Red Mosquito

Green Habit wrote:I'm hearing a lot of people rage about the DH (or lack thereof) from this Adam Wainwright injury. Max Scherzer had an interesting perception:

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon ... th-leagues

Personally, I like the DH but that's only because I root for an AL team that has one of the most awesome DHs. But I don't really like to make a strong point about it, though--especially when so many other people do like to make strong points.

2 of the top pitchers in the NL would definitely be against this...
Kershaw and Greinke LOVE to hit

I find the NL game a lot more fun to watch too because of the pitchers hitting / double switching / how you pitch to the 8 hitter when the pitchers on deck and what not. Paul Molitor was my all time fav growing up, and it def helped his career, but i wouldnt mind getting rid of the DH all together.

It'd be nice if they all played by the same rules, that's for sure.

cutuphalfdead wrote:It'd be nice if they all played by the same rules, that's for sure.

Agreed. I'd rather they do away with it, but making them the same is more important.

I'm all for the "purity of the game," and I felt a lot differently a few years ago. But I find nothing particularly exciting about knowing a rally is going to get cut short because the pitcher is due up, or about watching a pitcher flail helplessly (or worse, have his knees buckle) at 3 straight breaking balls.

Chris_H_2 wrote:I'm all for the "purity of the game," and I felt a lot differently a few years ago. But I find nothing particularly exciting about knowing a rally is going to get cut short because the pitcher is due up, or about watching a pitcher flail helplessly (or worse, have his knees buckle) at 3 straight breaking balls.

I enjoy shouting "Yeah! How do you like it?" at my TV.

Chris_H_2 wrote:I'm all for the "purity of the game," and I felt a lot differently a few years ago. But I find nothing particularly exciting about knowing a rally is going to get cut short because the pitcher is due up, or about watching a pitcher flail helplessly (or worse, have his knees buckle) at 3 straight breaking balls.

This is kind of where I stand, too. I'm really big on the historical aspect of baseball and I used to be really slow to embrace change of any kind, but what do you gain by watching a pitcher hit? I guess you get the odd chance to cheer for something unexpected. Otherwise, you get to watch a player forced to do something he's really, really bad at.

People I talk to about this often bring up Greinke and Zambrano and Hampton as reasons to get rid of the DH, but to me that's just more reason to use it more: if these guys are viewed as offensive powerhouses among pitchers over the last couple decades, what does it say about pitchers overall that Hampton's career batting line is nearly identical to Pokey Reese? Or that Greinke has been slightly worse than the worst Molina brother?

Here's a stat for you: last year, 46.78% of plate appearances by pitchers resulted in either a strikeout or a sac bunt. That seems like a whole lot of boring to put up with in order to get a little extra strategy late in games.

I've been going to MLB games since I was about five. My dad was a Phillies fan, my grandpa was an Orioles fan, and my uncle was a Pirates fan. I remember at a very young age enjoying the Orioles more because I didn't have to watch the pitcher bat.

philpritchard wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:I'm all for the "purity of the game," and I felt a lot differently a few years ago. But I find nothing particularly exciting about knowing a rally is going to get cut short because the pitcher is due up, or about watching a pitcher flail helplessly (or worse, have his knees buckle) at 3 straight breaking balls.

This is kind of where I stand, too. I'm really big on the historical aspect of baseball and I used to be really slow to embrace change of any kind, but what do you gain by watching a pitcher hit? I guess you get the odd chance to cheer for something unexpected. Otherwise, you get to watch a player forced to do something he's really, really bad at.

People I talk to about this often bring up Greinke and Zambrano and Hampton as reasons to get rid of the DH, but to me that's just more reason to use it more: if these guys are viewed as offensive powerhouses among pitchers over the last couple decades, what does it say about pitchers overall that Hampton's career batting line is nearly identical to Pokey Reese? Or that Greinke has been slightly worse than the worst Molina brother?

Here's a stat for you: last year, 46.78% of plate appearances by pitchers resulted in either a strikeout or a sac bunt. That seems like a whole lot of boring to put up with in order to get a little extra strategy late in games.

Interesting stat and makes me rethink a bit. Source?

Fuck You Jobu wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:I'm all for the "purity of the game," and I felt a lot differently a few years ago. But I find nothing particularly exciting about knowing a rally is going to get cut short because the pitcher is due up, or about watching a pitcher flail helplessly (or worse, have his knees buckle) at 3 straight breaking balls.

This is kind of where I stand, too. I'm really big on the historical aspect of baseball and I used to be really slow to embrace change of any kind, but what do you gain by watching a pitcher hit? I guess you get the odd chance to cheer for something unexpected. Otherwise, you get to watch a player forced to do something he's really, really bad at.

People I talk to about this often bring up Greinke and Zambrano and Hampton as reasons to get rid of the DH, but to me that's just more reason to use it more: if these guys are viewed as offensive powerhouses among pitchers over the last couple decades, what does it say about pitchers overall that Hampton's career batting line is nearly identical to Pokey Reese? Or that Greinke has been slightly worse than the worst Molina brother?

Here's a stat for you: last year, 46.78% of plate appearances by pitchers resulted in either a strikeout or a sac bunt. That seems like a whole lot of boring to put up with in order to get a little extra strategy late in games.

Interesting stat and makes me rethink a bit. Source?

Fangraphs + math. I was just looking around at the pitching stats, saw the crazy strikeout rate (36.6%) and wondered how often pitchers bunted (10.18%, apparently).

Green Habit wrote:I'm hearing a lot of people rage about the DH (or lack thereof) from this Adam Wainwright injury. Max Scherzer had an interesting perception:

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/writer/jon ... th-leagues

Personally, I like the DH but that's only because I root for an AL team that has one of the most awesome DHs. But I don't really like to make a strong point about it, though--especially when so many other people do like to make strong points.

The irony of all this so-called "rage" is that Adam Wainwright himself is almost certainly against the DH, and loves to hit. I doubt he would want his own injury used as an example of why the NL needs the DH. It doesn't.

Most NL baseball fans would rather keep things the way they are. I am one of them.

matt reeder wrote:The irony of all this so-called "rage" is that Adam Wainwright himself is almost certainly against the DH, and loves to hit. I doubt he would want his own injury used as an example of why the NL needs the DH. It doesn't.

Most NL baseball fans would rather keep things the way they are. I am one of them.

I would guess that most pitchers enjoy hitting. The all still really, really suck at it (including Wainwright).

philpritchard wrote:

matt reeder wrote:The irony of all this so-called "rage" is that Adam Wainwright himself is almost certainly against the DH, and loves to hit. I doubt he would want his own injury used as an example of why the NL needs the DH. It doesn't.

Most NL baseball fans would rather keep things the way they are. I am one of them.

I would guess that most pitchers enjoy hitting. The all still really, really suck at it (including Wainwright).

Eh, Wainwright's not too bad. The argument for the DH boils down to "pitchers suck, we should replace them with somebody who doesn't." A lot of people would rather see a pitcher hit than see somebody hit who doesn't play the field. You won't convince them AL baseball is superior, just like I can't convince AL baseball fans that NL baseball is superior.

matt reeder wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

matt reeder wrote:The irony of all this so-called "rage" is that Adam Wainwright himself is almost certainly against the DH, and loves to hit. I doubt he would want his own injury used as an example of why the NL needs the DH. It doesn't.

Most NL baseball fans would rather keep things the way they are. I am one of them.

I would guess that most pitchers enjoy hitting. The all still really, really suck at it (including Wainwright).

Eh, Wainwright's not too bad. The argument for the DH boils down to "pitchers suck, we should replace them with somebody who doesn't." A lot of people would rather see a pitcher hit than see somebody hit who doesn't play the field. You won't convince them AL baseball is superior, just like I can't convince AL baseball fans that NL baseball is superior.

I'm a fan of an AL team, but I don't think that's why I like having a DH. I like having a DH because I like watching players who are good at things do those things. And viewing Wainwright as "not bad" is part of the problem, to me. Yes, compared to other pitchers, he's ok. But only one qualified hitter in the last 115 years has had a worse wOBA than Wainwright's career numbers. He's a terrible hitter unless you compare him to a group of really, really terrible hitters. That's like saying David Ortiz is a decent shortstop when compared to a group of six-year-olds.

To be honest, I actually don't mind the idea that there are different rules in each league. I've watched it that way my whole life, so it's not a big deal to me. I just think that, 90% of the time, watching pitchers hit sucks.

philpritchard wrote:

matt reeder wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

matt reeder wrote:The irony of all this so-called "rage" is that Adam Wainwright himself is almost certainly against the DH, and loves to hit. I doubt he would want his own injury used as an example of why the NL needs the DH. It doesn't.

Most NL baseball fans would rather keep things the way they are. I am one of them.

I would guess that most pitchers enjoy hitting. The all still really, really suck at it (including Wainwright).

Eh, Wainwright's not too bad. The argument for the DH boils down to "pitchers suck, we should replace them with somebody who doesn't." A lot of people would rather see a pitcher hit than see somebody hit who doesn't play the field. You won't convince them AL baseball is superior, just like I can't convince AL baseball fans that NL baseball is superior.

I'm a fan of an AL team, but I don't think that's why I like having a DH. I like having a DH because I like watching players who are good at things do those things. And viewing Wainwright as "not bad" is part of the problem, to me. Yes, compared to other pitchers, he's ok. But only one qualified hitter in the last 115 years has had a worse wOBA than Wainwright's career numbers. He's a terrible hitter unless you compare him to a group of really, really terrible hitters. That's like saying David Ortiz is a decent shortstop when compared to a group of six-year-olds.

To be honest, I actually don't mind the idea that there are different rules in each league. I've watched it that way my whole life, so it's not a big deal to me. I just think that, 90% of the time, watching pitchers hit sucks.

Same, I like that the leagues have different rules and I hope it stays that way. Sure, it's unfair to AL teams in Interleague play and the WS, but whatever.

philpritchard wrote:To be honest, I actually don't mind the idea that there are different rules in each league. I've watched it that way my whole life, so it's not a big deal to me. I just think that, 90% of the time, watching pitchers hit sucks.

If you think about it, there are different rules in every game on any given night. What other major sport has rules that depend on where the teams are playing? You can be in Comerica and have to hit a baseball 440 feet to dead center for a home run, and the next night be in US Cellular Field and only to swing a 60-degree wedge at 25% to hit a ball out to center.

Chris_H_2 wrote:

philpritchard wrote:To be honest, I actually don't mind the idea that there are different rules in each league. I've watched it that way my whole life, so it's not a big deal to me. I just think that, 90% of the time, watching pitchers hit sucks.

If you think about it, there are different rules in every game on any given night. What other major sport has rules that depend on where the teams are playing? You can be in Comerica and have to hit a baseball 440 feet to dead center for a home run, and the next night be in US Cellular Field and only to swing a 60-degree wedge at 25% to hit a ball out to center.

The beauty of baseball.

numbers wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

philpritchard wrote:To be honest, I actually don't mind the idea that there are different rules in each league. I've watched it that way my whole life, so it's not a big deal to me. I just think that, 90% of the time, watching pitchers hit sucks.

If you think about it, there are different rules in every game on any given night. What other major sport has rules that depend on where the teams are playing? You can be in Comerica and have to hit a baseball 440 feet to dead center for a home run, and the next night be in US Cellular Field and only to swing a 60-degree wedge at 25% to hit a ball out to center.

The beauty of baseball.

You can have that and still have the positional breakdown still be uniform among all 30 teams.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

numbers wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

philpritchard wrote:To be honest, I actually don't mind the idea that there are different rules in each league. I've watched it that way my whole life, so it's not a big deal to me. I just think that, 90% of the time, watching pitchers hit sucks.

If you think about it, there are different rules in every game on any given night. What other major sport has rules that depend on where the teams are playing? You can be in Comerica and have to hit a baseball 440 feet to dead center for a home run, and the next night be in US Cellular Field and only to swing a 60-degree wedge at 25% to hit a ball out to center.

The beauty of baseball.

You can have that and still have the positional breakdown still be uniform among all 30 teams.

Which is why it makes sense to abolish the DH.

matt reeder wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:

numbers wrote:

Chris_H_2 wrote:

philpritchard wrote:To be honest, I actually don't mind the idea that there are different rules in each league. I've watched it that way my whole life, so it's not a big deal to me. I just think that, 90% of the time, watching pitchers hit sucks.

If you think about it, there are different rules in every game on any given night. What other major sport has rules that depend on where the teams are playing? You can be in Comerica and have to hit a baseball 440 feet to dead center for a home run, and the next night be in US Cellular Field and only to swing a 60-degree wedge at 25% to hit a ball out to center.

The beauty of baseball.

You can have that and still have the positional breakdown still be uniform among all 30 teams.

Which is why it makes sense to abolish the DH.

I'll take either rule, as long as it's consistent.

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

matt reeder wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

matt reeder wrote:The irony of all this so-called "rage" is that Adam Wainwright himself is almost certainly against the DH, and loves to hit. I doubt he would want his own injury used as an example of why the NL needs the DH. It doesn't.

Most NL baseball fans would rather keep things the way they are. I am one of them.

I would guess that most pitchers enjoy hitting. The all still really, really suck at it (including Wainwright).

Eh, Wainwright's not too bad. The argument for the DH boils down to "pitchers suck, we should replace them with somebody who doesn't." A lot of people would rather see a pitcher hit than see somebody hit who doesn't play the field. You won't convince them AL baseball is superior, just like I can't convince AL baseball fans that NL baseball is superior.

I'm a fan of an AL team, but I don't think that's why I like having a DH. I like having a DH because I like watching players who are good at things do those things. And viewing Wainwright as "not bad" is part of the problem, to me. Yes, compared to other pitchers, he's ok. But only one qualified hitter in the last 115 years has had a worse wOBA than Wainwright's career numbers. He's a terrible hitter unless you compare him to a group of really, really terrible hitters. That's like saying David Ortiz is a decent shortstop when compared to a group of six-year-olds.

To be honest, I actually don't mind the idea that there are different rules in each league. I've watched it that way my whole life, so it's not a big deal to me. I just think that, 90% of the time, watching pitchers hit sucks.

Same, I like that the leagues have different rules and I hope it stays that way. Sure, it's unfair to AL teams in Interleague play and the WS, but whatever.

the AL usually dominates interleague, the thinking, is because pitchers suck so bad anyway, theres no NL advantage in having the pitchers hit when the other teams pitcher has to hit as well, because a pitcher who hits .190 isnt much better than one whos never hit since high school. And AL clubs tend to go out and get a good DH, where NL clubs tend to just let one of their everyday starters get a day off from the field, put them at DH and start a reserve.