The principal argument against the DH is that it removes Strategy and Tactics from the game… an argument for preserving “Tradition”. It’s a loose and lazy argument, in direct conflict with the evidence that today’s game is far, far removed from The Hazy Poetic Yarn spun by “Traditionalists”.
The lead complaint against the DH is that it removes the decision of whether to Pinch Hit for a Pitcher. In 2015, Met’s Starting Pitchers hit a little more than 2x per game. Fans were treated to an overwhelming number of “Free Out At Bats” by Met’s and Opposing Pitchers—along with many, many “virtual intentional walks” to the 8th place hitter… certainly an “After Doubleday tactic. It’s Non- Traditional!!! There are normally 2-3 turns of a batting order before the “Pinch Hit for The Pitcher Decision” ever comes into play…in fact, it’s a quaint memory of a long ago game, and it’s a minor tactical decision in today’s game. Pitchers are normally replaced based on whether “They’re Done Pitching”. Your National League Starting Pitcher is going to Hit Twice, pitch 5-6 inings, and he’s going to Shower!!!
Tradition???? In 1969, Mets Pitchers had a total of 365 Game Appearances. In 1986, That Total was 414 games. In 2000, the total was 573. The 2015 staff logged 647 Game Appearances!!!!! If You Love Pitching Changes, you’re in good shape!!! By The Way, if you’re watching the Game in Kansas City, a DH Town, you saw the SAME 647 Pitcher Game Appearances in 2015 as you would have seen watching the Mets!!!
Let’s Talk about Tactics!
The Defensive Shifts that we see today were birthed long ago in the mind of Cleveland Manager Lou Boudreau. “Handsome Lou”, himself a Hall of Fame Shortstop, devised the shift as a maneuver against Ted Williams…almost inarguably The Game’s Greatest All Time Hitter. Boudreau later admitted that he wanted to challenge Williams “Mentally”…. He wanted to get under his skin! He had little hope that anything he did would actually impact Williams. The Williams Shift (aka The Boudreau Shift) was Later known as The McCovey Shift, utilized against Hall of Fame Slugger Willie McCovey. The Defensive Shift is now a matter of “Positioning”…. Spearheaded by the Success of Joe Madden. He recognized that The Offensive Approach of the Game had changed greatly over the past 50 years. Hitters have a drastically different approach than they did 75 years ago…50 years ago…. 20 years ago. Hitters have One Swing…and they are exclusively Power Focused. They “Hit THEIR Pitch”…and they “Swing THEIR Swing”—and they hit it the ball to the same places almost all the time!!! …and they don’t care about Contact or the Game Situation. In 1926, Pitchers averaged 2.75 k/9 innings. By 1956, the rate bumped to 4.64. In 1986, the rate went to 6.87, and it has jumped to 8.21 today. There is virtually no situational focus in the Offensive Game. That has been the biggest change in the game since I began watching as a 9 year old boy in 1968. Whether you’re watching the game in Pittsburgh or Baltimore, you are seeing a dramatically different game than you watched with your father, much less the game he watched with his father.
Baseball is about Players and it’s about Fans. Let’s get the game back to being about Pitchers and Hitters and Baserunners. Let’s hope for a return of tactics Beyond The Pitching Change… I Really, Really miss Hit and Run Baseball!!! I cannot understand how universal The Shift has become in recognition of the present “One Swing…Power Oriented…Situation be Damned” Offensive Approach, while ignoring the weakness of that Offensive Approach on the Offensive Side of the game….against The Shift!!! The Stolen Base…The Hit and Run… The Bunt…. We can argue for the return of these “traditions”. Situational Offensive Baseball IS The Answer to “The Shift”. Whitey Herzog!!!—We Miss You!!!!!!!
Let’s get the Pitchers on the Mound…… Keep the Batters in The Box…. Let’s see meaningful At Bats from 1-9. This includes the DH…It’s a must! It’s good for the Game and the future of the game. The Game is awash in Tactics…and it’s missing some great tactics. The Greatest return to tradition would be to put the game back in the Players Hands…. It’s Good for the Players. It’s Great For the Fans…and it RETURNS the Game to its Roots— Hitting..Pitching…Fielding…Running… Throwing. Doubleday would Approve!!!!
What’s the end game? Do we get to pinch run for Wilmer Flores because he’s slow? Do we get to defensive switch for Flores because he can’t throw? Can we substitute for Flores because he can’t hit RHP but put him back in if the other team brings in another lefty? Why are pitchers a special category in and of themselves to receive this special treatment?
If this is the type of game you want to watch, you can watch it, as 15 teams play it already. It’s not the game I want to watch and you want to take it away from me. That seems wrong.
“There is virtually no situational focus in the Offensive Game.”
I believe this is what he wants. But he totally misses the boat as there’s no causation between no/with DH and situational focus.
Adding the DH will not cause less hitters to strike out less and make more contact. For that you happen, you need to limit how fast pitchers throw. Make it so that there can only be 2-3 pitchers who can hit 95, the rest have to be soft tossers in the 85-90 range. Would you be OK with that?
It’s also hypocritical to say that pitchers should hit because it’s “tradition” argument is weak… when you want to go back to the “traditional” way of hitting pre 1980s…
Certainly, I would like to see a situational focus to offense. It doesn’t make sense that I acknowledge the Weakness of the Offensive approach to things like The Shift…but then I fail to attack the weakness of the shift???? It’s absurd!!!
I did not mean to indicate that The DH would power that reality…rather, I wanted to point out that the game is much heavier in tactics and Management decisions than it has ever been. Also, some of the “tactical arguments” don’t really exist any more….The PH versus Let the Pitcher Hit. The DH certainly does very little to affect actual in game moves.
Finally, this is really a discussion of baseball…and I’m interested in Everything about it.
Wow…. That’s a lot of Flores Hate! …. Sounds like you hate him even more than you hate The DH!!!
I have never been a fan of the DH. I am a baseball purist and think the pitchers should have to hit. I dont get why they dont hit any better than they do. Many of them are fantastic athletes. Look at Rick Ankiel. He goes from starting pitcher to home run hitting outfielder. Lets ban the DH. To make it fair, how about a DM ? A designated manager. If the manager makes bad decisions, rather than firing him, let someone else manage for a week. With the Mets, we may are better off with our home run hitting pitchers Colon and Syndergaard.
The Rise in Strikeouts is mostly a result of their acceptance as a “cost” of hitting, and an approach that sells out to power over contact and situation.
Not so long ago, a 100 strikeout season (for a Hitter) was a virtual walk of shame.
Two Words: Bartolo Colon
Two more: Noah Syndergaard
Two more: Madisin Bumgarner
Eric, you have a lively and interesting and unconventional baseball mind. I always find you perceptive, though, of course, we’re not always in agreement.
I think the point of your post falters a bit because you start to conflate a number of not necessarily-related issues. Too many loose ends.
Sticking with the DH only, I agree. I give up. I’m ready to see it.
On shifts and the modern approach to hitting, I think those are separate from the DH issue. My hope is that offenses with naturally respond to the new defenses, that is, that scouts and coaches will recognize and nurture hitters who can use the whole field.
I think one of your most compelling points from this season has been about “balance” and “sequencing.” Than an offense is a series of events. The problem with Sandy Alderson’s offensive vision is that he becomes too singular-focused on power. Too in love with one type of hitter. What I’m learning is that an offense needs more balance, more different types, within a lineup. Sure, the Jay Bruce always has a place in my 5-hole; there’s tremendous value in the guy who can hit it over the wall, despite the low average and high strikeouts. But you can’t win with too many guys like that.
The irony for me, as a well-read fan conversed in and supportive of sabermetric thinking in general, is that lately I’ve come back to the beginning. That the old-fashioned idea of a lineup that they came up with in the ’30s is still basically the best. Yes, all the cliches. The speedy leadoff hitter who always seems to be on base, followed by the contact hitter (who can also lay down a bunt if necessary), the team’s best overall hitter in the 3-spot, the cleanup hitter — with talent and power, followed in the 5-spot by a flawed power/RBI guy. Then 6, then 7. In the 8-spot, in an ideal world (and this is the problem, rosters do not always have guys who seamlessly fit into traditional roles), I’d like a guy who knows how to take a walk when it is given to him. A guy who is comfortable working deep counts, taking pitches. An added plus if he has the speed to score from 2B, after all those sac bunts. Which is why I hate, loathe, detest the idea of putting d’Arnaud in that role. He’s a grip-it-and-rip-it hitter. See ball, hit ball. I like him in the 6-spot. My point is that this conventional lineup is the most balanced, and best utilizes the natural sequences for scoring, assuming a team doesn’t have eight amazing hitters.
One grammatical lesson for today. The period always goes inside the quotation mark. So it reads, for example, “tradition.”
Not “tradition”.
Jim-
The reason I focused on Tactics: so much of the objection to the DH has been about the “loss” of the decision about PH for the pitcher. I wanted to show that this “traditional” decision was not really a big part of the game in the National League 2016..yes, It does exist.
I did want to show that the game is full of tactics, in many cases…and many of them Non-Traditional, mostly focused on Pitching Specialization and “The Shift”.
I can never resist talking baseball…. and I love it that you’ve brought up “Sequence”! It’s a term I’ve used often–baseball is a sport dominated by Sequence, even more than statistics…especially game-by-game.
I lamented some of the recent Tactics of the Game…. and I’ve mourned some of the missing Traditional tactics. I believe the DH actually provides for a game that is truer to it’s original format, and it doesnt erode the tactical possibilities and advantages that a Great Manager and GM can provide via Roster Contstruction and Playing Style.
Your article concerning the DH is backed by interresting statitistics of how the game has changed. I like the traditional National League game because of the late game strategy. I also find that when the pitcher bats it is boring. In the Chatter you mentioned a compromise about the DH getting the first two at bats for the pitcher and when the 3rd and any subsequent DH AB occurs the pitcher has to bat or be removed from the game if the DH hits. This would happen every subsequent DH at bat for the rest of the game. It was a convincing arguement for me yet you failed to bring this up in the article.
Sense— I was long oposed to the DH… my mid ground would be to “force a decision” at the 5th or 6th inning—use the DH, Lose the Pitcher. An accomodation to the perception that we we’re losing that friction and decision.
Todays game sees very little of that “decision”—certainly not Late in the Game. Your 6-9th inning guys, even if the starter is still in, are Never batting…almost never—it’s barely a blip. I don’t believe we’re all trying to figure out whether the Manager is letting his relievers hit. If you’re pining for a Double switch….c’mon.
The reality is that the DH instroduces some decisions you don;t now have—ok…I’ll pitch to the 8th hitter…because the guy behind him is not a pitcher…. and do I stick with my tiring Pitcher? If he’s gonna get the Pitcher out, I probably do….if he needs to face an actual Hitter????…probably not.
That said…I could live with the mid ground idea that I developed— and I’d push it to the 6th inning at the very least—maybe the 3rd DH ab…whichever came 1st?
My opinion, after research, is that the PH decision is extraordinarily Minor in occurance and importance. The in game “moves” have to do with Specialty Pitchers, Batter-Pitcher Match ups, Defensive Positioning—The Shift. I don;t have to like all of these things— but…. It Is.
Pitching around the 8th place hitter…..pitching to instant outs when Pitchers Hit—- I’d like to see the gane getting Played…not Managed.
Take a look at the 647 Pitching Changes—I went back to 1969—-darn close to double! We’re not lacking seeing the game being Managed.
I have a revulsion to the DH that is more basic than any interest a double-switch might provide. It has to do with the the three fundamental baseball skills–hit the ball, catch the ball, throw the ball–that should be required of all players, and whose weighted skill set determines position offensively or defensively. Relieve a player entirely from one (or two!) of these physical tasks and they cease to be playing baseball IMO.
A similarly played game with 6 offense only players, 8 defense only and a gaggle of pitchers, might even be interesting to watch from time to time, but it wouldn’t be baseball.
OK, add 3 designated baserunners.
+1 – Hobie hits it deep, this thing is crushed….and its g-o-n-e!
In terms of diminishing tactics, I think the #1 issue has become the size of the modern-era bullpen. Everybody has 7 guys back there, putting all the emphasis on defense. Today’s teams, if fully healthy, start games with 5 position players on the bench. You can eliminate the backup catcher, who is rarely used, so it now becomes 4 players. In a time of match-ups, all the advantage has shifted toward pitching.
In previous times, managers had 6 players. Huge difference, and a more diverse array of weapons/strategies/tactics on hand. You’d have a speed guy, a glove guy, a lefty specialist, and so on. Today’s limited bench continues to handicap offenses game after game, season after season. If a team wants to explore a potential competitive edge, I think some bold thinker ought to try a return to a shorter pen, 6 guys instead of 7 relievers. When you look at the innings these guys throw, and the ease of shifting pitchers from AAA to MLB, I don’t see why it can’t be done.
In addition, the modern short bench necessitates the jack-of-all-trades type, the Joe McEwing player, who provides a manager with flexibility if not actual talent. It also makes it more difficult for teams to rely on platoons, from a sheer numbers POV.
I think the game was more interesting, offensively and defensively, with 10 pitchers on a staff and 15 regular players.
I realize those days are gone.
Which is why I’d be in favor of a move to a 26-man roster, and would also accept a DH across all of baseball.
Some good thoughts, Jimmy.
As a traditionalist I don’t care for the DH. In conversations with other fans I find that those who root for AL teams usually like the DH while NL fans generally don’t.
Any change involving the DH would have to be approved by the MLBPA as per the contract’s working conditions. I’ve seen a proposal which would do away with the DH in exchange for a 27 player roster with the manager naming 25 eligible players for each game. Usually two starting pitchers could be dropped each game, thus enlarging the bench. I don’t know if that would fly with the owners or the players, but I think it has merit.
Jimmie— Decent points, but it doesn’t address several things I believe to be missing from the offensive approach…and adding players doesn’t help:
-2 Strike “approach”-Bunt-Hit and Run-“Moving the Runner Over”.
Those are nice qualities, for sure, but to be clear you are essentially advocating for dead-ball era tactics at a time when offenses and home runs are up.
I personally am not hoping for more sacrifice bunts.
With the advent of power, something gets lost. That’s the game’s wicked calculus. My hope is simply for a more balanced offense, players who can do different things, rather than be one-dimensional up and down the lineup.
The other thing you are calling for, in an unstated way, is speed. Because without speed, some of those tactics just won’t work. By focusing too much on power, you sacrifice defense and speed. Wilmer Flores is a poster boy for this. If the team has balance — speed elsewhere — than it can work.
I don’t know that I want Yoenis to take too much of a two-strike approach, though there are times when it would be helpful.
Interestingly, Loney got a huge single last night by dunking a low inside pitch to the opposite field. He inside-outted it. It was vintage Murphy . . . before Daniel became a much more dangerous hitter. Overall I think Loney has, in effect, damaged his career by too often settling for the dink and dunk, and never learning how to consistently turn on pitches. It was a big hit, and there’s much to admire about James Loney’s steady professionalism, but I don’t think he does enough damage at the plate. Moving the chains along is nice, but.
It’s not that Sandy is wrong about Power. I love the long ball, too. It’s that — I think — he becomes too singularly focused on that sole ability. Doubling down on that approach with Bruce only underscores my point; it’s like Sandy watched the entire season and learned nothing. Meanwhile, Jose Reyes has added a much-needed missing dimension. Thank goodness he fell into our lap, and easily retainable for 2017, too.
Mostly, that’s my conclusion: Build a well-rounded team, an array of tools, realizing that no single player can do it all. Not many Joe Morgans come along. I like the old-time lineup. The speedy guy, the bat-control guy, the power slot, etc.
We’re in complete agreement…. I don’t point out the missing tactics as a substitute for power. The balance of tactics and the balance of talents and skills is what I’m looking for
Game situation …. Pitch count… Etc, etc… The shift…… I’d like the offenses to expand