Quote:
Originally Posted by alnorth
yes. Yes it is.
A few years ago, I was on that "get rid of the DH" bandwagon, bemoaning the lack of "strategy" etc.
I've changed my mind, I am now a fan of American League baseball, rather than just baseball. If the Royals switched leagues, my interest would decrease.
At the college level and below, the pitcher should hit, because even though he's not as good, he can still put in a credible effort at the plate. At the MLB level, the pitcher is about as effective as some handcuffed guy in a gimp suit. Sure, we have a couple "hitting pitchers" in the NL, but mostly you are hoping for a successful bunt, or if he has to swing, then a miracle.
It is not fun to watch an inning get shut down because with 2 outs they walk the bases loaded in the 2nd inning to get to the pitcher and shut down the threat with a K. I'm also not excited about a double-switch. The "strategy" there is to move that gimp-spot elsewhere in your batting order so you have 8 good hitters in front of him. The bench should be used for defense to hold the lead, speed if a slow tying runner is on, pinch-hitting an all-glove starter late when behind, or to give a guy a day off. You want to play every day, beat the guy in front of you.
If I were emperor of baseball, I'd put the DH in the NL, and tell the NL fans to stuff it when they complain. After 10+ years they'll come around.
|
Brilliantly stated! The DH is not going anywhere. Eventually, NL fans will have to bite the bullet on this.
Stubbornly insisting that "Real" baseball is baseball sans DH is the same as stubbornly insisting that "Real" basketball is basketball sans the 3-point line, the shot clock, and the legal ability to dunk the ball, or football sans the forward pass.