Actually I had become indifferent to the DH issue some time around the new millenium. I'd watched enough post-season baseball in AL parks and seen enough live baseball (amateur and minors) to stop caring. Good baseball is good baseball, whether it is in Korea or Mexico or Cincinnati. The nail in the coffin for me was the 2010 World Series. My beloved San Francisco Giants kicked ass in an AL park in Texas and became champions for the first time. They did it again in 2012 and 2014, winning with aplomb under DH-rules in AL parks. I particularly remember Mike Morse--a perfect DH--making clutch contributions to the Giants remarkable Game 7 win on the road in Kansas City. Those were all great ballgames and were not in any way hurt by the presence of the designated hitter.
Believe me, I know all the arguments. After all, there has been a DH since 1973. Did I mention that? 1973. We've covered that ground, man. You've all seen the graphs:
wRC+ is one of those fancy-pants stats the saber-istas love, and I admit to being seduced by it, but you can just substitute "hitting performance" for the y-axis. It ain't pretty. We've been fortunate to enjoy the PEAK of pitcher hitting these last many years, namely Madison Bumgarner. His .188/.248/.349 over his last 336 PA (2015-2019) is right up there with the always stalwart Zack Greinke's .231/.258/.339 in the same span (334 PA), and super stud Jacob deGrom's .184/.255/.234 (337 PA). The Bumbino has 'em all beat with 13 long balls in the last five seasons (five in 2015!) versus only five and three respectively for the other guys. Fun fact: Bumgarner is 0-for-27 with 14 whiffs in the post-season.
And I will certainly miss Bum. He is fun to watch--all that cowpoke orneriness and snot snortin' is a kick (except when he starts fights with Yasiel Puig), not to mention the awesome performances. It will be a shame to silence his bat. After all, a .200 average may not be much but it is something. It is not .000! Having a one-in-five chance for a hit ain't that bad, really. But that's the BEST a pitcher will hit. Most won't come close to a .200 batting average.
We remember great moments at the plate by pitchers because they are rare. Those great moments hide the fact that pitchers mostly stink at hitting. Of course, that's why we get so excited! I also think the "strategy" argument is a tired one. Most of the time that a manager makes a pitching change there is little or no strategy in the sense that the decisions are obvious. Every once in a while he has to juggle some tough odds, but double-switches and all that don't require a Magnus Carlsen brain. Knowing when to pull your starter and how to get the best bullpen matchups late in the game are much more important than occasional "strategic" moves.
Ultimately the players want the DH and that is the deciding factor. What if the adoption of the universal DH encourages the growth of the two-way player? Is Shohei Otani a trailblazer? We already know that Farhan Zaidi likes positional flexibility and we've seen the Dodgers feature several players who play at different spots. That seems like a genuine trend to me. Versatility used to be the kiss of death for players--if you wanted to establish yourself you had to settle on a position. The Giants are making it clear they want the opposite from their young athletes. The more you can do on a field the better your chances of making the bigs. I guess what I'm saying is fear not the DH. In a few years you'll hardly miss it.
Obviously I'm here at home with no real baseball to write about. I hope you'll forgive my brain dump! Tell me what you think in the comments--please. Life, the universe, baseball, the DH, whatever! Let yourselves go!
--M.C.
13 comments:
Phillies just cancelled spring training. Covid hit the team.
I saw that. Even if MLB and the PA reach an agreement there may not be any baseball.
All arguments you make are valid but I like being able to shuttle the lineup with pitching changes, just like they did with the situations you made.
If I wanted that style of baseball I'd have been an American league fan for 50+ years.
The DH is actually optional! A pitcher can bat in an AL lineup just like an NL lineup. If you had a good-hitting pitcher . . .
Also, you can PH or PR for the DH. You can move him on to the field (in which case you lose the DH and the P has to bat). So there are still plenty of lineup-juggling possibilities.
You can still "double-switch" if you want to get a better defender in at a spot, or a L-R matchup later. The DH rule does not prevent managers from substituting players or platooning or any of the things that managers do!
The biggest change is there are fewer sacrifice bunts. Pitchers are poor hitters so asking them to bunt is usually a good strategy. When you have a real hitter the bunt choice becomes less optimal. You see more bunting for base hits and fewer sacrifices which in my mind makes for better baseball. Playing for one run is fine in certain situations (like late in close games at home) but going for the big inning ("crooked numbers") is not only more exciting for the fans but better for the team's chances to win.
A pitching-dominated team (one good at run-suppression) will still play "small ball" on occasion because they will likely be in a lot of close, low-scoring games. So if you like old-school NL-style baseball root for the teams with the best pitchers!
The DH is an abomination. Your younger self was right. Simply having viewed Giants victories under AL rules does not change that. The problem is that the lineup under a DH doesn't much matter. If you watch AL games (not Giants games where you hang on every at bat, but a game where you are not so invested in every player) then it is hard to tell where you are in the line-up. Top of the order? Seventh? What difference does it make? Less bunting, too, makes baseball less interesting.
Rob Manfred, Making the Game Worse, Little by Little, Since 2015
In other words, they have good hitters up and down the lineup? When I was a kid you could have Hal Lanier on your team because he played SS. You could have a poor hitter at C and CF and even 2B. But then guys like Barry Larkin came around and proved that a skilled defender at a premium position could also hit.
You have to "hit your weight" in today's game, which is better. No more 6-7-8 automatic outs. There were a lot more "easy innings" in the old days.
Rickey Henderson played almost his whole career in the AL and always led off. So I don't understand--lead-off hitters still lead off! Giancarlo Stanton hits 3rd or 4th whether he hits in an NL or an AL lineup. I never had any problem keeping track of nine guys, fer chrissakes. You still want your best hitters at the top and the weakest hitters at the bottom of the lineup. The #9 guy will just hit .250 instead of .121 (Matt Cain's career average) or something worse.
My argument should not be taken as a defense of Manfred, who comes across as a real sleaze in my mind. The DH is not "his idea." The players are universally in favor of the DH, as you would expect.
The DH is a grotesque abomination. Typical AL ball is far less interesting than typical NL ball. If Pitchers had to hit throughout their careers, they'd be better at it - they are top Athletes.
And, just wondering ... where are you reading that the Players are universally in favor of the DH?
The PA has consistently stated over the years in negotiations that they support the DH. Perhaps it is more accurate to say they are not opposed to it. It is not something that will hang up an agreement as there is no "passion" in the argument, it is just an aesthetic preference. NL pitchers always say they like to hit, and who can blame them for that, but they aren't going to scuttle negotiations over it. Especially when they have a whole bunch of guys in the union who would benefit from a universal DH.
It makes sense--more jobs for hitters. In today's game the 30-year old FA is a doomed species. But if he can still rake he can get a job as a DH.
"If pitchers practiced" is pointless. They don't. They stop hitting in amateur ball! You aren't going to have two different development pathways, one for "NL-pitchers" and one for "All other pitchers in all other baseball leagues in the world." If you want pitchers to hit then you have to get rid of the DH at every level. Good luck with that.
And, exactly, what is the "abomination"? And how does it interfere with your enjoyment of the game? I frankly don't notice it when I watch amateur ball or minor league ball or AL ball. You still have pitch and hit and run and throw and etc. How is the game reduced by adding a more skilled player and reducing the impact of a less skilled player?
If you look at the graph I posted you can see that pitchers' hitting was plunging in quality LONG before the DH rule. In fact, that was much of the reason FOR the rule, that pitchers had stopped being hitters. Sandy Koufax' career line was. 097/.145/.116 and no one cared because he was the Left Arm of God. By comparison Juan Marichal was a great hitter: .165/.191/.202!
Think about all the IBBs that #8 hitters have been issued over the years in order to get an "automatic out" from the pitcher. Yuck. I won't miss that.
More three true outcomes types! A team full of Rob Deers. I can't wait.
TTO is the rage in ALL of baseball, the NL is not exempt.
Things go in and out of fashion. Soon the spray hitter will make a comeback because he can beat the shift. You have to read this FanGraphs piece about Brandon Belt bunting to beat the shift. Good stuff! I agree with the author that bunting for a hit is a very exciting play. I think more players are going to "fight back" against the shift by being creative. Putting the ball in play will become the new Moneyball tactic, and the non-TTO guys will be valuable again. But that's an aside.
The main point is this:
We are taking about ONE hitter. You still have to have SS, CF, 3B, etc. etc. etc. And wasn't the whole excitement about MadBum as a hitter is that he hit dingers? If I recall, he was not any better than any other pitcher at bunting, moving runners over, executing the butcher-boy play, or getting RBI basehits. No, it was his HOMERS. MadBum had one thought as a hitter. He whiffed 255 times in 679 PA which is almost 38%. That's well past Rob Deer territory.
We've seen plenty of great all-around players in the AL over the years. The NL does NOT have any advantage there! The DH does not mean teams will dump Junior Griffey types in favor of Ryan Howard types. Good lord, every team still wants five-tool players like Mookie Betts and Mike Trout!!
When we were kids if a player got a hit off guys like Don Drysdale or Bob Gibson those pitchers would retaliate and deliberately throw at the hitter in his next PA. This was considered a natural part of the game and those pitchers were celebrated for their manliness. Intimidation, they called it. Nowadays that behavior is bigtime assholiness! If some pitcher is pissed that he gave up a hit then he should just fucking pitch better next time!! (Hello, Hunter Strickland.) I like baseball better when pitchers throw at the strike zone and not at someone's head or ass or foot or whatever.
Times change. Rules of play evolve.
We will also be subject to the silly 3-batter rule for relievers. It is a silly rule because it accomplishes nothing. It will not speed up the game, which is supposedly why the rule was invented. It will not stop managers from making pitching changes. (I think it is Bruce Bochy's fault that the rule came about. He was just too good at those multi-pitcher innings!) The DH rule change was done to add offense. Good or bad, it worked. More runs are scored in the AL. If you make a change, it should accomplish what you want. I suspect the three-batter rule will go away as it won't provide any advantage. The DH gives teams flexibility.
The biggest problem in the game is NOT the DH by any means. It is the new economics. Guys hit their peak before they become free agents and teams are no longer willing to invest in a declining athlete when they can plug in a 23-year old. The veteran ballplayer will have to be an All-Star in order to stick around after his 30th birthday. A guy like Kevin Pillar is a perfect example. He was cut loose mostly because he was due for a BIG pay raise. He's still a major-league quality player, but now his experience works against him. He has to take a big cut to stay on a roster. Players should earn what they are worth (universal free agency) BEFORE they decline!
Post a Comment