Is the DH coming to the NL?

[brett05]

It's a mixed bag. Yes the NL has the advantage of an extra hitter but with the way benches are constructed in the NL most don't have a guy that adds as much as an AL DH would.

I agree, but the difference between a pitcher and a bench guy is greater than the difference in loss of a DH to a pitcher.

 

[brett05]

I would say it would be the AL managers not knowing how to utilize their bench later game and NL starters now having to deal with a line up with no easy inning.

As Tony LaRussa said, it's not that difficult to manage the NL game. I think the strategy and moves used in the NL is blown severely out of proportion.

 

[brett05]

AL teams can afford to pay David Ortiz to DH 150 games and know they're getting value; an NL teams 4th OF/5th IF/2nd C is going to be a significantly worse bat.

While I'd prefer a game without a DH because it creates more strategy to the game, I think both leagues should share the same rules and the AL isn't going to get rid of the DH.

I agree with all that is said here and would add while the NL does not pay for the DH, they use those dollars elsewhere that an AL team does not thanks to needing a DH.

 

[brett05]

I have a hard time understanding why people feel both leagues need to share the same rules. I'm not singling out Dantown just because he posted above. It's a repeated perspective from many posters. Outside of fantasy baseball and pitching stats, I just don't get the need for both leagues to conform.

One of the best ways I can think of to minimize the differences would be to eliminate most interleague play. Just have a rival for each team. The same rival every year (Cubs/Sox, Yanks/Mets, KC/StL, LAAoA/Dodgers, etc.) I get it. It isn't balanced. It isn't fair. Are all of you Packers fans whining about overtime rules, too? Can someone explain to me with good reason why both leagues must be identical?

Why should a sport have some play by one set of rules and another play by a different set? That's illogical if the two are two meet in any fashion for meaningful play.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Honestly, eliminating interleague play would be my solution as well but it helps sell merchandise in cities it's played in appealing to fans of say the Reds in Kansas City where they would otherwise never play. I would have honestly never thought of that until a friend of mine in marketing pointed it out to me a couple of years ago an showed me some numbers. With the availability of just about anything you want on the web the concept is bizarre to me but apparently many people are too ADD to think of their teams until they come to their hometown. Because of that his opinion, and I tend to share it now, is that interleague will never go away. If it's not then I'd like to see the same rules. I'm not at all an advocate for the DH, in fact I was vehemently opposed until recently, but if it is inevitable I would just as soon it be implemented at a time that the Cubs can take advantage of it. If it's not implemented ever I'm not going to be upset. I just think it's odd to have a sport with two different sets of rules.

My issue with that answer would be that just because the Cubs are set up for it, doesn't mean it's a good idea. What that does to me is put the Cubs above the game of baseball and I can't do that. Also, if people are flocking to the interleague matchups, there isn't any reason to change rules.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Why should a sport have some play by one set of rules and another play by a different set? That's illogical if the two are two meet in any fashion for meaningful play.

My house, my rules. Your house, your rules. Perhaps you don't know that there are different ground rules at every field. It isn't just the Ivy at Wrigley. It's the hill in Houston, etc.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

My issue with that answer would be that just because the Cubs are set up for it, doesn't mean it's a good idea. What that does to me is put the Cubs above the game of baseball and I can't do that. Also, if people are flocking to the interleague matchups, there isn't any reason to change rules.

I'm referring more to the inevitability of it which seems to be the conventional wisdom. Again if it never happens I'd be OK with it but I do think the separate rules are difficult for younger fans to understand, and even younger players. Especially considering there is a DH in every level of baseball except for the NL.

Good point on the ground rules though. Completely uniformity is never possible.

 

[Parade_Rain]

I'm referring more to the inevitability of it which seems to be the conventional wisdom. Again if it never happens I'd be OK with it but I do think the separate rules are difficult for younger fans to understand, and even younger players. Especially considering there is a DH in every level of baseball except for the NL.

Good point on the ground rules though. Completely uniformity is never possible.

I get that, TC. As for the DH at every level, I've always looked at the DH as a development tool in MiLB. Since you're a pitcher, concentrate on what will get you to the big leagues. Likewise DH spot develops hitters. It involves 10 players instead of 9, so it makes sense at the MiLB level.

 

[brett05]

My house, my rules. Your house, your rules. Perhaps you don't know that there are different ground rules at every field. It isn't just the Ivy at Wrigley. It's the hill in Houston, etc.

True, but there are limits. Baseball has always allowed the parks to be unique to clubs, but the rules of the game cannot be changed. You can't make 5 balls a walk in your house. It's more akin to my room my rules. Kids get some freedom but ultimately they fall under the rule of their parents. Similarly the leagues fall under the law of the game itself. It's illogical to do otherwise and still call it the same.

 

[Parade_Rain]

True, but there are limits. Baseball has always allowed the parks to be unique to clubs, but the rules of the game cannot be changed. You can't make 5 balls a walk in your house. It's more akin to my room my rules. Kids get some freedom but ultimately they fall under the rule of their parents. Similarly the leagues fall under the law of the game itself. It's illogical to do otherwise and still call it the same.

You got all wordy and nerdy to try to describe a "franchise"? That's your defense that each team is a franchise?

 

[brett05]

You got all wordy and nerdy to try to describe a "franchise"? That's your defense that each team is a franchise?

Step back a bit and try and keep this civil.

Define franchise

 

[Parade_Rain]

Step back a bit and try and keep this civil.

Define franchise

 

[beckdawg]

I'm gonna throw this out, if you sort the DH's based on fangraphs' offensive value they look like this

1 Nelson Cruz .302/.369/.566
2 Edwin Encarnacion .277/.372/.557
3 David Ortiz .273/.360/.553
4 Jose Abreu .290/.347/.502
5 Alex Rodriguez .250/.356/.486
6 Kendrys Morales .290/.362/.485
7 Prince Fielder .305/.378/.463
8 Albert Pujols .244/.307/.480
9 C.J. Cron .262/.300/.439
10 Jimmy Paredes .275/.310/.416
11 David Murphy .283/.318/.421
12 Evan Gattis .246/.285/.463
13 Billy Butler .251/.323/.390
14 Adam LaRoche .207/.293/.340
15 Victor Martinez .245/.301/.366

Long story short of the 15 DH's there's 7 or 8 who are more than an average hitter. The NL average for runs/g last season was 4.11. The AL average was 4.39. I'd argue that while adding a DH in the NL might propel runs up slightly it might have the opposite effect on the DH as clearly there's not a ton of great DH's out there. It very well might dry up what little talent is there. NL teams are shopping for different kinds of position players and that diversity in my opinion is a good thing. That's the down side of uniformity.

Ultimately, I just don't see who's supposedly pushing this so hard it's inevitable. I already outline earlier why I thought the argument that the players are pushing it is wrong. I don't see how their going to get more money with it. I mean Billy Butler for example is making around $12 mil. Austin Jackson hasn't signed yet but he's a bit of a tweener between starter and good back up and fangraphs projects him to get around $10 mil/season. And if we're being honest here, the majority of the guys above are old players on big contracts. It's not that teams were paying them huge to DH. It's that they paid them huge when they still could play a position and now are relegated to DH because they are old. As for the owners, I don't really see any motivation for them either. I suppose you could argue pitchers getting hurt batting but that's pretty flimsy because they still can get hurt fielding their position and how many pitchers actually get hurt batting?

That's why I think this is just the same debate people have been having for over 50 years. And the thing is I'd say over 60% of the people here who by in large are cubs fans have said they don't really want the DH though some have said they thought it was coming regardless. I'd wager most fans of NL teams are going to say the same thing. So why force it down fans throats who seemingly don't want it? That's why I feel like you have to have a blatantly obvious reason to do it rather than the wishy washy reasons people will give.

 

[brett05]

Ah, PR being PR....:smh:

 

[brett05]

beckdawg,
Why do you say over 50 years when the DH didn;t start until 73?

 

[beckdawg]

beckdawg,
Why do you say over 50 years when the DH didn;t start until 73?

Was thinking it was more in the 60's/50's but either way it's kinda splitting hairs as that's 43 years.

 

[brett05]

Was thinking it was more in the 60's/50's but either way it's kinda splitting hairs as that's 43 years.

Well, 73 it started, but the debate may not have started for some time after. But I agree, the debate has been there for some time.

 

[DanTown]

I'm gonna throw this out, if you sort the DH's based on fangraphs' offensive value they look like this

1 Nelson Cruz .302/.369/.566
2 Edwin Encarnacion .277/.372/.557
3 David Ortiz .273/.360/.553
4 Jose Abreu .290/.347/.502
5 Alex Rodriguez .250/.356/.486
6 Kendrys Morales .290/.362/.485
7 Prince Fielder .305/.378/.463
8 Albert Pujols .244/.307/.480
9 C.J. Cron .262/.300/.439
10 Jimmy Paredes .275/.310/.416
11 David Murphy .283/.318/.421
12 Evan Gattis .246/.285/.463
13 Billy Butler .251/.323/.390
14 Adam LaRoche .207/.293/.340
15 Victor Martinez .245/.301/.366

Long story short of the 15 DH's there's 7 or 8 who are more than an average hitter. The NL average for runs/g last season was 4.11. The AL average was 4.39. I'd argue that while adding a DH in the NL might propel runs up slightly it might have the opposite effect on the DH as clearly there's not a ton of great DH's out there. It very well might dry up what little talent is there. NL teams are shopping for different kinds of position players and that diversity in my opinion is a good thing. That's the down side of uniformity.

Ultimately, I just don't see who's supposedly pushing this so hard it's inevitable. I already outline earlier why I thought the argument that the players are pushing it is wrong. I don't see how their going to get more money with it. I mean Billy Butler for example is making around $12 mil. Austin Jackson hasn't signed yet but he's a bit of a tweener between starter and good back up and fangraphs projects him to get around $10 mil/season. And if we're being honest here, the majority of the guys above are old players on big contracts. It's not that teams were paying them huge to DH. It's that they paid them huge when they still could play a position and now are relegated to DH because they are old. As for the owners, I don't really see any motivation for them either. I suppose you could argue pitchers getting hurt batting but that's pretty flimsy because they still can get hurt fielding their position and how many pitchers actually get hurt batting?

That's why I think this is just the same debate people have been having for over 50 years. And the thing is I'd say over 60% of the people here who by in large are cubs fans have said they don't really want the DH though some have said they thought it was coming regardless. I'd wager most fans of NL teams are going to say the same thing. So why force it down fans throats who seemingly don't want it? That's why I feel like you have to have a blatantly obvious reason to do it rather than the wishy washy reasons people will give.

I think unless you have an Ortiz level hitter, I'd rather just have a deep roster and alternate guys in and out of the DH spot based on rest, etc.

The reason for the DH to me isn't what I prefer to see it's that I think it's incredibly stupid to have a massive rule in one league and not the other. Add in small other reasons (most minor leagues use a DH, player safety, etc) then it makes sense to me to just normalize baseball and give teams a DH.

I also think that baseball should switch from 25 man rosters to what hockey has which is like 28 man roster with 3 floating spots. Sometimes a guy is hurt and needs 5-7 days off but a team has to carry his roster spot. Also, not sure why yesterday and tomorrow's SP need to be on the active roster. I think teams with depth should be able to use that depth more than they have.

 

[czman]

I think unless you have an Ortiz level hitter, I'd rather just have a deep roster and alternate guys in and out of the DH spot based on rest, etc.

The reason for the DH to me isn't what I prefer to see it's that I think it's incredibly stupid to have a massive rule in one league and not the other. Add in small other reasons (most minor leagues use a DH, player safety, etc) then it makes sense to me to just normalize baseball and give teams a DH.

I also think that baseball should switch from 25 man rosters to what hockey has which is like 28 man roster with 3 floating spots. Sometimes a guy is hurt and needs 5-7 days off but a team has to carry his roster spot. Also, not sure why yesterday and tomorrow's SP need to be on the active roster. I think teams with depth should be able to use that depth more than they have.

You want games to be 6 hours long. Adding more roster spots is adding more pitching changes. That is all you will get.

I would like to see inter league play disappear and leave the DH rules as they are. No reason to make 5 rule changes. The only way adding more players to the roster makes sense is if you limit the pitchers in an inning. If you add the DH you are already going to be increasing the pitching changes.

Games are long enough. Leave it alone.

 

[Diehardfan]

Honestly, eliminating interleague play would be my solution as well but it helps sell merchandise in cities it's played in appealing to fans of say the Reds in Kansas City where they would otherwise never play. I would have honestly never thought of that until a friend of mine in marketing pointed it out to me a couple of years ago an showed me some numbers. With the availability of just about anything you want on the web the concept is bizarre to me but apparently many people are too ADD to think of their teams until they come to their hometown. Because of that his opinion, and I tend to share it now, is that interleague will never go away. If it's not then I'd like to see the same rules. I'm not at all an advocate for the DH, in fact I was vehemently opposed until recently, but if it is inevitable I would just as soon it be implemented at a time that the Cubs can take advantage of it. If it's not implemented ever I'm not going to be upset. I just think it's odd to have a sport with two different sets of rules.

I said pretty much the same thing earlier in this thread. No other major sport does. Before inter-league play it never seemed to be that big of a deal to me but now I'm seeing it in a different light...both leagues are playing for the same championship. The WS is the only championship where teams got there by playing a different set of rules. Not the Super Bowl, the Stanley Cup, NBA Finals....none of them, just MLB.