DH or no DH?

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

Everything you say that applies to this side of the argument applies to the other side of the argument as well. If the standard for defining "push button" is that the strategy has to be applied in 100.0% of the situations—not 99.9%, but 100.0%—then almost nothing is "push-button".

Yes, there are isolated cases in which your SP is down 1-0 in the seventh, he's due up, and this manager at this point in time decides to let SP bat even though the team is in imminent danger of losing the game for lack of scoring runs. That does happen more than 0.0% of the time. But even the other side will concur that is not the usual decision that is made. It's not even common enough to be considered an unusual decision. This decision is literally a rarity, and would happen maybe single digit percent of the time. The other 90+%, that pitcher is coming out, and a pinch hitter is coming in*.

And I hear ya regarding the selection of which pinch hitter comes up, and any non-P on the bench is technically an option. But seriously, if you have to have a run just to keep yourself in the game, your only logical option is to push that button and get the best hitter available up to the plate, regardless of the strategic implications as the pertain to future

Drivel. Get some real coaching or playing experience.

[The Wolf]

I'm not saying don't use the DH in your game leagues. Do what you want. But be aware that the ONLY thing that the DH brings to the game is slightly more offense, and that's it, and it takes a lot away from the game in strategic options in exchange for that. If you are willing to make that trade, then do it. If not, don't.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

And I hear ya regarding the selection of which pinch hitter comes up, and any non-P on the bench is technically an option. But seriously, if you have to have a run just to keep yourself in the game, your only logical option is to push that button and get the best hitter available up to the plate, regardless of the strategic implications as the pertain to future possibilities.

But what defines your term "best hitter?" Is it the guy who's going to get on base? Is it the guy who's most likely to hit a home run? Is it the guy who's most likely to get a base hit? It's not like a manager can say, OK, pinch hit spot, time to send up Miguel Cabrera.

Anyway, we obviously don't view baseball strategy the same way, which is the actual beauty of the game. There are a lot of ways to win.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

I'm not saying don't use the DH in your game leagues. Do what you want. But be aware that the ONLY thing that the DH brings to the game is slightly more offense, and that's it, and it takes a lot away from the game in strategic options in exchange for that. If you are willing to make that trade, then do it. If not, don't.

Thanks dad, can I use the car Friday night?

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

But what defines your term "best hitter?" Is it the guy who's going to get on base? Is it the guy who's most likely to hit a home run? Is it the guy who's most likely to get a base hit? It's not like a manager can say, OK, pinch hit spot, time to send up Miguel Cabrera.

Anyway, we obviously don't view baseball strategy the same way, which is the actual beauty of the game. There are a lot of ways to win.

Given that there are usually 12 and sometimes 13 pitchers on a 25 man squad, and eight non-pitchers are already in the game, that leaves four or maybe five guys on the bench, among them a backup catcher and a defense-first middle infielder. So the choice is usually fairly clear.

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Drivel. Get some real coaching or playing experience.

Logical Fallacies» Appeal to Authority

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

Given that there are usually 12 and sometimes 13 pitchers on a 25 man squad, and eight non-pitchers are already in the game, that leaves four or maybe five guys on the bench, among them a backup catcher and a defense-first middle infielder. So the choice is usually fairly clear.

That's a far cry from the "push button" tactics you argued against a few posts ago.

Again, I'm not sure how needing to make a decision is less strategic than not having a decision to make, which is the case with the DH.

[rpriske]

I also don't get why people think that a double-switch is a good thing.

Yay! We get to see worse players on the field!


I guess it comes down to those people who talk about lots of managerial decisions as a good thing.

I think the game should be decided by the players with as little interference as possible.

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

That's a far cry from the "push button" tactics you argued against a few posts ago.

It's not anything like a "far cry". If your choice is fairly clear as to who your best hitter on the bench is at this moment, you push the button and get him up there. You're not wringing your hands over which of four or five guy on the bench is the best option, which is even more limited given platoon considerations. I mean, come on, you need a run, goddammit! Get your best hitter up there!

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

Again, I'm not sure how needing to make a decision is less strategic than not having a decision to make, which is the case with the DH.

You're right in that if your P is down 1-0 in the seventh and there's a DH in the game, you don't have to bat for P. In that case, even pushing a button is "more strategic" than not having a decision to make at all. I would counter only that merely being put into a situation in which a push-button decision will be made is not worth waxing rhapsodic about, as so many DH opponents seem to do; and that even if this is one situation where the NL has a strategic component where the AL does not, there are other situations in which the strategic consideration in the AL is more varied and interesting (i.e., "more strategic") than the same consideration in the NL, for example, constructing batting orders.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

It's not anything like a "far cry". If your choice is fairly clear as to who your best hitter on the bench is at this moment, you push the button and get him up there. You're not wringing your hands over which of four or five guy on the bench is the best option, which is even more limited given platoon considerations. I mean, come on, you need a run, goddammit! Get your best hitter up there!



You're right in that if your P is down 1-0 in the seventh and there's a DH in the game, you don't have to bat for P. In that case, even pushing a button is "more strategic" than not having a decision to make at all. I would counter only that merely being put into a situation in which a push-button decision will be made is not worth waxing rhapsodic about, as so many DH opponents seem to do; and that even if this is one situation where the NL has a strategic component where the AL does not, there are other situations in which the strategic consideration in the AL is more varied and interesting (i.e., "more strategic") than the same consideration in the NL, for example, constructing batting orders.

And round and round we go. No sense in discussing any further.

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

And round and round we go. No sense in discussing any further.

Sounds good. Let's leave it up to the people.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Thanks dad, can I use the car Friday night?

No, because you've been a smart ass of late. Take the bus.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

It's not anything like a "far cry". If your choice is fairly clear as to who your best hitter on the bench is at this moment, you push the button and get him up there. You're not wringing your hands over which of four or five guy on the bench is the best option, which is even more limited given platoon considerations. I mean, come on, you need a run, goddammit! Get your best hitter up there!



You're right in that if your P is down 1-0 in the seventh and there's a DH in the game, you don't have to bat for P. In that case, even pushing a button is "more strategic" than not having a decision to make at all. I would counter only that merely being put into a situation in which a push-button decision will be made is not worth waxing rhapsodic about, as so many DH opponents seem to do; and that even if this is one situation where the NL has a strategic component where the AL does not, there are other situations in which the strategic consideration in the AL is more varied and interesting (i.e., "more strategic") than the same consideration in the NL, for example, constructing batting orders.

Except that none of that is true.

[The Wolf]

Obviously everyone should decide whether they're going to use a DH or not. But don't ever use a DH thinking you're adding anything to your league except increased offense, because that's all it adds. And you give up a lot for it.

[BusterKing]

Originally Posted by rpriske

I also don't get why people think that a double-switch is a good thing.

Yay! We get to see worse players on the field!


I guess it comes down to those people who talk about lots of managerial decisions as a good thing.

I think the game should be decided by the players with as little interference as possible.

In the NL a lot is about the double-switch, it's like a chess game between the managers. Who's left on your bench and bullpen, who's left on theirs, how can I match certain players with certain of their players, ya ok, but that bench player is better defensively in certain position so that means playing there then I have to move my regular player to another position, now that affects that position.... so much stuff to cover for someone who wants to manage the game like it should be managed. On the other end, people can just make simple replacement and totally miss that aspect of the game. That's why no-dh is so much more fun and more complicated, if you want it to be.

[Padreman]

When a local sports radio guy needs to kill time because he has no material, you know the best of doing? Getting people to call in and argue. They bring up Pete Rose, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Sosa ect should they be in HOF or not or should there be a DH or is the DH good for the game something in those lines. No one ever proofs the other side wrong it just goes in circles

[Westheim]

I play without the DH all the time when in fictional, and safe for one very short experiment my real and historical leagues have either been with the Mets or pre-1973.

The DH in the game kills off so many meaningful and interesting decisions:
- third time through the lineup, how's the score, who's on base, and do we need to hit for the starting pitcher if he's still in there, like: tied game, bottom 7th, runner on third and one out?
- starter knocked out by the opposition by blunt force and the #8 or #9 slot will lead off in our next half-inning: whom to remove in a double switch?
- when to actually rest your key players that play every day?
- manage your bench
- manage your bullpen
- is there a meaningful position on my roster for that 38-year old, immobile former home run champion who is going to get victimized at first base?

If I want to hit ENTER 80 times in a row I can well do so without firing up OOTP. With the DH, unless the opposition puts a 5-spot on my starter in the second inning, I can come well late to the party, since *managing* won't start until the seventh inning anyway.

Boring concept. Boring gameplay.

Originally Posted by rpriske

I think the game should be decided by the players with as little interference as possible.

So your players set their own lineup? Why don't just hit "sim season"?

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by Westheim

I play without the DH all the time when in fictional, and safe for one very short experiment my real and historical leagues have either been with the Mets or pre-1973.

The DH in the game kills off so many meaningful and interesting decisions:
- third time through the lineup, how's the score, who's on base, and do we need to hit for the starting pitcher if he's still in there, like: tied game, bottom 7th, runner on third and one out?
- starter knocked out by the opposition by blunt force and the #8 or #9 slot will lead off in our next half-inning: whom to remove in a double switch?
- when to actually rest your key players that play every day?
- manage your bench
- manage your bullpen
- is there a meaningful position on my roster for that 38-year old, immobile former home run champion who is going to get victimized at first base?

If I want to hit ENTER 80 times in a row I can well do so without firing up OOTP. With the DH, unless the opposition puts a 5-spot on my starter in the second inning, I can come well late to the party, since *managing* won't start until the seventh inning anyway.

Boring concept. Boring gameplay.



So your players set their own lineup? Why don't just hit "sim season"?

With DH

3rd time through the lineup, how's the score, who's on base and do we need to pinch hit for someone who's just not getting it done today

When to rest key players who start everyday

Manage your bench
Manage your pen

Is there a meaningful position for that 38 yr old no defense 1B - you bet, it's called DH

Note - I'm not arguing against you, all valid points, but those things need to be done when you play with the DH as well.


Both sides make valid points and it's really individual choice in OOTP. Some like more challenge, some less. There's no right or wrong, it just comes down to how one likes playing.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by BusterKing

In the NL a lot is about the double-switch, it's like a chess game between the managers. Who's left on your bench and bullpen, who's left on theirs, how can I match certain players with certain of their players, ya ok, but that bench player is better defensively in certain position so that means playing there then I have to move my regular player to another position, now that affects that position.... so much stuff to cover for someone who wants to manage the game like it should be managed. On the other end, people can just make simple replacement and totally miss that aspect of the game. That's why no-dh is so much more fun and more complicated, if you want it to be.

The objection here is that some people try to elevate double switches into some sort of stratospheric mental accomplishment just so they can look down their nose at someone they disagree with regarding the DH. I don't care whether people prefer the DH or not but for those who do not like it please spare me the, "I'm an advanced thinker" routine. It's not that difficult. There is far more complexity in managing a bullpen and knowing when to replace a starter unless you are pitch count OCD. Even with the help of a pitching coach and bullpen coach.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Cryomaniac

Soccer is limited to 3 subs per game (or 6 in exhibitions*).

As for baseball related things on that regard, it would be interesting to allow the DH for someone other than the pitcher as is the case in High School baseball IIRC.

*Used to be 12 or 13 in exhibitions, until Sven Goran Erikson was England manager and had habits of always changing the whole team at half time, much to the annoyance of fans and just about everyone else.

And when subs were first allowed in league football purists saw the sky fall and predicted the demise of the game.