- Thread starter
- #1
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
your thoughts on the DH
- Thread starter J.O.
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Card Magnet
New member
I like the DH, just because it allowed Frank Thomas/Paul Konerko and now Konerko/Jim Thome to exist together. It allows some starts to stay around longer because of their hitting, and adds more offense to the game. I like the DH.
cowboysrule48
Active member
Personally, I hate the DH. I wish it would be done away with.
johnny rook
New member
Why doesn't the AL just get rid of the pitchers all together and use pitching machines. That would be right up their alley. Every team would put up 20 runs a night. Start using 4 outfielders. Then aluminum bats. Then put a keg and cheerleaders on third base.
George_Calfas
Well-known member
johnny rook said:
So what you are saying is you like the DH.
RL24
New member
I like how the two leagues are different, and play by the home teams rules. I think it's neat. It allows old farts the chance to keep adding to their numbers, and gives Jake Peavy a place to hide. Perfect.
Seriously though... I like how the two leagues are different, and play by the home teams rules. I always have.
Seriously though... I like how the two leagues are different, and play by the home teams rules. I always have.
johnny rook
New member
George_Calfas said:
So what you are saying is you like the DH.[/quote:1ye7f2sd]
No.
The DH rule was a response to declining ticket sales of AL teams in the early '70s. It was for all the AL "fans" who thought baseball was too boring to watch. Now that the AL is doing just fine revenue wise the DH rule should go the way of the steroid era.
rico08
Active member
AL teams have an advantage drafting and trading players because they don't have to worry about signing guys who can't play defense.
I don't like it, but I wouldn't want to see a change made now.
I don't like it, but I wouldn't want to see a change made now.
hive17
Active member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 21,426
- 24
The DH is a sham. Always has been, always will be. It protects no-defense-having clowns and no-bat-handling-skills pitchers. And believe me, I watched one of the worst dudes with a bat (Ben Sheets) for years, and i still wouldn't want the change.
Sham, sham, sham.
And again, you're talking to a guy who also loved one of the best DH's ever in Paul Molitor (first primarily DH in the HOF if I'm not mistaken); but it's still a sham.
SHAM!
Sham, sham, sham.
And again, you're talking to a guy who also loved one of the best DH's ever in Paul Molitor (first primarily DH in the HOF if I'm not mistaken); but it's still a sham.
SHAM!
leatherman
Active member
I care more about the rules being the same in both leagues than I do about whether or not there is a DH. The way it is currently, I think there is an advantage for AL teams in the World Series, and here is why:
Most pitchers, with few exceptions, are poor hitters. Their role in the NL home World Series games is to advance runners by putting the ball in play. In AL home World Series games, the AL team has a hitter who has been playing DH all season and gets quite a few ABs. The NL team puts a player into their lineup who is most likely a utility type player, who doesn't have near the bat as the AL team. Let's look at the DH from the most recent World Series where the AL team won:
2007 Red Sox (David Ortiz) vs Rockies (Ryan Spilborghs) - 2 games in AL park, 2 in NL
2005 White Sox (Carl Everett, 107 games at DH; 23 HR, 87 RBI) vs Astros (Jeff Bagwell, only 100 ABs all year, just before he retired) - 2 AL games, 2 NL
2004 Red Sox (David Ortiz) vs Cardinals (Reggie Sanders & Marlon Anderson) - 2 AL games, 2 NL games
2002 Angels (Brad Fulmer, 94 games at DH; .289, 19 HR , 59 RBIs) vs Giants (Tsuyoshi Shinjo, Shawon Dunston, and Pedro Feliz) - 4 AL games, 3 NL
2000 Yankees (Chuck Knoblauch) vs Mets (Mike Piazza, but that meant Todd Pratt's bat was now in the lineup; Lenny Harris, ) - 2 AL games, 3 NL
My point is this...the AL almost always has a DH in the World Series that has a ton of ABs and is used to hitting every day without playing the field. In each of the last (at least) 5 WS won by AL teams, they have used exactly one DH for all games, whereas the NL team has to shuffle their lineup. There are very few pitchers in the NL where the NL team has a distinct advantage because the AL pitcher is forced to hit, and a manager isn't going to shuffle his rotation so that his pitcher can pitch in an NL park. To me, this gives AL teams a big advantage in WS games played in AL ballparks.
David
Most pitchers, with few exceptions, are poor hitters. Their role in the NL home World Series games is to advance runners by putting the ball in play. In AL home World Series games, the AL team has a hitter who has been playing DH all season and gets quite a few ABs. The NL team puts a player into their lineup who is most likely a utility type player, who doesn't have near the bat as the AL team. Let's look at the DH from the most recent World Series where the AL team won:
2007 Red Sox (David Ortiz) vs Rockies (Ryan Spilborghs) - 2 games in AL park, 2 in NL
2005 White Sox (Carl Everett, 107 games at DH; 23 HR, 87 RBI) vs Astros (Jeff Bagwell, only 100 ABs all year, just before he retired) - 2 AL games, 2 NL
2004 Red Sox (David Ortiz) vs Cardinals (Reggie Sanders & Marlon Anderson) - 2 AL games, 2 NL games
2002 Angels (Brad Fulmer, 94 games at DH; .289, 19 HR , 59 RBIs) vs Giants (Tsuyoshi Shinjo, Shawon Dunston, and Pedro Feliz) - 4 AL games, 3 NL
2000 Yankees (Chuck Knoblauch) vs Mets (Mike Piazza, but that meant Todd Pratt's bat was now in the lineup; Lenny Harris, ) - 2 AL games, 3 NL
My point is this...the AL almost always has a DH in the World Series that has a ton of ABs and is used to hitting every day without playing the field. In each of the last (at least) 5 WS won by AL teams, they have used exactly one DH for all games, whereas the NL team has to shuffle their lineup. There are very few pitchers in the NL where the NL team has a distinct advantage because the AL pitcher is forced to hit, and a manager isn't going to shuffle his rotation so that his pitcher can pitch in an NL park. To me, this gives AL teams a big advantage in WS games played in AL ballparks.
David
Therion
Well-known member
The DH is a bastardization of baseball. Get rid of it.
All of my reasons for this have already been stated. In fact, leatherman hit it right on the nose.
All of my reasons for this have already been stated. In fact, leatherman hit it right on the nose.
Tomlinson21RB
Active member
leatherman said:
Looks like almost every other year the national league team wins, so is the DH really that big of an advantage?
scotty21690
New member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 16,150
- 0
Wow.hive17 said:
abncollectsautos
New member
i like the DH for a couple reasons,
pitchers on average cant hit and to often get hurt trying to run bases (i know some like sabathia, hampton, dontrelle, and a couple others are good hitters)
and it has given some of the better hitters of the past twenty or thirty years a few more seasone to help them get into the hall of fame. (really helped moliter become hof, and helped players like frank thomas and edgar martinez get even closer)
just my opinion
pitchers on average cant hit and to often get hurt trying to run bases (i know some like sabathia, hampton, dontrelle, and a couple others are good hitters)
and it has given some of the better hitters of the past twenty or thirty years a few more seasone to help them get into the hall of fame. (really helped moliter become hof, and helped players like frank thomas and edgar martinez get even closer)
just my opinion
Penno
New member
Therion said:
+1
pujolsjunkie
New member
- Aug 8, 2008
- 3,753
- 0
It is a major factor in the game of course, and imagine the change in the game if it hadn't come to pass. If there was no DH, it's pretty much a guarantee the Red Sox are still searching for their first WS win since 1918. Pretty crazy to think about.
predatorkj
Active member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 11,871
- 2
So a lot of you guys are for it because it allows players who really aren't good enough to be playing baseball as a complete player to stick around.In my mind that is a horrible reason.When you no longer are able to play up to the expectations of a MLB player then it is time to retire.
In my mind its an added advantage that is pretty unfair.Even with the prospect of them having to change it up during interleague play.The AL still ends up winning that battle because not all games are played in an NL park and the ones that are not are already lopsided.
I think the pitchers should have to hit.Hell...you are taught from little league on how to hit.Some of the best pitching prospects in high school right now can get some bat on the ball quite well so I don't buy the crap of them not being able to hit.I also don't buy the fact that they have to only and constantly focus on their pitching.They can do both.Especially since pitchers make some of the highest salaries of any player.They just have to work harder to nail both aspects of their game whereas a position player doesn't have to do as much to stay sharp.
All I can say is the whole argument that has been made of pitchers not being able to hit seems like an excuse to me.I am not sure who started making it first.The Clubs or the pitchers themselves.In any case its pretty weak.
In my mind its an added advantage that is pretty unfair.Even with the prospect of them having to change it up during interleague play.The AL still ends up winning that battle because not all games are played in an NL park and the ones that are not are already lopsided.
I think the pitchers should have to hit.Hell...you are taught from little league on how to hit.Some of the best pitching prospects in high school right now can get some bat on the ball quite well so I don't buy the crap of them not being able to hit.I also don't buy the fact that they have to only and constantly focus on their pitching.They can do both.Especially since pitchers make some of the highest salaries of any player.They just have to work harder to nail both aspects of their game whereas a position player doesn't have to do as much to stay sharp.
All I can say is the whole argument that has been made of pitchers not being able to hit seems like an excuse to me.I am not sure who started making it first.The Clubs or the pitchers themselves.In any case its pretty weak.
OhioBobcat3
Member
predatorkj said:
And who's to say what those expectations are? Honestly, if the AL says it's okay, I'm fine with it. The guy that I collect would not be able to play the field consistently due to an arthritic condition in his elbow, so needless to say I'm glad the option exists for him and for others who can still contribute to the game on an offensive basis.
Tomlinson21RB
Active member
OhioBobcat3 said:
Another aspect is a lot of baseball fans don't care if those expectations are met. If I watch baseball I want to see the best players playing. Why in the world would I want to see Curt Schilling, Pedro Martinez, or Derek Lowe hit instead of David Ortiz a few years ago? I don't care that he can't play defense, he was someone that made people stop and watch those 4-5 at bats a game. If the pitchers were hitting it would've been a good time to hit the bathroom or go to the concession stand.
IndyManning18
Active member
Put the bat in the pitchers hand and take it out of players who've lost thier defensive skills.
