The N.L. needs the designated hitter! (1 Viewer)

[MikeH]

Hello, my name is Mike and I like the Designated Hitter.
It's no more evident than having to watch Randy Johnson at the plate. I'm always amazed at the contrast when he is so dominant and menacing on the mound and then silly and weak at the plate.
Okay, I understand why the NL has the DH.
1) It's tradition. Baseball's pat answer for everything.
2) It creates drama and excitement in the later innings. True but a close game has enough drama and excitement.
3) It is a thinking man's league and allows the manger to be involved in the game and supposedly they are better mangers than their AL counterparts. This is probably my weakest argument as I almost agree with the statement. There is definitely more strategy in the course of an NL game (due to no DH) and being a manager in the NL is far more risky in the professional sense.
Although I am serious this is also a little tongue in cheek. Admittedly I am not that big a fan of baseball so I don't invest that much energy to the DH controversy.
I will conclude with this, Quarterbacks and not expected to tackle, Goalies are not expected to score goals, Centers are not expected to hit three pointers why oh why are pitchers expected to hit?
My suit is zipped up, my helmet is securely fastened flame on.

Mike

 

[Brian Perry]

I firmly believe the DH should be eliminated, as it greatly reduces strategic elements of the game. It also allows pitchers to go headhunting without fear of reprisals from the other pitcher.
I agree that Randy Johnson at the plate is a joke, but I blame him and other pitchers for not practicing their hitting enough. There are some decent hitting pitchers (Mike Hampton), but many of them just look like pansies at the plate.
------------------
Home Theater Pictures

 

[Ricky Hustle]

Get rid of the DH. Then we dont have these overpaid bench warmers that only get off their arses to hit.
I'm a fan of the National League and proud if it.
------------------
rickyhustle.com

 

[Jeff_A]

I have hated the DH for years. Maybe the managers in the NL should even receive special compensation over their AL counterparts only because they are required to strategize so much more (pinch-hitters, bench, bullpen, etc.). I am even a longtime AL fan, BTW.
------------------
The Dark Tower

Fearless Vampire Killers (1967)?
[Edited last by Jeff Amaris on October 17, 2001 at 10:39 AM]

 

[Mark Pfeiffer]

No it doesn't. Eliminate the DH.

 

[Trey Fletcher]

Actually Mike, Quarterbacks are expected to tackle when their team is on defense (i.e. after a turnover), there are centers that shoot 3's (ala Sam Perkins), and I have actually seen Goalies score in hockey (but your point is taken). Still, I have always felt that the nine guys that take the field, should be the same ones to bat. And yes, it does make the game much more intersting when its late innings, the game is close, and the pitchers spot in the batting order is up. NL baseball is the only way to go.
Also, while they look no worse that Randy Johnson, it is still fun to see AL pitchers batting during the World Series. TF

 

[Philip Hamm]

The DH rule is the worst thing that has ever happened to baseball. I don't even consider the American League to be baseball because of it.
The bottom line is that as long as the pitcher can bean batters with the ball, he should have to stand in the box and face the same threat.
------------------
Philip Hamm
AIM: PhilBiker

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I told my wife that if we ever move that we are moving to another NL town, unless the AL gets rid of the DH!

 

[Carlo_M]

I grew up watching and loving the Oakland A's (bash brothers era). But after moving to L.A. and watching NL baseball, the DH really has to go. The strategy that comes into play when a manager has to decide whether a pitcher's effectiveness at the mound is worth his ineffectiveness at the plate is great to watch. Also, pitchers aren't expected to hit homers, but they are expected to be able to get the bunt down and move runners over. And the bonus, if someone like Darren Dreifort hits a home run (or twice in a game like a season or two ago) that is priceless!

 

[Jack Gilvey]

Why stop at hitting for the pitcher? Why not have an offense and a defense? Works for football, right?
The DH in morally wrong.
------------------

 

[Mark Pfeiffer]

Not to mention that NL games tend to flow better and take less time to play. (To give the AL it's due, I attended a Blue Jays/Twins game in Toronto this summer. It was over in two hours. I was stunned.)

 

[Dana Fillhart]

I am the only person I know who believes the DH is good.
Each reason given above against it can be countered:
1) The pitcher that doesn't bat feels empowered to hit batters.
False. Umpires (who follow the rules) throw out pitchers who intentionally hit batters.
2) Games are shorter without the DH.
Unsubstantiated. Today's AL and NL seasonal game time averages are only short minutes apart; both take close to 3 hours on average. Additionally, the game is played to generate revenue, and as fans and advertisers are the primary sources of money, in general, the longer the game the better the revenue stream will be. There are, of course, limits to this axiom, but the presence of (or lack of) the DH is not a significant factor in the length of games. Average game times have increased overall throughout the past decades because of changes to other rules.
3) Strategy is easier without the DH.
Slightly true. It becomes primarily a matter of where the shifting of players occurs between the two leagues when bringing in off the bench; most would agree that maneuvering around the pitcher in arranging players is trickier than not having the pitcher in, but the presense of the DH in the lineup does not preclude strategic player-switching -- for example, a manager with a DH has to determine who is appropriate at what time for the player to play the field and when to put him in the DH role, as Torre well knows with the recent David Justice and Shane Spencer plays. And with the DH, remember, you have to consider the other team's DH, which factors in how you approach their offense (this can be a very significant factor when NL teams play AL teams in AL stadiums during intra-league play and the World Series).
Probably the most important reason for the DH isn't because a pitcher generally can't hit, but because pitching is the most crucial component to a team's success. You can have nine Barry Bonds batting for your team, but if you have just one Mike Mussina against you, far more often than not, you're going to lose. The prospect of losing such a valuable cornerstone of a baseball team's defense is a far greater threat than that of a pitcher getting stupid on a batter. Remember, if a pitcher hits a regular batter, he can be thrown out, fined, etc, and the team hit is unlikely to be severely damaged defensively. But if that batter is another pitcher, the hit team could lose their primary defense and could even lose the season. The threat of retaliation is not a justification for the foundation of game rules, thus the proper way to address the dilemma is the DH.
My 4c.
[Edited last by Dana Fillhart on October 17, 2001 at 02:36 PM]

 

[Marvin]

Admittedly I am not that big a fan of baseball..

I rest my case.

 

[David Lawson]

Michael -
Considering this past Reds season, I would consider moving to a town where they play Major League baseball.

------------------
Link Removed
He obviously misinterpreted what it means to "be bullish."

 

[Brian Perry]

I am the only person I know who believes the DH is good.

Dana,
Your response presents some good points, but I don't see any reasons given for liking the DH (if anything, your post is actually slightly anti-DH). What is it that you like about it -- more offense?
------------------
Home Theater Pictures

 

[Ricky Hustle]

1) The pitcher that doesn't bat feels empowered to hit batters.
False. Umpires (who follow the rules) throw out pitchers who intentionally hit batters.

Just how is it that umpires know for sure if a batter HBP was intentional? They don't.

 

[Hugh Jackes]

The designated hitter is an abomination before Gawd!! Sacrilege!

 

[MikeH]

I rest my case.

I agree with you Marvin. Being a fairweather fan probably doesn't give me the right to discuss such baseball issues. (I would also like to discuss contraction, dream team Olympic baseball and a salary cap). I would never expect to change someone's mind, just the opposite I would like to have my mind changed but only with good enough reasons.
BTW, I really do prefer watching NL teams over AL teams.
Mike

 

[David Oliver]

I don't really have a cite for it, but I am pretty sure there is no proof that beanings occur less often in the NL. I am one who thinks the whole "strategizing" argument is pretty weak. It simply is not a factor as often as folks think. And I think when Randy Johnson is asked to hit is almost more of an abomination than any pursit argument for the DH. It's just silly to have most of these pitchers hitting like little leaguers in what is supposed to be a showcase of the best players in the world. I mean here is a well contested game and then some pitcher comes in and whiffs away the qualtiy of the competion with their inept hitting. I'm sorry if I offend some folks sensibilities with this, but the DH is a good thing. Pitchers who can't hit is an affront to the game. (starts putting on flame suit)

 

[Joseph S]

Keep the DH, Fire the Commissioner, eliminate the nepotism within the umping crews and hire an entirely new group.