Some possible MLB Rule Changes

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

That's the crux of it. Whether or not one likes the DH is a matter of personal taste. I'm never going to say someone is wrong for having a differing opinion on the matter.

Nor would I. Preferences don't need to be defended, unlike statements some make like, "pitchers should have to play the whole game just like all the other players", or something equally asinine. I know you didn't say this, but it's a common argument anti-DHers use.

[Clovidequano Dovatha]

I highly doubt that hitters have donkeys as a general rule, or that pitchers do too. And I have never really understood why people always seem to want to laugh their arms or ankles off, either, for that matter. CD out.

[mgom27]

DH and Pitcher in same Lineup,No Trade Deadline so Trades all year round,Trades at Draft,Draft like at site of NHL Draft so Teams can come up announce picks/GM can talk Trades/Draft also on ESPN and so on.

[grall1126]

I read most of the posts and thought.

Okay, playing OOTP19 and less to do with a dh lineup than with a National league lineup. For me, I am a National league fan, just more strategy on this side.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

Those guys were gifted, talented, and very rare exceptions. For every one pitcher who was also able to hit, there were hundreds more playing at the same time who couldn't.

So they never had to work at it is what you're saying.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

.....when even you seem to accept that they will never become better hitters because they will never work at it.......

Never said this. Never said "they will never work at it." I said some do work at it. I said most are never required to work at it. But unless age is a factor, I think people will always improve if they practice at just about anything in life.

So, with all due respect, supporting the idea that pitchers must be required to hit because they could become better hitters if they only worked at it is equally pointless.

Your theory, which you are entitled to.

Now that we’ve firmly established this,

Really?

what’s the point of sending a hitter we know is incompetent to the plate in a live game, when there are other competent hitters on the roster we could send to the plate instead?

Because we are all human beings, all imperfect, and the weaknesses & strengths is what makes team competition great. Do you want the strong player or the fast player? Do you want the super athlete or the smart one? The young phenom or the steady veteran? Defensive player or offensive one? Lefty or righty? Walk a man into scoring position to face the weak hitter or try to get the one at the plate out now? The infinite numbers of potential matchups and strategies is what makes sports worth talking about.


You seem to be of the opinion that the best 8 hitters on the team always start. Why not have the DH for the defense 1st SS or C? Let's have 4 DH's per game.

[Curve Ball Dave]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

So they never had to work at it is what you're saying.

They worked the same at hitting as the other pitchers. These guys happened to have more talent for hitting.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

They worked the same at hitting as the other pitchers. These guys happened to have more talent for hitting.

But you said they don't have the time to work to become competent hitters.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

But you said they don't have the time to work to become competent hitters.

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

They worked the same at hitting as the other pitchers. These guys happened to have more talent for hitting.

He answered your question before you even asked it. They work the same amount of time as other pitchers (little to not at all), but they can hit better because they have more talent for hitting than other pitchers. Just like some batters have better hands and eyes at the plate than other batters, some pitchers have better hands and eyes at the plate than other pitchers.

[Curve Ball Dave]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

He answered your question before you even asked it. They work the same amount of time as other pitchers (little to not at all), but they can hit better because they have more talent for hitting than other pitchers. Just like some batters have better hands and eyes at the plate than other batters, some pitchers have better hands and eyes at the plate than other pitchers.

^

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Never said this. Never said "they will never work at it." I said some do work at it. I said most are never required to work at it. But unless age is a factor, I think people will always improve if they practice at just about anything in life.

I never said you said they never will work at it. I said you seem to accept they will never work at it. Those are not equivalent statements. I said that because that's how I interpreted your earlier replies to my posts. If I got that wrong, then sorry.

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Because we are all human beings, all imperfect, and the weaknesses & strengths is what makes team competition great. Do you want the strong player or the fast player? Do you want the super athlete or the smart one? The young phenom or the steady veteran? Defensive player or offensive one? Lefty or righty? Walk a man into scoring position to face the weak hitter or try to get the one at the plate out now? The infinite numbers of potential matchups and strategies is what makes sports worth talking about.

I'm not talking about super athletes. I'm talking about competence at hitting, and I have been very clear about that.

I have already agreed with you that people can get better at something they work at. It is also an objective fact that practically all pitchers are incompetent major league hitters, and there's a good reason for this. Because pitchers are never hired for their bats and never will be, they are not required to work at their hitting; and because they are not required to work at their hitting, they never will work at their hitting; and because they never will work at their hitting, they will continue to be incompetent at the plate. This concept will always be in force whether or not you accept it.

It's OK to want to continue seeing this incompetence at the plate because you prefer it. Perfectly defensible, and no one can or should argue you out of the preference. But to continue to maintain a preference for pitchers hitting because of a bullshirt reason like, pitchers should be required to hit because they could be good at it if only they worked at it, knowing that they never will, is pointless. And I mean objectively pointless, irrespective of my opinion.

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

You seem to be of the opinion that the best 8 hitters on the team always start. Why not have the DH for the defense 1st SS or C? Let's have 4 DH's per game.

Slippery slope is never a good debate tactic, particularly since I already addressed this exact point in an earlier post.

[David Watts]

Wonder how long before baseball decides to go to the new NBA draft method to pick teams for the All Star game? It's getting more and more clear every year that the AL and NL are no longer separate leagues. I've hated interleague play since its inception. Maybe it because I grew up a fan of a team in a one team state. I personally never gave a rat's knuckle to see the Mets play the Yankees, or the Cubs play the White Sox. I know the hair on my back stands on end every year when my Tigers battle the Pittsburgh Pirates. If I had my way, interleague play would be abolished and the two leagues would continue to use separate rules when it comes to the DH. Oh and one league umps would be forced to use the huge chest protector thingys too

[ra24mpa]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Wonder how long before baseball decides to go to the new NBA draft method to pick teams for the All Star game? It's getting more and more clear every year that the AL and NL are no longer separate leagues. I've hated interleague play since its inception. Maybe it because I grew up a fan of a team in a one team state. I personally never gave a rat's knuckle to see the Mets play the Yankees, or the Cubs play the White Sox. I know the hair on my back stands on end every year when my Tigers battle the Pittsburgh Pirates. If I had my way, interleague play would be abolished and the two leagues would continue to use separate rules when it comes to the DH. Oh and one league umps would be forced to use the huge chest protector thingys too

I feel the same way about the Cardinals and the Royals. It was alright for the first few years, but then the novelty wore off. Now it just seems pointless. I would have no problem if the league scheduled a few of the traditional interleague rivals, i.e., Dodgers/Yankees, Cardinals/Red Sox or Tigers, and whoever played in the World Series the previous year, and maybe have a home-and-home series immediately after the allstar game or something like that, but most of the matchups are meh.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by ra24mpa

I feel the same way about the Cardinals and the Royals. It was alright for the first few years, but then the novelty wore off. Now it just seems pointless. I would have no problem if the league scheduled a few of the traditional interleague rivals, i.e., Dodgers/Yankees, Cardinals/Red Sox or Tigers, and whoever played in the World Series the previous year, and maybe have a home-and-home series immediately after the allstar game or something like that, but most of the matchups are meh.

I would like to see it gone completely. Heck, when I was a kid, the Tigers and Reds scheduled an exhibition game every summer. It took place on a mutual day off and that was enough interleague play to last me until the World Series.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

He answered your question before you even asked it. They work the same amount of time as other pitchers (little to not at all), but they can hit better because they have more talent for hitting than other pitchers. Just like some batters have better hands and eyes at the plate than other batters, some pitchers have better hands and eyes at the plate than other pitchers.

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

^

But the counter people have been giving me is that pitchers don't have time to practice on hitting because they are spending all of their time on getting better on the mound............

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

Because pitching is a full time job. .....Time spent in the batting cage means they aren't doing something else related to pitching like watching video, doing strength and conditioning, or simply resting.

Originally Posted by chucksabr

doesn't spend any time working on his hitting:

When you’re in the minors and your goal is to become a major league pitcher, why would you waste any time on becoming a major league hitter, too?

all of a sudden he’s expected to work on his hitting so he can become a major league-quality hitter?

Originally Posted by chucksabr

OK, well, clearly you don't understand why professional pitchers never work on their hitting.

So once again, the belief must be either they are doing nothing to practice hitting, or they do have time to practice hitting. Which is it?

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

I never said you said they never will work at it. I said you seem to accept they will never work at it. Those are not equivalent statements. I said that because that's how I interpreted your earlier replies to my posts. If I got that wrong, then sorry.

Nope. Missed the point. I accept they aren't expected to work on it. Some will even if management doesn't push them. Because some have the character to want to be good at every thing they are asked to do. Pitching, hitting, fielding, running the bases. Make MLB all DH and even they won't try to be good at hitting because there is no point.

I'm not talking about super athletes. I'm talking about competence at hitting, and I have been very clear about that.

I have already agreed with you that people can get better at something they work at. It is also an objective fact that practically all pitchers are incompetent major league hitters, and there's a good reason for this. Because pitchers are never hired for their bats and never will be, they are not required to work at their hitting; and because they are not required to work at their hitting, they never will work at their hitting; and because they never will work at their hitting, they will continue to be incompetent at the plate. This concept will always be in force whether or not you accept it.

It's OK to want to continue seeing this incompetence at the plate because you prefer it. Perfectly defensible, and no one can or should argue you out of the preference. But to continue to maintain a preference for pitchers hitting because of a bullshirt reason like, pitchers should be required to hit because they could be good at it if only they worked at it, knowing that they never will, is pointless. And I mean objectively pointless, irrespective of my opinion.

Again you missed the point. This is not about my preference. Look at my original post. I said this was about taking a long term approach. So do I think an all-DH MLB is better for the game in the long run? No. And I outlined my reasons. It is the rest of you that turned the convo into a "pitchers suck at hitting" topic in order to disagree w/my opinion.

Edit: I went back & looked & I was wrong. The "pitchers suck @ hitting" didn't start as a counter to anything I said. My bad.

Slippery slope is never a good debate tactic, particularly since I already addressed this exact point in an earlier post.

What slippery slope? All I'm pointing out is poor hitters are part of the game. If that is what is bothering you guys, you are going to need more than just one DH per team in most lineups. So-called "automatic outs" aren't detrimental to the game.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

But the counter people have been giving me is that pitchers don't have time to practice on hitting because they are spending all of their time on getting better on the mound............

They don't have time to practice hitting because are they are spending all of their time getting better on the mound. It's just that some of them, like Bumgarner, are naturally more talented hitters than other pitchers, therefore, they hit better than other pitchers. It's talent that differentiates "good" hitting pitchers from the rest, not hours of extra practice.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

They don't have time to practice hitting because are they are spending all of their time getting better on the mound. It's just that some of them, like Bumgarner, are naturally more talented hitters than other pitchers, therefore, they hit better than other pitchers. It's talent that differentiates "good" hitting pitchers from the rest, not hours of extra practice.

OK. So you think they don't work on it. So you think working on your hitting is pointless. Mookie Betts just got out of bed and became a great hitter from natural ability alone. Hard work is meaningless.

[David Watts]

Then you have guys like Logan Morrison and Chris Davis, whom based on this discussion must have been solely obsessed with being the best defensive first basemen in the game last year......or are they secretly working on their pitching

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Then you have guys like Logan Morrison and Chris Davis, whom based on this discussion must have been solely obsessed with being the best defensive first basemen in the game last year......or are they secretly working on their pitching

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

But unless age is a factor, I think people will always improve if they practice at just about anything in life.

Nice try. Everyone's skills diminish with age. Some hit their ceilings earlier than others.