|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| A universal designated hitter — something the players have sought for more than three decades, according to commissioner Rob Manfred — also was part of the union’s proposal. Under the plan, the National League would adopt the DH for the 2019 season. |
most catchers can't run well, so maybe MLB should have a designated runner for catchers, who is allowed to pinch run any time a catcher gets on base, but the catcher can stay in the game to bat and play catcher. I mean who comes to a game to see a pudgy slow guy run?
they can't run, what's the point of making them. I'd guess more catchers have been injured running the bases than pitchers running the bases.
the excuses are what I have an issue with, not the prospect of DH in the NL. Just say in the essence of fairness consistency makes sense. period. stop trying to justify it with AL reasons.
Quote:
Does every player also have to be able to pitch?
Does every player have to be able to play catcher? Or shortstop?
Every player has to be able to throw and catch. And hit.
Throwing and Pitching are not the same.
You might as well pick a fan out of the crowd to bat.
why is that justification any better than someone who says I have no interest in watching a player who doesn't play the field. If I wanted to go to a HR derby I would, but I like watching players play defense and I'm not interested in seeing a player who can't play the field, bat 4 times a game.
I'm obviously playing devil's advocate, I've already said I don't care if the DH is added to the NL, but as I've maintained, my reason is more for fairness and consistency than any of these other opinions - and if the leagues got together and decided to get rid of the DH (never happen) and pitchers bat in both leagues I'd think that accomplishes the same thing.
One thing I thought about is and just a wild theory, but in 1973 the DH was adopted in the AL, I wonder if not having to bat has influenced tommy john occurrences in pitchers.
Pre-70's it didn't seem nearly as common and you had pitchers pitch harder (in some cases) or at the very least they threw hard and more often, and more innings, and seemed to not have the TJ issues that players today do. I wonder if its related. Of course NL pitchers would have a less occurence of TJS if that was true, but maybe it's pervasive through the minors too, maybe hitting and/or more time in the cage working on hitting helped strengthen the ulnar collateral ligament)
I've seen no proof of any sort about why the onslaught of Tommy John Surgeries. Do you have any source for your comment?
and from what I've read pitchers like Ryan, Carlton, even Feller and even more old school guys like Walter Johnson had similar velocity to todays hardest throwers. No technology like today to prove it from what I've read though.
Quote:
than your average fireballer throws today. Nolan Ryan was a physical freak. The rise of TJS likely has a lot more to do with year-round baseball in youth and with max-effort pitching than with any sort of changes to who bats and when.
I've seen no proof of any sort about why the onslaught of Tommy John Surgeries. Do you have any source for your comment?
and from what I've read pitchers like Ryan, Carlton, even Feller and even more old school guys like Walter Johnson had similar velocity to todays hardest throwers. No technology like today to prove it from what I've read though.
Well, considering Tommy John surgery didn't exist until it was performed on Tommy John, you wouldn't see any history of it prior to 1973. Pitchers just retired when they had that type of injury.
Quote:
In comment 14289066 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
than your average fireballer throws today. Nolan Ryan was a physical freak. The rise of TJS likely has a lot more to do with year-round baseball in youth and with max-effort pitching than with any sort of changes to who bats and when.
I've seen no proof of any sort about why the onslaught of Tommy John Surgeries. Do you have any source for your comment?
and from what I've read pitchers like Ryan, Carlton, even Feller and even more old school guys like Walter Johnson had similar velocity to todays hardest throwers. No technology like today to prove it from what I've read though.
Well, considering Tommy John surgery didn't exist until it was performed on Tommy John, you wouldn't see any history of it prior to 1973. Pitchers just retired when they had that type of injury.
was it common? Do we know?
Anyway, I said it was a wild theory, but IMO one worth studying even if easily refuted.
The one common thing I've read is strength training and conditioning are thought to help reduce the chances, maybe was achieved through cage time - think of it like cross training.
I can't remember where I read it, but I did read an article somewhere that said a scientific estimate at measuring Walter Johnson's heater came up with about 92.
I get why some fans prefer the DH and don't care about any of those strategies. I don't understand how you can't comprehend that for other fans they do enjoy the strategy that goes along without it.
I'm not trying to convince anyone but for myself I like that it's your best nine against the other teams best nine. So right out of the gate with setting a lineup the manger has to weigh fielding and hitting. Not much decision goes into throwing out the best hitter in the DH regardless if he can't catch a cold let alone field a position.
Then in game the manager is faced with more decisions. Does he sacrifice with a pitcher, or let him swing away? Once further in the game he has to weigh how well the pitcher is pitching verses pinch hitting for him, and while doing so taking into account the opposing pitcher and bull pen. Then if pinch hitting does he sacrifice another player on defense and at the same time use someone on his bench by pulling a double switch? And all that repeats itself each time through the order only magnified by a thinner bench and BP.
Again I get why some fans prefer the DH, but there are plenty of fans that appreciate the beauty of having your best line up against their best and all the little nuances that go along with that. For myself; that is baseball and what I enjoy watching. For me it looses a lot when you remove the pitcher and add the DH.
Baseball is different from all other team sports. It's a slow paced game with no clock that's part sport and part chess match best played on a leisurely sunny day. It's never going to be a high flying scoring game like other sports and adding the DH doesn't change that only loses some of what makes it so unique from all other sports for a minute amount of additional offense.
IMO they should leave each league as it is, one for fans that prefer the DH, and the other for the fans that prefer baseball without it.
Quote:
In comment 14289071 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
In comment 14289066 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
than your average fireballer throws today. Nolan Ryan was a physical freak. The rise of TJS likely has a lot more to do with year-round baseball in youth and with max-effort pitching than with any sort of changes to who bats and when.
I've seen no proof of any sort about why the onslaught of Tommy John Surgeries. Do you have any source for your comment?
and from what I've read pitchers like Ryan, Carlton, even Feller and even more old school guys like Walter Johnson had similar velocity to todays hardest throwers. No technology like today to prove it from what I've read though.
Well, considering Tommy John surgery didn't exist until it was performed on Tommy John, you wouldn't see any history of it prior to 1973. Pitchers just retired when they had that type of injury.
was it common? Do we know?
Anyway, I said it was a wild theory, but IMO one worth studying even if easily refuted.
The one common thing I've read is strength training and conditioning are thought to help reduce the chances, maybe was achieved through cage time - think of it like cross training.
I doubt there's any way to go back in history to figure out how many players it impacted to support either side.
Quote:
than your average fireballer throws today. Nolan Ryan was a physical freak. The rise of TJS likely has a lot more to do with year-round baseball in youth and with max-effort pitching than with any sort of changes to who bats and when.
I've seen no proof of any sort about why the onslaught of Tommy John Surgeries. Do you have any source for your comment?
and from what I've read pitchers like Ryan, Carlton, even Feller and even more old school guys like Walter Johnson had similar velocity to todays hardest throwers. No technology like today to prove it from what I've read though.
Jeff Passan's book The Arm talks about it. He acknowledges there is no single answer, at least none with any significant amount of data to support it, but that's what he highlights.
Good point. The article below suggests the Mets knew about this likely rule change prior to the trade
NYP: Possible Rule Changes - ( New Window )
Quote:
Nobody ever showed up at a ballpark and said "I'm here for the strategy!"
I get why some fans prefer the DH and don't care about any of those strategies. I don't understand how you can't comprehend that for other fans they do enjoy the strategy that goes along without it.
I'm not trying to convince anyone but for myself I like that it's your best nine against the other teams best nine. So right out of the gate with setting a lineup the manger has to weigh fielding and hitting. Not much decision goes into throwing out the best hitter in the DH regardless if he can't catch a cold let alone field a position.
Then in game the manager is faced with more decisions. Does he sacrifice with a pitcher, or let him swing away? Once further in the game he has to weigh how well the pitcher is pitching verses pinch hitting for him, and while doing so taking into account the opposing pitcher and bull pen. Then if pinch hitting does he sacrifice another player on defense and at the same time use someone on his bench by pulling a double switch? And all that repeats itself each time through the order only magnified by a thinner bench and BP.
Again I get why some fans prefer the DH, but there are plenty of fans that appreciate the beauty of having your best line up against their best and all the little nuances that go along with that. For myself; that is baseball and what I enjoy watching. For me it looses a lot when you remove the pitcher and add the DH.
Baseball is different from all other team sports. It's a slow paced game with no clock that's part sport and part chess match best played on a leisurely sunny day. It's never going to be a high flying scoring game like other sports and adding the DH doesn't change that only loses some of what makes it so unique from all other sports for a minute amount of additional offense.
IMO they should leave each league as it is, one for fans that prefer the DH, and the other for the fans that prefer baseball without it.
Steve, I respect you and I respect what you're saying. But to the extent that strategy has an outsized role to play, at this point it is so data-driven that even longtime fans are only grasping a part of it. Strategy today is subtle changes in defensive positioning based on a count, it's analytically-driven pitch sequencing, a whole bunch of things that we struggle to acknowledge. And the more overt new strategies, things like openers, are pissing off the curmudgeons anyway. I love baseball, I love the pace, I love watching in person, and to an extent I enjoy strategy too, but it's not high on my list of reasons I go to a ballgame.
Quote:
In comment 14289041 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
Nobody ever showed up at a ballpark and said "I'm here for the strategy!"
I get why some fans prefer the DH and don't care about any of those strategies. I don't understand how you can't comprehend that for other fans they do enjoy the strategy that goes along without it.
I'm not trying to convince anyone but for myself I like that it's your best nine against the other teams best nine. So right out of the gate with setting a lineup the manger has to weigh fielding and hitting. Not much decision goes into throwing out the best hitter in the DH regardless if he can't catch a cold let alone field a position.
Then in game the manager is faced with more decisions. Does he sacrifice with a pitcher, or let him swing away? Once further in the game he has to weigh how well the pitcher is pitching verses pinch hitting for him, and while doing so taking into account the opposing pitcher and bull pen. Then if pinch hitting does he sacrifice another player on defense and at the same time use someone on his bench by pulling a double switch? And all that repeats itself each time through the order only magnified by a thinner bench and BP.
Again I get why some fans prefer the DH, but there are plenty of fans that appreciate the beauty of having your best line up against their best and all the little nuances that go along with that. For myself; that is baseball and what I enjoy watching. For me it looses a lot when you remove the pitcher and add the DH.
Baseball is different from all other team sports. It's a slow paced game with no clock that's part sport and part chess match best played on a leisurely sunny day. It's never going to be a high flying scoring game like other sports and adding the DH doesn't change that only loses some of what makes it so unique from all other sports for a minute amount of additional offense.
IMO they should leave each league as it is, one for fans that prefer the DH, and the other for the fans that prefer baseball without it.
Steve, I respect you and I respect what you're saying. But to the extent that strategy has an outsized role to play, at this point it is so data-driven that even longtime fans are only grasping a part of it. Strategy today is subtle changes in defensive positioning based on a count, it's analytically-driven pitch sequencing, a whole bunch of things that we struggle to acknowledge. And the more overt new strategies, things like openers, are pissing off the curmudgeons anyway. I love baseball, I love the pace, I love watching in person, and to an extent I enjoy strategy too, but it's not high on my list of reasons I go to a ballgame.
I know you are a very smart baseball fan, and I equally respect your view and agree with you about what analytics is doing to the game. I guess for myself adding the DH to the NL would be the last straw of many. It will just have changed too much from what I love. I guess I must be one of the baseball curmudgeons haha
I have been an avid BB fans since the 1960's, and perhaps it will change over time, but I probably won't watch other than occasionally once this happens.
Yep. Back in 1977 I was one of 3 juniors on our senior heavy HS team that made it to the state semi-finals. In the 4th game of the season our starting second baseman broke his arm and I became the starter. Whichever one of our 2 man pitching crew was not starting that day DH’ed for me. They were better hitters than I was at that time and as long as we won I couldn’t have cared less.
You might as well pick a fan out of the crowd to bat.
Do you think the fact that bullpens are being used earlier in games, leading to more pitchers having to hit, who normally never had, is partially bringing down the average?
Link - ( New Window )
For spring training and the all-star game.
Quote:
Nobody ever showed up at a ballpark and said "I'm here for the strategy!"
I get why some fans prefer the DH and don't care about any of those strategies. I don't understand how you can't comprehend that for other fans they do enjoy the strategy that goes along without it.
I'm not trying to convince anyone but for myself I like that it's your best nine against the other teams best nine. So right out of the gate with setting a lineup the manger has to weigh fielding and hitting. Not much decision goes into throwing out the best hitter in the DH regardless if he can't catch a cold let alone field a position.
Then in game the manager is faced with more decisions. Does he sacrifice with a pitcher, or let him swing away? Once further in the game he has to weigh how well the pitcher is pitching verses pinch hitting for him, and while doing so taking into account the opposing pitcher and bull pen. Then if pinch hitting does he sacrifice another player on defense and at the same time use someone on his bench by pulling a double switch? And all that repeats itself each time through the order only magnified by a thinner bench and BP.
Again I get why some fans prefer the DH, but there are plenty of fans that appreciate the beauty of having your best line up against their best and all the little nuances that go along with that. For myself; that is baseball and what I enjoy watching. For me it looses a lot when you remove the pitcher and add the DH.
Baseball is different from all other team sports. It's a slow paced game with no clock that's part sport and part chess match best played on a leisurely sunny day. It's never going to be a high flying scoring game like other sports and adding the DH doesn't change that only loses some of what makes it so unique from all other sports for a minute amount of additional offense.
IMO they should leave each league as it is, one for fans that prefer the DH, and the other for the fans that prefer baseball without it.
This is exactly how I feel. I would prefer the AL to drop the DL, but it is what it is I suppose.
Quote:
They hit .115/.144/.149 at the plate in 2018 and are only getting worse.
You might as well pick a fan out of the crowd to bat.
Do you think the fact that bullpens are being used earlier in games, leading to more pitchers having to hit, who normally never had, is partially bringing down the average?
not to mention that the RPs rarely hit, they get pinch hit for so it's like a DH anyway.
From the 6th inning on, relievers on teams that are tied or losing bat an average of less than once in every 7 games.
The only other no DH league besides the NL is the Central League in Japan
Whats moronic is that after 10 innings, regular season games can't end in a tie. Why the fuck not? Football plays 1/10th the number of regular season games and no one bats an eye when the Browns and Steelers tie...
Not only are the 16 inning marathons so long and played in front of 5000 fans by the end... they tax bullpens and put yet more stress on player bodies.
It's not really about whether the merits of any particular strategy or rule, it's just anti-change. Some people just complain about any change. There was BBI outrage when the NFL moved the extra point back a few yards.
The worst reason to keep doing something is "because that's the way we've always done it."
those 4-5 pitcher at bats per game before the pinch hitter parade and the odd double switch every couple of games make the game INFINITELY more exciting, amirite?
If a rule proposal were brought up to eliminate the DH and force these offensively-challenged pitchers to hit, would most be in favor of it?
Just make the big move and have an offensive and defensive lineup like in football; any nine in the lineup can bat.
the tweet showed the worst 15 or 20 hitters over their last 1000 at bats and said fans opposed to pitchers hitting are ok with 1000 plus at-bats of awful hitting from position players, but not 2 - 3 per game for a pitcher.
just another lens to view it from, fans are very conditioned.
You know what is very much like softball? Utilizing a shift. Attempting to get batters to hit pop-ups.
These discussions about softball always take a negative tone too. Because a pitcher is replaced by a better batter, it's now compared to beer-bellied guys?
Back in my Grandpa's day, a pitcher could throw both games of a double-header. These guys today are pussies, so why should I watch a bunch of divas!!!
I am not debating this point I agree with you, but then why don't fans say "who wants to to go the ballpark and watch Chris Davis hit 4 times a game?" when he's as bad as a pitcher. And he wasn't even the worst in the tweet, I thought Pujols was worse and many others. Over their last 1000 plus at-bats.
My point, again, is I think the leagues should be consistent.
I think the fans who say "who wants to see pitchers bat, they could get hurt"
or the fans who say
"who wants to watch a softball game"
are both using their opinions to shape the game they want to see and neither really has more merit than the other.
but the leagues should be the same for fairness and consistency.
I definitely think AL teams have an advantage when competing interleague because they build their rosters with a DH in mind, not using one ten games per year or so and just throwing someone in that spot.
But yeah, sure seems like a fat lazy move designed to keep players like David Ortiz active well passed their ability to do anything other than hit.
.168/.243/.296.
It was horrifically bad. He kept playing because he had a huge contract and the Orioles were tanking, and because he at one point was a good hitter.
Pitchers on AVERAGE hit
.115/.144/.149
That's not even in the same universe of ineptitude as Chris Davis.
Comparing the average pitcher to an all-time bad season by one player doesn't make any sense.
It would make more sense to say "imagine making Chris Davis significantly worse than he was last season and putting him on every team playing in every game."
It was mentioning a tweet (I wish I could find it) that showed a list of players and their OPS over 1000 at-bats (+) so two seasons or more in some cases, of the worst position players.
and they were unquestionably awful, Davis was one of them, Pujols was another.
And it was really questioning the people who say "no one goes to the stadium to see pitchers hit" crowd.
when no one also goes to the stadium to see guys who bat regularly OPS .300 or whatever it is (not to be compared with a pitcher, but evaluated as awful in its own right)
In fact, if you're being honest and not biased it's probably worse seeing a position player be awful for two years than a pitcher 2 to 3 times a game, who you expect to be bad, be awful.
And you would be wrong. I watch close to all 162 Mets games each season, have for years (been a fan since the 1960's). If the NL gets the DH I'm guessing I'll go to just catching an occasional game each year. At least it will save me some money from buying MLB extra inning each season.
Quote:
they'll stop watching baseball if the NL adds the DH don't watch a lot of baseball right now.
And you would be wrong. I watch close to all 162 Mets games each season, have for years (been a fan since the 1960's). If the NL gets the DH I'm guessing I'll go to just catching an occasional game each year. At least it will save me some money from buying MLB extra inning each season.
Then I think you're being ridiculous but hey, we all have limited time so do what you like.
The global talent pool and better training methods have made pitchers far more specialized than ever before. They are throwing harder than ever before with more relievers available to throw harder than ever before. Hitting is really damn hard, and that is for guys who play every day where hitting is the top priority.
It's even harder for pitchers to hit who only get up once every five games. It has also made it harder for a pitcher to make the majors. As such, the priority for pitchers who want to make MLB is to focus exclusively on pitching. Unless you have freaks like Shohei Otani, pitchers aren't advancing and getting shots because they are semi-competent at the plate.
I'm still not following the tweet you reference. Pujols's worst season at the plate was .241/.286/.386 for an OPS of .672. Comparing that to an OPS of .293 for the average pitcher doesn't make sense.
When a position player is having an incomprehensibly bad stretch, there's still the hope that he will break out it-- that perhaps it was a fluky slump, or perhaps an injury that the player is working through.
Of course it's frustrating to see a position player struggle at the plate. But the hope is that the player can find their way out of the aberration that is the horrific streak at the plate.
Having pitchers go up there is just a total waste of time.
Quote:
In comment 14289672 Metnut said:
Quote:
they'll stop watching baseball if the NL adds the DH don't watch a lot of baseball right now.
And you would be wrong. I watch close to all 162 Mets games each season, have for years (been a fan since the 1960's). If the NL gets the DH I'm guessing I'll go to just catching an occasional game each year. At least it will save me some money from buying MLB extra inning each season.
Then I think you're being ridiculous but hey, we all have limited time so do what you like.
LOL, ridiculous would be continue to watch something as often that I wouldn't enjoy the same as before.
I posted earlier that I can appreciate why some fans prefer the DH, but for some reason too many of those same fans can't comprehend why others might feel differently. Obviously you don't appreciate the same things about the game as I do. To each his own.
again, my point is not like I'm some pro pitcher batting advocate, I'm not.
I don't really care if pitchers never bat again.
I just find the reasons many AL fans make are hypocritical and mostly because Chien Ming Wang got hurt (not even hitting, but running the bases - so in your world pitchers should not be allowed to be pinch runners either).
If pitchers shouldn't bat it's because it represents inconsistency and unfairness between the leagues from everything from roster building to in-game strategy requirements. Not because they're bad at it or because they might get hurt.
I read one advocate for removal of the hitting pitchers say baseball pitchers are not baseball players, they're pitchers.