The Great DH Compromise

[2drfischer@gmail.c]

5F727F6E69786F2F2C1D0 wrote: Interesting idea but I am with DOc on this one. Just leave it alone. If it ain't broke don't fix it!
Agreed. I don't want a DH or a compromise DH. But if I had to choose one or the other I would choose the compromise. But it's all academic. Just something fun to talk about. I don't believe MLB would consider anything less than the full NL DH. 




I'm in agreement with you that the DH is coming to the NL, shortened season or not. I won't like it when it does but I'm not going to turn away from baseball, either. It'll just be a bit diminished for me, much like it was when Interleague play and the replay system were implemented.

[shedman]

702630242B31212A273002252F232B2E6C21420 wrote: Interesting idea but I am with DOc on this one. Just leave it alone. If it ain't broke don't fix it!
Agreed. I don't want a DH or a compromise DH. But if I had to choose one or the other I would choose the compromise. But it's all academic. Just something fun to talk about. I don't believe MLB would consider anything less than the full NL DH. 




I'm in agreement with you that the DH is coming to the NL, shortened season or not.  I won't like it when it does but I'm not going to turn away from baseball, either.  It'll just be a bit diminished for me, much like it was when Interleague play and the replay system were implemented.
_________

Just for some perspective for me. Which could you accept first, the DH or 1 foot gimmee putts?

[2drfischer@gmail.c]

58434E4F464A452B0 wrote: Interesting idea but I am with DOc on this one. Just leave it alone. If it ain't broke don't fix it!
Agreed. I don't want a DH or a compromise DH. But if I had to choose one or the other I would choose the compromise. But it's all academic. Just something fun to talk about. I don't believe MLB would consider anything less than the full NL DH. 




I'm in agreement with you that the DH is coming to the NL, shortened season or not.  I won't like it when it does but I'm not going to turn away from baseball, either.  It'll just be a bit diminished for me, much like it was when Interleague play and the replay system were implemented.
_________

Just for some perspective for me.  Which could you accept first, the DH or 1 foot gimmee putts?




Hard as it is to admit, the DH. If it's in the rules to have a designated hitter, then I'd have to accept it. I haven't seen that gimmie putts are now allowed by the Rules of Golf.

[shedman]

366076626D77676C6176446369656D682A67040 wrote: Interesting idea but I am with DOc on this one. Just leave it alone. If it ain't broke don't fix it!
Agreed. I don't want a DH or a compromise DH. But if I had to choose one or the other I would choose the compromise. But it's all academic. Just something fun to talk about. I don't believe MLB would consider anything less than the full NL DH. 




I'm in agreement with you that the DH is coming to the NL, shortened season or not.  I won't like it when it does but I'm not going to turn away from baseball, either.  It'll just be a bit diminished for me, much like it was when Interleague play and the replay system were implemented.
_________

Just for some perspective for me.  Which could you accept first, the DH or 1 foot gimmee putts?




Hard as it is to admit, the DH.  If it's in the rules to have a designated hitter, then I'd have to accept it.  I haven't seen that gimmie putts are now allowed by the Rules of Golf.
_______

So, if you were in a golf league whose rules allowed 1 foot gimmee putts, then you would accept it?

[2drfischer@gmail.c]

766D606168646B050 wrote: Interesting idea but I am with DOc on this one. Just leave it alone. If it ain't broke don't fix it!
Agreed. I don't want a DH or a compromise DH. But if I had to choose one or the other I would choose the compromise. But it's all academic. Just something fun to talk about. I don't believe MLB would consider anything less than the full NL DH. 




I'm in agreement with you that the DH is coming to the NL, shortened season or not.  I won't like it when it does but I'm not going to turn away from baseball, either.  It'll just be a bit diminished for me, much like it was when Interleague play and the replay system were implemented.
_________

Just for some perspective for me.  Which could you accept first, the DH or 1 foot gimmee putts?




Hard as it is to admit, the DH.  If it's in the rules to have a designated hitter, then I'd have to accept it.  I haven't seen that gimmie putts are now allowed by the Rules of Golf.
_______

So, if you were in a golf league whose rules allowed 1 foot gimmee putts, then you would accept it?




No, because 12" gimmies quickly turn into 18" gimmies, which then turn into 36" gimmies.  Every group on the course would have its own definition of a gimmie putt for that particular round, which would then change based on the make-up of the groups in the next round.  There would never be consistency.  Therefore, putting every ball until it's in the hole is the only rule necessary, and it applies to every group in every circumstance so that everyone is abiding by the exact same rule, which then gives you a legitimate winner.  But to answer your question more succinctly, I'd neither grant any gimmies nor would I accept any.  In my mind, the Rules of Golf supercede a local golf league.



One other thing. If a golfer is in a competition for money or prizes (as is your golf league), or if he/she is keeping a scorecard, then there can be no gimmies. They make that golfer's score illegitimate. If a golfer is not keeping score, then it doesn't matter.

[WildwoodDave]

6A3C2A3E312B3B303D2A183F35393134763B580 wrote: Interesting idea but I am with DOc on this one. Just leave it alone. If it ain't broke don't fix it!
Agreed. I don't want a DH or a compromise DH. But if I had to choose one or the other I would choose the compromise. But it's all academic. Just something fun to talk about. I don't believe MLB would consider anything less than the full NL DH. 




I'm in agreement with you that the DH is coming to the NL, shortened season or not.  I won't like it when it does but I'm not going to turn away from baseball, either.  It'll just be a bit diminished for me, much like it was when Interleague play and the replay system were implemented.
_________

Just for some perspective for me.  Which could you accept first, the DH or 1 foot gimmee putts?




Hard as it is to admit, the DH.  If it's in the rules to have a designated hitter, then I'd have to accept it.  I haven't seen that gimmie putts are now allowed by the Rules of Golf.
_______

So, if you were in a golf league whose rules allowed 1 foot gimmee putts, then you would accept it?




No, because 12" gimmies quickly turn into 18" gimmies, which then turn into 36" gimmies.  Every group on the course would have its own definition of a gimmie putt for that particular round, which would then change based on the make-up of the groups in the next round.  There would never be consistency.  Therefore, putting every ball until it's in the hole is the only rule necessary, and it applies to every group in every circumstance so that everyone is abiding by the exact same rule, which then gives you a legitimate winner.  But to answer your question more succinctly, I'd neither grant any gimmies nor would I accept any.  In my mind, the Rules of Golf supercede a local golf league.



One other thing.  If a golfer is in a competition for money or prizes (as is your golf league), or if he/she is keeping a scorecard, then there can be no gimmies.  They make that golfer's score illegitimate.  If a golfer is not keeping score, then it doesn't matter.
When you are talking about gimmies, how can you NOT mention Shedman?

[2drfischer@gmail.c]

556B6E66756D6D6646637467020 wrote: Interesting idea but I am with DOc on this one. Just leave it alone. If it ain't broke don't fix it!
Agreed. I don't want a DH or a compromise DH. But if I had to choose one or the other I would choose the compromise. But it's all academic. Just something fun to talk about. I don't believe MLB would consider anything less than the full NL DH. 




I'm in agreement with you that the DH is coming to the NL, shortened season or not.  I won't like it when it does but I'm not going to turn away from baseball, either.  It'll just be a bit diminished for me, much like it was when Interleague play and the replay system were implemented.
_________

Just for some perspective for me.  Which could you accept first, the DH or 1 foot gimmee putts?




Hard as it is to admit, the DH.  If it's in the rules to have a designated hitter, then I'd have to accept it.  I haven't seen that gimmie putts are now allowed by the Rules of Golf.
_______

So, if you were in a golf league whose rules allowed 1 foot gimmee putts, then you would accept it?




No, because 12" gimmies quickly turn into 18" gimmies, which then turn into 36" gimmies.  Every group on the course would have its own definition of a gimmie putt for that particular round, which would then change based on the make-up of the groups in the next round.  There would never be consistency.  Therefore, putting every ball until it's in the hole is the only rule necessary, and it applies to every group in every circumstance so that everyone is abiding by the exact same rule, which then gives you a legitimate winner.  But to answer your question more succinctly, I'd neither grant any gimmies nor would I accept any.  In my mind, the Rules of Golf supercede a local golf league.



One other thing.  If a golfer is in a competition for money or prizes (as is your golf league), or if he/she is keeping a scorecard, then there can be no gimmies.  They make that golfer's score illegitimate.  If a golfer is not keeping score, then it doesn't matter.
When you are talking about gimmies, how can you NOT mention Shedman?


He's the king of gimmies. He's never met a gimmie he hasn't taken, and many of them are a lot longer than one foot.

[IABucFan]

This is interesting to me, the whole thing about 12 inch gimmies. I'm an avid golfer. I play as frequently as I can, though I'm not any good, which is why I don't play in any competitions. I just play for fun, usually as a single, because it's a nice reprieve for me. It's a couple of hours to just think and be. It's bliss.



That said, when I'm playing by myself, no competition or anything, yes, I take 12 inch gimmies. I take mulligans. I lose balls and don't take lost ball strokes. Why? Because it's not real. It's for fun. If I were playing for real, I'd follow the rules to the letter. Now, I realize that golf modernized the rules in 2019. Many of the rule changes were rather inconsequential...you can leave the flag in when putting, where to drop (knee as opposed to shoulder), you can move loose impediments in bunkers, things like that, three minutes to look for a lost ball as opposed to five. But, there is one that caught my eye as being significant. Essentially, the USGA said that players could follow a common local rule on out-of-bounds. Normally, OB is stroke and distance...you hit from the same spot, but add two. So, if your tee shot takes a right hand turn and lands in somebody's back yard, you rehit, now hitting three. The USGA said that it is acceptable to go to where your ball went OB, drop in the fairway, and hit four. I'm all in favor of this rule for your average hacker, like me. It speeds up play. Some guys would hit a dozen balls OB if they have the same miss. But do this on tour? In a PGA event? No way. It messes with the fabric of the game.



This is how I feel about what MLB has done over the last few years with "modifying" rules. Put four fingers up for an IBB...stupid. It's MLB. They should have to throw four pitches to the plate. The Pirates won a game on a wild pitch on an IBB. Look it up. May 2006, against the Astros. I don't remember the exact date, but the game was in the bottom of the 18th, and the Astros' pitcher threw one to the backstop on an intentional walk, which allowed the runner on second to advance to third (I think it was Jason Bay off the top of my head), and he then scored on a Jose Bautista sac fly. It's rare. But it happens. And that's the point.



Three batter minimum...because, "watchability" or something. You may not like the LaRussa way of managing. The constant lefty/righty matchups. Fine. I get that. But it wasn't breaking any rules. It was using a well-known statistical quirk to your advantage. Instead of saying that pitchers should be able to get both lefties and righties out, maybe we should switch it around, and say that hitters should be able to hit both lefties and righties?



Eventually, somebody is going to lose a big game, maybe a playoff game, because an ineffective pitcher was forced to stay in the game and pitch to somebody hitting opposite of him and is going to give up a bomb. I can only hope this happens to the Red Sox or Yankees. Maybe then this rule will get put back the way it should be.



Finally, the DH...I hate the DH. You all know that. It takes a key strategic element out of the game. Having the pitcher bat makes managers decide if they are willing to risk giving up defense to get their big bat/no glove guy in the lineup. Think 2015 WC game and Pedro Alvarez sitting on the bench behind S-Rod.



Wasn't there a situation in the World Series last year that only came about because the pitcher bats in NL parks? I can't remember the exact situation. But I seem to recall one of the managers walking the bases loaded to get to the opposing pitcher and forcing the opposing manager to make a decision...PH and try to score some runs, or keep your pitcher in the ballgame, who had been throwing well up to that point.



But, it seems MLB is dead set on this. They think it sells more or something. IDK. For this millennial fan, however, the DH coming to the NL might be the proverbial straw that breaks my back. This is of course to say nothing of the fact that it puts the Pirates even more behind the 8-ball with our do-nothing owner now having one more regular position to fill. I'm more and more convinced that MLB doesn't really care about the fans.



Finally, one unrelated note...they're finally talking about revenue sharing in MLB. Apparently, the concern is that some states might allow fans back sooner than others, and teams in those (others) don't want to be left out in the cold. It's not fair, they say. No word about fairness when the Dodgers and Yankees are pulling their massive TV deals, or when the Pirates overspend on the freaking draft. (Which, BTW, let's limit that to five rounds this year...that's another way to kill the small market teams that can only build through the draft).



I'm more and more convinced that MLB is a joke. They care about one thing...money. And the best way to ensure making the most money is to do whatever is best for the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, and Cubs...the other 26 teams be damned. Screw 'em.



Off rant.

[Ecbucs]

60686B5C4A6F4847290 wrote: This is interesting to me, the whole thing about 12 inch gimmies. I'm an avid golfer. I play as frequently as I can, though I'm not any good, which is why I don't play in any competitions. I just play for fun, usually as a single, because it's a nice reprieve for me. It's a couple of hours to just think and be. It's bliss.



That said, when I'm playing by myself, no competition or anything, yes, I take 12 inch gimmies. I take mulligans. I lose balls and don't take lost ball strokes. Why? Because it's not real. It's for fun. If I were playing for real, I'd follow the rules to the letter. Now, I realize that golf modernized the rules in 2019. Many of the rule changes were rather inconsequential...you can leave the flag in when putting, where to drop (knee as opposed to shoulder), you can move loose impediments in bunkers, things like that, three minutes to look for a lost ball as opposed to five. But, there is one that caught my eye as being significant. Essentially, the USGA said that players could follow a common local rule on out-of-bounds. Normally, OB is stroke and distance...you hit from the same spot, but add two. So, if your tee shot takes a right hand turn and lands in somebody's back yard, you rehit, now hitting three. The USGA said that it is acceptable to go to where your ball went OB, drop in the fairway, and hit four. I'm all in favor of this rule for your average hacker, like me. It speeds up play. Some guys would hit a dozen balls OB if they have the same miss. But do this on tour? In a PGA event? No way. It messes with the fabric of the game.



This is how I feel about what MLB has done over the last few years with "modifying" rules. Put four fingers up for an IBB...stupid. It's MLB. They should have to throw four pitches to the plate. The Pirates won a game on a wild pitch on an IBB. Look it up. May 2006, against the Astros. I don't remember the exact date, but the game was in the bottom of the 18th, and the Astros' pitcher threw one to the backstop on an intentional walk, which allowed the runner on second to advance to third (I think it was Jason Bay off the top of my head), and he then scored on a Jose Bautista sac fly. It's rare. But it happens. And that's the point.



Three batter minimum...because, "watchability" or something. You may not like the LaRussa way of managing. The constant lefty/righty matchups. Fine. I get that. But it wasn't breaking any rules. It was using a well-known statistical quirk to your advantage. Instead of saying that pitchers should be able to get both lefties and righties out, maybe we should switch it around, and say that hitters should be able to hit both lefties and righties?



Eventually, somebody is going to lose a big game, maybe a playoff game, because an ineffective pitcher was forced to stay in the game and pitch to somebody hitting opposite of him and is going to give up a bomb. I can only hope this happens to the Red Sox or Yankees. Maybe then this rule will get put back the way it should be.



Finally, the DH...I hate the DH. You all know that. It takes a key strategic element out of the game. Having the pitcher bat makes managers decide if they are willing to risk giving up defense to get their big bat/no glove guy in the lineup. Think 2015 WC game and Pedro Alvarez sitting on the bench behind S-Rod.



Wasn't there a situation in the World Series last year that only came about because the pitcher bats in NL parks? I can't remember the exact situation. But I seem to recall one of the managers walking the bases loaded to get to the opposing pitcher and forcing the opposing manager to make a decision...PH and try to score some runs, or keep your pitcher in the ballgame, who had been throwing well up to that point.



But, it seems MLB is dead set on this. They think it sells more or something. IDK. For this millennial fan, however, the DH coming to the NL might be the proverbial straw that breaks my back. This is of course to say nothing of the fact that it puts the Pirates even more behind the 8-ball with our do-nothing owner now having one more regular position to fill. I'm more and more convinced that MLB doesn't really care about the fans.



Finally, one unrelated note...they're finally talking about revenue sharing in MLB. Apparently, the concern is that some states might allow fans back sooner than others, and teams in those (others) don't want to be left out in the cold. It's not fair, they say. No word about fairness when the Dodgers and Yankees are pulling their massive TV deals, or when the Pirates overspend on the freaking draft. (Which, BTW, let's limit that to five rounds this year...that's another way to kill the small market teams that can only build through the draft).



I'm more and more convinced that MLB is a joke. They care about one thing...money. And the best way to ensure making the most money is to do whatever is best for the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, and Cubs...the other 26 teams be damned. Screw 'em.



Off rant.


I hate the dh but it isn't going to go away. However, the 3 batter minimum is the worst rule change ever. I agree with your hope that it costs the Red Sox or Yankees big time (but it may only cost them for a season as they will adjust).

[GreenWeenie]

Name a business that doesn't care about money and I'll name a business that soon won't BE in business.



Name a person who doesn't care about money and I'll name someone who doesn"t have any, or will run out of it soon.



MLB is a joke.  That's why we're on here writing about it after being in business 150 years.



BOB is the joke.  Doesn't need to win and he still takes it in.  That's some joke.