01090A3D2B0E2926480 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, [highlight]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.[/highlight] 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.
That's exactly the correct point. If a golfer is not competing with others or not keeping a score, then hitting mulligans or not putting out is okay by me. But in any competition, where the score determines the winner, or where a score is reported to playing partners after each hole, the ball must be put into the hole in order for it to be a legitimate score. The reason players grant gimmies is that they want the same accommodation when faced with a similar putt because they're afraid they'll miss.
The rest of your post should receive the Post of the Year award.
The Great DH Compromise
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
Bobster21
The Great DH Compromise
What I don't understand about the push for the DH is "why?" When it was instituted in the AL the rationale was that it provided more offense and therefore made the game more enjoyable for the fans. Of course, the more fans like the game, the more revenue is generated.
But since the DH was adopted by the [oops! edit] AL there has never been any pattern of AL attendance being greater than NL attendance. So where is the evidence that AL fans enjoy baseball more than NL fans?
At a time when an NL DH is being considered, here are the most recent 2019 MLB attendance standings:
1. Dodgers
2. Cardinals
3. Yankees DH
4. Cubs
5. Angels DH
6. Rockies
7. Red Sox DH
8. Brewers
9. Astros DH
10. Phillies
11. Giants
12. Braves
13. Mets
14. Padres
15. Twins DH
16. Nationals
17. Diamondbacks
18. Rangers DH
19. Reds
20. Mariners DH
21. Blue Jays DH
22. Indians DH
23. Athletics DH
24. White Sox DH
25. Tigers DH
26. Pirates
27. Royals DH
28. Orioles DH
29. Rays DH
30. Marlins
So fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball accounted for only 1 of the top 4 attendance totals and only 6 of the top 19. Those fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball comprised 9 of the 11 teams with the fewest fans attending games. So the theory that the DH is needed to ramp up fan enthusiasm for the game is completely contrary to the evidence. In fact, the evidence at the very time MLB wants to force the DH on the NL suggests it will diminish fan interest and lower attendance more in line with what we see from AL attendance in comparison to NL attendance which seems to indicate more interest without the DH.
But since the DH was adopted by the [oops! edit] AL there has never been any pattern of AL attendance being greater than NL attendance. So where is the evidence that AL fans enjoy baseball more than NL fans?
At a time when an NL DH is being considered, here are the most recent 2019 MLB attendance standings:
1. Dodgers
2. Cardinals
3. Yankees DH
4. Cubs
5. Angels DH
6. Rockies
7. Red Sox DH
8. Brewers
9. Astros DH
10. Phillies
11. Giants
12. Braves
13. Mets
14. Padres
15. Twins DH
16. Nationals
17. Diamondbacks
18. Rangers DH
19. Reds
20. Mariners DH
21. Blue Jays DH
22. Indians DH
23. Athletics DH
24. White Sox DH
25. Tigers DH
26. Pirates
27. Royals DH
28. Orioles DH
29. Rays DH
30. Marlins
So fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball accounted for only 1 of the top 4 attendance totals and only 6 of the top 19. Those fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball comprised 9 of the 11 teams with the fewest fans attending games. So the theory that the DH is needed to ramp up fan enthusiasm for the game is completely contrary to the evidence. In fact, the evidence at the very time MLB wants to force the DH on the NL suggests it will diminish fan interest and lower attendance more in line with what we see from AL attendance in comparison to NL attendance which seems to indicate more interest without the DH.
The Great DH Compromise
7C7477405673545B350 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.
__________
I play in 2 golf leagues. Both leagues allow gimmees to be determined by your opponents. In fact, in the whole world, I know of only 2 players who do not accept 1 foot gimmee putts. There are a lot of rules that we don;t follow that the pros follow. We hit from the senior tees whiie they hit from the blue tees. Wgen we hit one out of bounds, we put one down where it went out with a 1 stroke penalty. Pros must retee in that situation. These give us a far greater advantage than taking 1 foot gimmee putts. The average golfer makes 98% of those 1 foot putts, why slow down the game.
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 play in 2 golf leagues. Both leagues allow gimmees to be determined by your opponents. In fact, in the whole world, I know of only 2 players who do not accept 1 foot gimmee putts. There are a lot of rules that we don;t follow that the pros follow. We hit from the senior tees whiie they hit from the blue tees. Wgen we hit one out of bounds, we put one down where it went out with a 1 stroke penalty. Pros must retee in that situation. These give us a far greater advantage than taking 1 foot gimmee putts. The average golfer makes 98% of those 1 foot putts, why slow down the game.
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.
The Great DH Compromise
7E76754254715659370 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.
_______
Even the average golfer statistically makes 95% of 1 foot putts. When comparing to pros, we get a lot of advantages. We play from the senior tees while the pros play from the blues. If we hit one out of bounds, we put down another ball and take a 1 stroke penalty, while pros must keep hitting balls until they get one in bounds. In stead of slowing down play while players labor over a 1 foot putt that will be made 95% of the time anyway, just pick it up and go to the next hole. I know of only two players in the whole world who will not take 1 foot gimmee pitts.
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.
_______
Even the average golfer statistically makes 95% of 1 foot putts. When comparing to pros, we get a lot of advantages. We play from the senior tees while the pros play from the blues. If we hit one out of bounds, we put down another ball and take a 1 stroke penalty, while pros must keep hitting balls until they get one in bounds. In stead of slowing down play while players labor over a 1 foot putt that will be made 95% of the time anyway, just pick it up and go to the next hole. I know of only two players in the whole world who will not take 1 foot gimmee pitts.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
The Great DH Compromise
6B707D7C757976180 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.
_______
Even the average golfer statistically makes 95% of 1 foot putts. When comparing to pros, we get a lot of advantages. We play from the senior tees while the pros play from the blues. If we hit one out of bounds, we put down another ball and take a 1 stroke penalty, while pros must keep hitting balls until they get one in bounds. In stead of slowing down play while players labor over a 1 foot putt that will be made 95% of the time anyway, just pick it up and go to the next hole. I know of only two players in the whole world who will not take 1 foot gimmee pitts.
So much of what you wrote is wrong it's hard to know where to begin. But begin I must.
First, missing 5% of one foot putts is proof positive that those putts should be attempted. If the figure was 100%, then you'd have a case.
Second, the new out-of-bounds rule, which I had to invoke on myself today (of which you were a witness), now states that the player can drop his ball in the fairway, at the distance his drive traveled, but is now hitting his fourth shot. Therefore, it's now a two stroke penalty.
Third, "laboring" over a one foot putt takes all of 5-10 seconds. If that were to occur on all 18 holes (which it wouldn't) by all four players (which it wouldn't), as little as 6 to no more than 12 minutes would be added to a round. Jesus, who wants to spend another 12 minutes on a golf course?
And fourth, if you know only two people who always putt out, then Paul and I are happy to raise the overall quality of the people who inhabit your sphere.
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.
_______
Even the average golfer statistically makes 95% of 1 foot putts. When comparing to pros, we get a lot of advantages. We play from the senior tees while the pros play from the blues. If we hit one out of bounds, we put down another ball and take a 1 stroke penalty, while pros must keep hitting balls until they get one in bounds. In stead of slowing down play while players labor over a 1 foot putt that will be made 95% of the time anyway, just pick it up and go to the next hole. I know of only two players in the whole world who will not take 1 foot gimmee pitts.
So much of what you wrote is wrong it's hard to know where to begin. But begin I must.
First, missing 5% of one foot putts is proof positive that those putts should be attempted. If the figure was 100%, then you'd have a case.
Second, the new out-of-bounds rule, which I had to invoke on myself today (of which you were a witness), now states that the player can drop his ball in the fairway, at the distance his drive traveled, but is now hitting his fourth shot. Therefore, it's now a two stroke penalty.
Third, "laboring" over a one foot putt takes all of 5-10 seconds. If that were to occur on all 18 holes (which it wouldn't) by all four players (which it wouldn't), as little as 6 to no more than 12 minutes would be added to a round. Jesus, who wants to spend another 12 minutes on a golf course?
And fourth, if you know only two people who always putt out, then Paul and I are happy to raise the overall quality of the people who inhabit your sphere.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
The Great DH Compromise
664B46575041561615240 wrote: What I don't understand about the push for the DH is "why?" When it was instituted in the AL the rationale was that it provided more offense and therefore made the game more enjoyable for the fans. Of course, the more fans like the game, the more revenue is generated.
But since the DH was adopted by the NL there has never been any pattern of AL attendance being greater than NL attendance. So where is the evidence that AL fans enjoy baseball more than NL fans?
At a time when an NL DH is being considered, here are the most recent 2019 MLB attendance standings:
1. Dodgers
2. Cardinals
3. Yankees DH
4. Cubs
5. Angels DH
6. Rockies
7. Red Sox DH
8. Brewers
9. Astros DH
10. Phillies
11. Giants
12. Braves
13. Mets
14. Padres
15. Twins DH
16. Nationals
17. Diamondbacks
18. Rangers DH
19. Reds
20. Mariners DH
21. Blue Jays DH
22. Indians DH
23. Athletics DH
24. White Sox DH
25. Tigers DH
26. Pirates
27. Royals DH
28. Orioles DH
29. Rays DH
30. Marlins
So fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball accounted for only 1 of the top 4 attendance totals and only 6 of the top 19. Those fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball comprised 9 of the 11 teams with the fewest fans attending games. So the theory that the DH is needed to ramp up fan enthusiasm for the game is completely contrary to the evidence. In fact, the evidence at the very time MLB wants to force the DH on the NL suggests it will diminish fan interest and lower attendance more in line with what we see from AL attendance in comparison to NL attendance which seems to indicate more interest without the DH.
Good research, Bobster. Speaking for myself, I've not found the AL any more exciting. In fact, I've been hard pressed to find a reason to ever watch one of their games when available to me.
But since the DH was adopted by the NL there has never been any pattern of AL attendance being greater than NL attendance. So where is the evidence that AL fans enjoy baseball more than NL fans?
At a time when an NL DH is being considered, here are the most recent 2019 MLB attendance standings:
1. Dodgers
2. Cardinals
3. Yankees DH
4. Cubs
5. Angels DH
6. Rockies
7. Red Sox DH
8. Brewers
9. Astros DH
10. Phillies
11. Giants
12. Braves
13. Mets
14. Padres
15. Twins DH
16. Nationals
17. Diamondbacks
18. Rangers DH
19. Reds
20. Mariners DH
21. Blue Jays DH
22. Indians DH
23. Athletics DH
24. White Sox DH
25. Tigers DH
26. Pirates
27. Royals DH
28. Orioles DH
29. Rays DH
30. Marlins
So fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball accounted for only 1 of the top 4 attendance totals and only 6 of the top 19. Those fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball comprised 9 of the 11 teams with the fewest fans attending games. So the theory that the DH is needed to ramp up fan enthusiasm for the game is completely contrary to the evidence. In fact, the evidence at the very time MLB wants to force the DH on the NL suggests it will diminish fan interest and lower attendance more in line with what we see from AL attendance in comparison to NL attendance which seems to indicate more interest without the DH.
Good research, Bobster. Speaking for myself, I've not found the AL any more exciting. In fact, I've been hard pressed to find a reason to ever watch one of their games when available to me.
The Great DH Compromise
[quote author=2E786E7A756F7F74796E5C7B717D7570327F1C0
That's exactly the correct point. If a golfer is not competing with others or not keeping a score, then hitting mulligans or not putting out is okay by me. But in any competition, where the score determines the winner, or where a score is reported to playing partners after each hole, the ball must be put into the hole in order for it to be a legitimate score. The reason players grant gimmies is that they want the same accommodation when faced with a similar putt because they're afraid they'll miss.
The rest of your post should receive the Post of the Year award.
Thank you. That's quite kind of you to say.
That's exactly the correct point. If a golfer is not competing with others or not keeping a score, then hitting mulligans or not putting out is okay by me. But in any competition, where the score determines the winner, or where a score is reported to playing partners after each hole, the ball must be put into the hole in order for it to be a legitimate score. The reason players grant gimmies is that they want the same accommodation when faced with a similar putt because they're afraid they'll miss.
The rest of your post should receive the Post of the Year award.
Thank you. That's quite kind of you to say.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
The Great DH Compromise
510711050A10000B061123040E020A0F4D00630 wrote: What I don't understand about the push for the DH is "why?" When it was instituted in the AL the rationale was that it provided more offense and therefore made the game more enjoyable for the fans. Of course, the more fans like the game, the more revenue is generated.
But since the DH was adopted by the NL there has never been any pattern of AL attendance being greater than NL attendance. So where is the evidence that AL fans enjoy baseball more than NL fans?
At a time when an NL DH is being considered, here are the most recent 2019 MLB attendance standings:
1. Dodgers
2. Cardinals
3. Yankees DH
4. Cubs
5. Angels DH
6. Rockies
7. Red Sox DH
8. Brewers
9. Astros DH
10. Phillies
11. Giants
12. Braves
13. Mets
14. Padres
15. Twins DH
16. Nationals
17. Diamondbacks
18. Rangers DH
19. Reds
20. Mariners DH
21. Blue Jays DH
22. Indians DH
23. Athletics DH
24. White Sox DH
25. Tigers DH
26. Pirates
27. Royals DH
28. Orioles DH
29. Rays DH
30. Marlins
So fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball accounted for only 1 of the top 4 attendance totals and only 6 of the top 19. Those fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball comprised 9 of the 11 teams with the fewest fans attending games. So the theory that the DH is needed to ramp up fan enthusiasm for the game is completely contrary to the evidence. In fact, the evidence at the very time MLB wants to force the DH on the NL suggests it will diminish fan interest and lower attendance more in line with what we see from AL attendance in comparison to NL attendance which seems to indicate more interest without the DH.
This isn't good reasoning.
Attendance is based on many things. To name only a few- population, a team's winning percentage, the capacity of its stadium, the cost, disposable income levels, and on and on.
And "attendance" is only one factor to consider. What about viewership?
The "why?" Is simple. It's to level the playing field in the sport. That's only one reason. NL pitchers are the only pitchers who waste time pretending to hit in most levels of the game. AL pitchers face a full lineup.
The DH isn't going away. You arent squeezing that toothpaste back into the tube. So, the DH will eventually be adopted in the NL, and better talent will follow, except for teams run by owners like BOB.
But since the DH was adopted by the NL there has never been any pattern of AL attendance being greater than NL attendance. So where is the evidence that AL fans enjoy baseball more than NL fans?
At a time when an NL DH is being considered, here are the most recent 2019 MLB attendance standings:
1. Dodgers
2. Cardinals
3. Yankees DH
4. Cubs
5. Angels DH
6. Rockies
7. Red Sox DH
8. Brewers
9. Astros DH
10. Phillies
11. Giants
12. Braves
13. Mets
14. Padres
15. Twins DH
16. Nationals
17. Diamondbacks
18. Rangers DH
19. Reds
20. Mariners DH
21. Blue Jays DH
22. Indians DH
23. Athletics DH
24. White Sox DH
25. Tigers DH
26. Pirates
27. Royals DH
28. Orioles DH
29. Rays DH
30. Marlins
So fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball accounted for only 1 of the top 4 attendance totals and only 6 of the top 19. Those fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball comprised 9 of the 11 teams with the fewest fans attending games. So the theory that the DH is needed to ramp up fan enthusiasm for the game is completely contrary to the evidence. In fact, the evidence at the very time MLB wants to force the DH on the NL suggests it will diminish fan interest and lower attendance more in line with what we see from AL attendance in comparison to NL attendance which seems to indicate more interest without the DH.
This isn't good reasoning.
Attendance is based on many things. To name only a few- population, a team's winning percentage, the capacity of its stadium, the cost, disposable income levels, and on and on.
And "attendance" is only one factor to consider. What about viewership?
The "why?" Is simple. It's to level the playing field in the sport. That's only one reason. NL pitchers are the only pitchers who waste time pretending to hit in most levels of the game. AL pitchers face a full lineup.
The DH isn't going away. You arent squeezing that toothpaste back into the tube. So, the DH will eventually be adopted in the NL, and better talent will follow, except for teams run by owners like BOB.
-
Bobster21
The Great DH Compromise
4B7E6969625B69696265690C0 wrote: What I don't understand about the push for the DH is "why?" When it was instituted in the AL the rationale was that it provided more offense and therefore made the game more enjoyable for the fans. Of course, the more fans like the game, the more revenue is generated.
But since the DH was adopted by the NL there has never been any pattern of AL attendance being greater than NL attendance. So where is the evidence that AL fans enjoy baseball more than NL fans?
At a time when an NL DH is being considered, here are the most recent 2019 MLB attendance standings:
1. Dodgers
2. Cardinals
3. Yankees DH
4. Cubs
5. Angels DH
6. Rockies
7. Red Sox DH
8. Brewers
9. Astros DH
10. Phillies
11. Giants
12. Braves
13. Mets
14. Padres
15. Twins DH
16. Nationals
17. Diamondbacks
18. Rangers DH
19. Reds
20. Mariners DH
21. Blue Jays DH
22. Indians DH
23. Athletics DH
24. White Sox DH
25. Tigers DH
26. Pirates
27. Royals DH
28. Orioles DH
29. Rays DH
30. Marlins
So fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball accounted for only 1 of the top 4 attendance totals and only 6 of the top 19. Those fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball comprised 9 of the 11 teams with the fewest fans attending games. So the theory that the DH is needed to ramp up fan enthusiasm for the game is completely contrary to the evidence. In fact, the evidence at the very time MLB wants to force the DH on the NL suggests it will diminish fan interest and lower attendance more in line with what we see from AL attendance in comparison to NL attendance which seems to indicate more interest without the DH.
This isn't good reasoning.
Attendance is based on many things. To name only a few- population, a team's winning percentage, the capacity of its stadium, the cost, disposable income levels, and on and on.
And "attendance" is only one factor to consider. What about viewership?
The "why?" Is simple. It's to level the playing field in the sport. That's only one reason. NL pitchers are the only pitchers who waste time pretending to hit in most levels of the game. AL pitchers face a full lineup.
The DH isn't going away. You arent squeezing that toothpaste back into the tube. So, the DH will eventually be adopted in the NL, and better talent will follow, except for teams run by owners like BOB.
I agree with you that the DH is coming, like it or not. As you say, that toothpaste isn't going back in the tube. It's also true as you say that NL pitchers didn't even bat much in the minors since A always uses a DH and AA and AAA use a DH in all games unless both teams are farms for NL teams.
My point is about whether the DH makes the game more enjoyable. When the DH was introduced in 1973 the premise was that more offense would mean more fan enjoyment. It wasn't because pitchers didn't bat in the minors because at that time they did. It wasn't to level the playing field because it did the opposite. I believe history has shown that MLB's argument in favor of the DH was wrong. I realize there are more factors affecting attendance than merely the DH. But if the DH had truly been a boon to fan enjoyment and enthusiasm there would have been some evidence reflected in attendance as well as local TV ratings. But that has not been the case. I have never seen evidence that the AL clearly benefited in terms of fan enthusiasm. And I thought it was ironic that at the time the DH looks closer to ever for the NL, fan enthusiasm for the NL game seems greater than in the AL. Yes, of course there are other factors involved but it's hard to see any benefit in the AL game over the NL game for its fans. Unless we assume that population, winning pct, stadium capacity, cost, disposable income levels, etc are all generally worse in AL cities such that even the wonderful enjoyment of the DH that the AL assumed back in 1973 isn't enough to make any difference.
So fan enjoyment doesn't appear to be the reason anymore. I think there are 2 main reasons. One is "leveling the playing field" as you said. They do it in 1 league, so do it in the other. Of course, philosophically, one could argue "then go back to no DH in the AL to level the playing field." Who says A is better than B? But I think the 2nd reason is that NL owners probably secretly want the DH. They won't say so publicly because most NL fans are against such an acute change to the game they love. And NL owners have had almost 50 years to see that AL fans don't seem to enjoy DH baseball any more than NL fans enjoy baseball without the DH. But I think every time an NL owner sees his multi-millionaire pitcher get hit with a pitch or otherwise get injured batting or running, he cringes and wishes that pitcher was safely tucked away in the dugout while someone else batted for him. I think that, more than anything else, is why the DH will be forced on NL fans who don't want it despite owners seeing no evidence that AL fans enjoy the game more because of the DH.
But since the DH was adopted by the NL there has never been any pattern of AL attendance being greater than NL attendance. So where is the evidence that AL fans enjoy baseball more than NL fans?
At a time when an NL DH is being considered, here are the most recent 2019 MLB attendance standings:
1. Dodgers
2. Cardinals
3. Yankees DH
4. Cubs
5. Angels DH
6. Rockies
7. Red Sox DH
8. Brewers
9. Astros DH
10. Phillies
11. Giants
12. Braves
13. Mets
14. Padres
15. Twins DH
16. Nationals
17. Diamondbacks
18. Rangers DH
19. Reds
20. Mariners DH
21. Blue Jays DH
22. Indians DH
23. Athletics DH
24. White Sox DH
25. Tigers DH
26. Pirates
27. Royals DH
28. Orioles DH
29. Rays DH
30. Marlins
So fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball accounted for only 1 of the top 4 attendance totals and only 6 of the top 19. Those fans getting more enjoyment out of DH baseball comprised 9 of the 11 teams with the fewest fans attending games. So the theory that the DH is needed to ramp up fan enthusiasm for the game is completely contrary to the evidence. In fact, the evidence at the very time MLB wants to force the DH on the NL suggests it will diminish fan interest and lower attendance more in line with what we see from AL attendance in comparison to NL attendance which seems to indicate more interest without the DH.
This isn't good reasoning.
Attendance is based on many things. To name only a few- population, a team's winning percentage, the capacity of its stadium, the cost, disposable income levels, and on and on.
And "attendance" is only one factor to consider. What about viewership?
The "why?" Is simple. It's to level the playing field in the sport. That's only one reason. NL pitchers are the only pitchers who waste time pretending to hit in most levels of the game. AL pitchers face a full lineup.
The DH isn't going away. You arent squeezing that toothpaste back into the tube. So, the DH will eventually be adopted in the NL, and better talent will follow, except for teams run by owners like BOB.
I agree with you that the DH is coming, like it or not. As you say, that toothpaste isn't going back in the tube. It's also true as you say that NL pitchers didn't even bat much in the minors since A always uses a DH and AA and AAA use a DH in all games unless both teams are farms for NL teams.
My point is about whether the DH makes the game more enjoyable. When the DH was introduced in 1973 the premise was that more offense would mean more fan enjoyment. It wasn't because pitchers didn't bat in the minors because at that time they did. It wasn't to level the playing field because it did the opposite. I believe history has shown that MLB's argument in favor of the DH was wrong. I realize there are more factors affecting attendance than merely the DH. But if the DH had truly been a boon to fan enjoyment and enthusiasm there would have been some evidence reflected in attendance as well as local TV ratings. But that has not been the case. I have never seen evidence that the AL clearly benefited in terms of fan enthusiasm. And I thought it was ironic that at the time the DH looks closer to ever for the NL, fan enthusiasm for the NL game seems greater than in the AL. Yes, of course there are other factors involved but it's hard to see any benefit in the AL game over the NL game for its fans. Unless we assume that population, winning pct, stadium capacity, cost, disposable income levels, etc are all generally worse in AL cities such that even the wonderful enjoyment of the DH that the AL assumed back in 1973 isn't enough to make any difference.
So fan enjoyment doesn't appear to be the reason anymore. I think there are 2 main reasons. One is "leveling the playing field" as you said. They do it in 1 league, so do it in the other. Of course, philosophically, one could argue "then go back to no DH in the AL to level the playing field." Who says A is better than B? But I think the 2nd reason is that NL owners probably secretly want the DH. They won't say so publicly because most NL fans are against such an acute change to the game they love. And NL owners have had almost 50 years to see that AL fans don't seem to enjoy DH baseball any more than NL fans enjoy baseball without the DH. But I think every time an NL owner sees his multi-millionaire pitcher get hit with a pitch or otherwise get injured batting or running, he cringes and wishes that pitcher was safely tucked away in the dugout while someone else batted for him. I think that, more than anything else, is why the DH will be forced on NL fans who don't want it despite owners seeing no evidence that AL fans enjoy the game more because of the DH.
The Great DH Compromise
Continuing with the golf analogy, imagine you have a tour pro who is horrid at one aspect of the game. Everything else is solid, but that one aspect, but it off the tee, approach shots, 50 yard pitches, chips from just off the green, playing out of sand, recovery shots in the rough, or putting, gets him every time. Now imagine saying that he didn't have to do that one aspect of the game. Every time he gets on the green, he can hang back and watch as his designated putter finishes the hole for him.
Better yet, we could just build the ultimate golfer...Dustin Johnson off the tee, Tiger with the irons, Phil around the greens, and Brad Faxon on them. That guy would shoot 57 every time out!
I'm totally serious...the DH coming to the NL might just be the straw that breaks my back in terms of my MLB fandom. I love baseball, but I just can't watch the AL game. In my mind, it barely passes as baseball. It's similar. But whatever it is, it isn't baseball. In my mind, Rob Manfred is one half step from permanently ruining the game.
Better yet, we could just build the ultimate golfer...Dustin Johnson off the tee, Tiger with the irons, Phil around the greens, and Brad Faxon on them. That guy would shoot 57 every time out!
I'm totally serious...the DH coming to the NL might just be the straw that breaks my back in terms of my MLB fandom. I love baseball, but I just can't watch the AL game. In my mind, it barely passes as baseball. It's similar. But whatever it is, it isn't baseball. In my mind, Rob Manfred is one half step from permanently ruining the game.