DH Rule (can of worms?)

[prisonerno6]

I look at the DH the same as Middle Reliever Specialist. Sixty to Seventy years ago, people said a real pitcher would complete what he started. Then over time Closers were used more and more then before you knew it, the Left or Right Handed Specialist became commonplace. So I guess it all depends on how you look at it.
Is it Real Baseball if there is a DH?
Is it Real Baseball when you use Three (3) different pitchers to get Three (3) outs in the inning?
Is it Real Baseball if you use a Five (5) or Six (6) Man Rotation?

[tedstriker]

Originally Posted by prisonerno6

Is it Real Baseball when you use Three (3) different pitchers to get Three (3) outs in the inning?
Is it Real Baseball if you use a Five (5) or Six (6) Man Rotation?

This isn't a great comparison because you are comparing a strategic change with a rule change.

I understand that some people like more offense, which is fine, but it feels like a hack to me to make the game more interesting. Why not expand the DH to 9 hitters and 9 defensive players? I'm guessing most people who say that would be too much. For me, it's the same argument when it is for a single player.

[Lukey_Pooky25]

I was opposed to the DH Rule at first, because I have a certain love for pitchers who absolutely dominate opposing batters, and my thought was that it would effect pitching statistics rather strongly, but after a number of Fictional and Modern saves that I've used with two leagues having a DH (or even one for that matter) it really hasn't effected it too strongly.

I mean, the lack of sub-2.00 ERAs makes me sad a little, but you can't complain when Jose Fernandez has a 2.09 (in Colorado for that matter), and Stephen Strasburg has a 2.20 (Still in Washington unfortunately.) But the DH rule hasn't changed too much, maybe the league average has gone up by .008 or so, but that is marginal at best. The DH rule does get rid of the horrendous hitting by pitchers, and allows them to stay on the mound, and only on the mound (:

[Mancandy]

Originally Posted by tedstriker

This isn't a great comparison because you are comparing a strategic change with a rule change.

I understand that some people like more offense, which is fine, but it feels like a hack to me to make the game more interesting. Why not expand the DH to 9 hitters and 9 defensive players? I'm guessing most people who say that would be too much. For me, it's the same argument when it is for a single player.

That's not a great comparison because pitchers are the only position that are completely different from every other player on the team. Pitchers are the only players that have the ball in their hand on every pitch. Pitchers are the only players who are far more important on the field than in the batter's box. (It's close for catchers, of course, but the disparity is nowhere near that of a pitcher.) Pitchers are the only players that only play one in every five games and are just as important as those who play every day. Pitchers are the only players that take up half a team's roster. Pitchers are the only players that nobody cares in the slightest what they do with their bat, the most important thing being that they don't get hurt and a successful bunt here and there is considered a big boon.

For me, I enjoy the DH because it forces managers to pay attention to the game. It introduces strategy to the game. I've never understood the argument that no DH means more strategy. Yes, no DH means there are more moves made. More pinch hitting, more pitching changes, more double switches. That's all well and good. But it seems to me that all of those decisions are made for you. All you have to do is wake up the manager when the pitcher is supposed to hit so he can send out the best batter on your bench, or remind him to double check the lineup card before a pitching change so you can make a double switch once in a while. The thousands of people in the stands and the millions watching at home can tell you what the manager's going to do before he does it. Without the DH, the manager's actually required to make difficult choices. When do you bring in a pinch hitter? You have to weigh the need for offense with the loss of the player they're replacing, who may be much better defensively. When you do you pinch run? You can get a faster player on the base paths at the expense of losing a bat you might need later. When you have a lead, how early do you make a defensive substitution? Bringing in a better fielder will help you maintain the lead, but, again, you're losing a bat you might need later. The most difficult decision NL managers have to make is which position player to use as a pitcher when you're deep in extra innings and you're out of pitchers because you had to keep pinch hitting for them.

To answer the question, my historical games accurately reflect history. I'm not a fan of watching real life games without the DH, but I sometimes enjoy playing OOTP without the DH because it's so easy, as mentioned above. But in modern games, especially if I'm playing with an NL team, I tend to implement the DH in the NL in 2018, which is when I expect it to happen(well, I hope it will) in real life.

[Vermin360]

Am I the only one that finds the NL more challenging as opposed to Mancandy above? I never find that the decision is made for me. I often find myself struggling with whether to pull a pitcher who is having a great game in a close-fought contest when maybe some offense would help.

And in games where I have had to fight back, pulling pitchers in favour of batters, I find my bullpen greatly depleted when I do pull even and the game goes into extras.

So I can't say I entirely agree with the argument that a lack of DH is an easier time. Remember, when you make a change to pull the pitcher for a batter in the NL, you're effectively changing two men on your roster, unless you've got a strong-hitting pitcher in your bullpen that can stay in the game after his at bat.

[tedstriker]

pitchers are the only position that are completely different from every other player on the team.

I don't disagree, but my point is that many people like the DH because it increases offense. If more DHs increase offense even further, why is more than one too much?

[tward13]

Originally Posted by Vermin360

Am I the only one that finds the NL more challenging as opposed to Mancandy above? I never find that the decision is made for me. I often find myself struggling with whether to pull a pitcher who is having a great game in a close-fought contest when maybe some offense would help.

And in games where I have had to fight back, pulling pitchers in favour of batters, I find my bullpen greatly depleted when I do pull even and the game goes into extras.

So I can't say I entirely agree with the argument that a lack of DH is an easier time. Remember, when you make a change to pull the pitcher for a batter in the NL, you're effectively changing two men on your roster, unless you've got a strong-hitting pitcher in your bullpen that can stay in the game after his at bat.

No. Every strategy move he discusses also has to be made by NL managers. Plus NL managers have tigger decisions on replacing pitchers. AL manages never have to consider where in the line-up his own team is, maybe double switching so as not to use an extra pitcher.

[tedstriker]

Am I the only one that finds the NL more challenging as opposed to Mancandy above? I never find that the decision is made for me. I often find myself struggling with whether to pull a pitcher who is having a great game in a close-fought contest when maybe some offense would help.

And in games where I have had to fight back, pulling pitchers in favour of batters, I find my bullpen greatly depleted when I do pull even and the game goes into extras.

I share your opinion.

More pinch hitting, more pitching changes, more double switches. That's all well and good. But it seems to me that all of those decisions are made for you. All you have to do is wake up the manager when the pitcher is supposed to hit so he can send out the best batter on your bench, or remind him to double check the lineup card before a pitching change so you can make a double switch once in a while.

I guess I don't understand the point about the decision be made for you.

Without the DH, the manager's actually required to make difficult choices. When do you bring in a pinch hitter? You have to weigh the need for offense with the loss of the player they're replacing, who may be much better defensively. When you do you pinch run? You can get a faster player on the base paths at the expense of losing a bat you might need later. When you have a lead, how early do you make a defensive substitution? Bringing in a better fielder will help you maintain the lead, but, again, you're losing a bat you might need later.

Every one of these challenges exists in the NL. However, the NL must also consider more frequent pinch hitting, which complicates all of these issues because there are many more combinations of possibilities to consider. Therefore, the lack of the DH only increases the size of the strategic space.

[pgjocki]

I added DH to a MLB Quick start that was 4 years in and it completely ruined the game for me. I did it because I had 4 stud outfielders and two power hitting first basemen that I wanted in the line up.

Besides my guys forgetting how to hit the next year I found the day to day games less interesting as I ended up rolling with the same 9 guys everyday. I didn't feel like I was as engaged with right/left splits or who was streaky, etc

In the end I believe it's a personal preference and partly how you grew up learning and watching the game. I'm a life long NL fan so I just roll with my known and acknowledged biases.

[Whoofe]

personally I like it the way things are now. one league with DH and one without. that way you can choose your preferred style in either case

[zappa1]

I play by the real rules for the time peroid I'm playing.

After I play the 2016 season by the rules, I will incorperate my rules for the next season, 2017. I will get rid of inter-league play as baseball will realize that this sham of a gimmick is no longer a "wow" for the fans.

The World Series and all of it's intrigue of 2 teams that never met during the season, will be restored. It's one of the things that make the World Series different from other championship games from other sports. Dare to be different!!!

Next, as the future moves on, I will get rid of the DH. To help compensate for the loss of the DH, I will increase the roster size by 1 to 26. Now the teams can have their choice of an extra bat or extra pitcher.

[zappa1]

Isn't the DH contradictory to baseball speeding up the game?

Look at the graph that was posted for runs scored and times of games.
Is that why the AL games are soooooooo long? Yep. It is.

So now baseball wants to speed up the game, in reality, because of the DH.
Now they've cut the time between innings.
Makes it harder for them to entertain the crowd between innings. Cut short the sausage, pierogie and President races. Oh, no!!!!
Blame it on the batters for not being in the box.
Hey, lets add a stupid pitch clock while were at it.

Baseball can't admit the obvious. The DH is the culprit. The DH alone has added to the length of time of baseball games. More runs = longer games.

The more baseball tinkers with this game, the more they should have left it alone.

[StanfordBerkely]

I usually let the league do the DH Rule on it's own through league evolution since it always seems to happen within the first few years of a game. Of course I mean implementing it on both leagues (if the AL removes the DH I back out of the game and re-advance to the offseason)

In my opinion the DH should be universal. To me it's not about fairness (although I do understand that), or "chicks digging the long ball", or anything like that. It's simply due to the fact that when an amateur pitcher comes in to an MLB organization, from high school, college, or otherwise, hitting is no longer a part of his development. Nor should it be. Any team that would refuse to advance a pitcher through their system because his hitting isn't up to par would be unjustified in doing so.

[kingcharlesxii]

I always turn off the DH in my solo leagues. I love finding pitchers that can hit decently as well as pitch. OOTP does generate some of them now. It opens up some interesting oddball strategies that you don't see in MLB, like starting a reliever who can hit and letting him get one plate appearance. You could also have a defensive specialist start the game if the pitcher can field and swap them before the defensive guy hits and bring in a fresh pitcher.

I enjoy experimenting with odd strategies and leagues, in case that isn't obvious.

[Le Grande Orange]

In regards to game time length, here are the 2015 figures for average game length in minutes of a regulation 8½-9 inning (51-54 outs) game, courtesy of Retrosheet. The number in parentheses is the number of games in the sample.

MLB (2,213): 176.25
AL (1,107): 176.55
NL ((1,106): 175.95

There is a minuscule difference in the average game length (0.6 minutes) between games played in AL parks and NL parks.

There is a notable difference between the average game length of a regulation 8½-9 inning (51-54 outs) major league game as compared to a minor league game. I'm still collecting the data, but below is the preliminary figure for Triple-A games.

MILB—AAA (860): 162.59

A Triple-A game was, on average, 13.66 minutes shorter. (Eventually, when I've finished the data collection, it will be possible to look at the average game length in the minors based on league or classification. For 2016, I'll have data on the overseas leagues in Taiwan, Korea, and Japan.)

[Painmantle]

If a player takes the field, that player should be required to Bat. The DH basically makes the AL a league that plays with 10 players at a time as opposed to 9. I don't like it.

But the Players Union will never allow it to be removed and will always push for it to be included in all of baseball because as far as they are concerned it creates more Jobs that pay better.

[psd]

Originally Posted by Painmantle

If a player takes the field, that player should be required to Bat. The DH basically makes the AL a league that plays with 10 players at a time as opposed to 9. I don't like it.
.

So that means you can't use your closer in the bottom of the 9th, up by one run, because he won't get an at bat. You will have to keep your reliever in until he gets an at-bat. Which might mean 3 innings if you go 1-2-3 until his spot comes up again.. You can't remove the pinch runner because he hasn't gotten an at-bat, and he has to replace the batter he ran for in the field. That pinch hitter who you had bat for your pitcher has to take the field now. Ok one batter has hit for the oppostition. You can replace him now. Just make sure the guy you replace him with has been to bat or will be before the game ends, otherwise you can't use him.

Should I keep going or do you see how dumb that rule would be yet??

And not using a DH makes the NL a league that starts the game with one more player available to the manager. I don't like it.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by zappa1

Isn't the DH contradictory to baseball speeding up the game?

Look at the graph that was posted for runs scored and times of games.
Is that why the AL games are soooooooo long? Yep. It is.

So now baseball wants to speed up the game, in reality, because of the DH.
Now they've cut the time between innings.
Makes it harder for them to entertain the crowd between innings. Cut short the sausage, pierogie and President races. Oh, no!!!!
Blame it on the batters for not being in the box.
Hey, lets add a stupid pitch clock while were at it.

Baseball can't admit the obvious. The DH is the culprit. The DH alone has added to the length of time of baseball games. More runs = longer games.

The more baseball tinkers with this game, the more they should have left it alone.

For 36 seconds I'd say your comment is BS.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by zappa1

Look at the graph that was posted for runs scored and times of games.
Is that why the AL games are soooooooo long? Yep. It is.

Look at the 2015 regular season data. The average regulation AL game is 0.6 minutes longer than the average regulation NL game.

Originally Posted by zappa1

Baseball can't admit the obvious. The DH is the culprit. The DH alone has added to the length of time of baseball games. More runs = longer games.

Plot the history of the average length in minutes of a regulation MLB game. You will find the biggest contributor to increased length appears to be the advent of television broadcasts of major league games. Namely, the need to show advertisements in order to recoup the hefty fees networks paid to clubs and MLB.

Below is a graph of the average length of a normal regulation MLB game (8½-9 innings, 51-54 outs). Note the jump in length from 1947 through 1964.

[RchW]

Like I said BS from anti DH types shows the paucity of their argument. Just quit with the whining and bitching already.