even if some of them are incorrect.
But stop playing the "traditionalist" card. If you were such a traditionalist, you would have quit watching baseball completely in 1973 (Me, the former militant anti-DH fan). Or 1919 . [highlight]Or 1869 (Doc Hamp).[/highlight]
https://sabr.org/journal/article/the-hi ... tter-rule/
Ever the smart ass.
Each has their reasons. I love reading them. I think some of them are fallacies, rooted in the theoretical and hypothetical instead of the actual and analytical. There's a lot of research not being done to back up beliefs, so to speak.
But the one that always gets me is "traditionalist". I've always bristled at the usage of that word.
Listen, if you are a lover of the no DH, National League brand of baseball based upon what you feel occurs during a game, great. Same with those that love the DH.
But please, quit using "I'm a traditionalist" as a defense for your position.
No one is a "traditionalist". You can't even define what makes one a traditionalist. If a pro and anti DH baseball fan both love day games played on the grass, "like they used to" are they both traditionalists?
Some old dead guy dug up and revived from 1919 might wonder what kind of baseball fan are you, watching all these guys playing with a ball as hard as a rock. That just makes everyone slug for the fences and takes strategy out of the game.
Let's go even further back, when that baseball fan from the 1868 wonders how that 1919 dude could even stand to watch a game that now employs "professionals". Wasn't this just a game? After all, once you bring money into the game, it's just going to lead to corruption.
You can all argue strategy till you're blue in the face. Your own personal reasons and examples are relevant, if only because you so dearly believe them, even if some of them are incorrect.
But stop playing the "traditionalist" card. If you were such a traditionalist, you would have quit watching baseball completely in 1973 (Me, the former militant anti-DH fan). Or 1919 . [highlight]Or 1869 (Doc Hamp).[/highlight]
https://sabr.org/journal/article/the-hi ... tter-rule/
Ever the smart ass.
-
ArnoldRothstein
No DH in NL next Year
I wanted to follow up with a few numbers from 2018, when the NL pitchers' average fell to .116:
- NL pitchers made 487 hits on the season. That's about 18.7 hits per week, spread over 15 teams.
- Only 20 pitchers in the whole league made seven or more hits in the course of the season. 20 pitchers in the whole league exceeded one hit per month.
- Only 14 pitchers in the league made eight or more hits on the season. Remove them from the calculation and the rest of the league's pitchers batted .095.
- NL pitchers made 487 hits on the season. That's about 18.7 hits per week, spread over 15 teams.
- Only 20 pitchers in the whole league made seven or more hits in the course of the season. 20 pitchers in the whole league exceeded one hit per month.
- Only 14 pitchers in the league made eight or more hits on the season. Remove them from the calculation and the rest of the league's pitchers batted .095.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
No DH in NL next Year
Probably more predictable bunts than hits.
How many extra base hits?
How many extra base hits?
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
No DH in NL next Year
0C3F232221291F2239253E392824234D0 wrote: I wanted to follow up with a few numbers from 2018, when the NL pitchers' average fell to .116:
- NL pitchers made 487 hits on the season. That's about 18.7 hits per week, spread over 15 teams.
- Only 20 pitchers in the whole league made seven or more hits in the course of the season. 20 pitchers in the whole league exceeded one hit per month.
- Only 14 pitchers in the league made eight or more hits on the season. Remove them from the calculation and the rest of the league's pitchers batted .095.
For me, it's not a matter of the collectively poor hitting by the pitchers, it's the altering of an important aspect of the game. The original design, where each player must both bat and assume a defensive position, makes baseball superior to the other sports because a player has to be able to function well enough at both. There were no sharing positions, nor were there substitutions without them being permanent.
For me, that's critical to staying true to the game. Otherwise, why not have designated hitters or fielders for any or all players? If getting the very best on the field or to the plate is what matters most, then why not have unlimited line-sharing? Why not allow pitchers to come in and out of the game throughout the nine innings at the managers discretion?
National League baseball is superior because there are costs and benefits to deciding line-ups that make the game far more interesting.
- NL pitchers made 487 hits on the season. That's about 18.7 hits per week, spread over 15 teams.
- Only 20 pitchers in the whole league made seven or more hits in the course of the season. 20 pitchers in the whole league exceeded one hit per month.
- Only 14 pitchers in the league made eight or more hits on the season. Remove them from the calculation and the rest of the league's pitchers batted .095.
For me, it's not a matter of the collectively poor hitting by the pitchers, it's the altering of an important aspect of the game. The original design, where each player must both bat and assume a defensive position, makes baseball superior to the other sports because a player has to be able to function well enough at both. There were no sharing positions, nor were there substitutions without them being permanent.
For me, that's critical to staying true to the game. Otherwise, why not have designated hitters or fielders for any or all players? If getting the very best on the field or to the plate is what matters most, then why not have unlimited line-sharing? Why not allow pitchers to come in and out of the game throughout the nine innings at the managers discretion?
National League baseball is superior because there are costs and benefits to deciding line-ups that make the game far more interesting.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
No DH in NL next Year
Can't be all that "superior" when more than 10% of the opponent men at bat the pitchers face are so inferior.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
No DH in NL next Year
6E5D4140434B7D405B475C5B4A46412F0 wrote: I wanted to follow up with a few numbers from 2018, when the NL pitchers' average fell to .116:
- NL pitchers made 487 hits on the season. That's about 18.7 hits per week, spread over 15 teams.
- Only 20 pitchers in the whole league made seven or more hits in the course of the season. 20 pitchers in the whole league exceeded one hit per month.
- Only 14 pitchers in the league made eight or more hits on the season. Remove them from the calculation and the rest of the league's pitchers batted .095.
You posed some interesting facts that got me to thinking about the overall batting averages of both leagues, as a way to compare one league with a DH with the other where pitchers bat. I only looked at the past five years (2020 excluded of course) so it's certainly not a complete study, but a recent one anyway.
2019 AL: .253 vs NL: .251
2018 AL: .249 vs NL: .247
2017 AL: .256 vs NL: .254
2016 AL: .257 vs NL: .254
2015 AL: .255 vs NL: .253
There doesn't seem to be a large difference as measured by an entire season.
- NL pitchers made 487 hits on the season. That's about 18.7 hits per week, spread over 15 teams.
- Only 20 pitchers in the whole league made seven or more hits in the course of the season. 20 pitchers in the whole league exceeded one hit per month.
- Only 14 pitchers in the league made eight or more hits on the season. Remove them from the calculation and the rest of the league's pitchers batted .095.
You posed some interesting facts that got me to thinking about the overall batting averages of both leagues, as a way to compare one league with a DH with the other where pitchers bat. I only looked at the past five years (2020 excluded of course) so it's certainly not a complete study, but a recent one anyway.
2019 AL: .253 vs NL: .251
2018 AL: .249 vs NL: .247
2017 AL: .256 vs NL: .254
2016 AL: .257 vs NL: .254
2015 AL: .255 vs NL: .253
There doesn't seem to be a large difference as measured by an entire season.
-
ArnoldRothstein
No DH in NL next Year
5E6B7C7C774E7C7C77707C190 wrote: Probably more predictable bunts than hits.
How many extra base hits?
2018: 4211 AB 487 H 70 2B 3 3B 22 HR 202 RBI 139 BB 1969 K .116 AVG .145 OBP .149 SA 396 SH
Compare to 2013, the first year with continuous interleague play:
2013: 4428 AB 597 H 91 2B 10 3B 21 HR 233 RBI 153 BB 1868 K .135 AVG .166 OBP .174 SA 528 SH
For completeness, here's the rebound year of 2019:
2019: 4201 AB 549 H 73 2B 4 3B 25 HR 227 RBI 141 BB 2056 K .131 AVG .161 OBP .168 SA 407 SH
So at-bats for pitchers were down about 5% from 2013 to 2018/19, but sacrifices are down about 20%.
How many extra base hits?
2018: 4211 AB 487 H 70 2B 3 3B 22 HR 202 RBI 139 BB 1969 K .116 AVG .145 OBP .149 SA 396 SH
Compare to 2013, the first year with continuous interleague play:
2013: 4428 AB 597 H 91 2B 10 3B 21 HR 233 RBI 153 BB 1868 K .135 AVG .166 OBP .174 SA 528 SH
For completeness, here's the rebound year of 2019:
2019: 4201 AB 549 H 73 2B 4 3B 25 HR 227 RBI 141 BB 2056 K .131 AVG .161 OBP .168 SA 407 SH
So at-bats for pitchers were down about 5% from 2013 to 2018/19, but sacrifices are down about 20%.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
No DH in NL next Year
There won't be. The other eight are comparable.
If bunting was counted at an AB, as it should, you'd see an even bigger difference. Pitchers get a pass on that.
Look at the DH vs Pitchers on BA, Slugging, OBP, RBI.
NL pitchers face weaker competition, and there is no argument.
If bunting was counted at an AB, as it should, you'd see an even bigger difference. Pitchers get a pass on that.
Look at the DH vs Pitchers on BA, Slugging, OBP, RBI.
NL pitchers face weaker competition, and there is no argument.