Author Topic: Unofficial Compromise DH Rule Testing Lab thread (Nats fans edition)  (Read 14995 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 10974
I used to be an adult but now I am too old so like to just end discussions when I want to end them.

:)

Online UMDNats

  • Posts: 13938
  • hire a-rod
i like the DH

dont care to see a pitcher hit

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 10974
i like the DH

dont care to see a pitcher hit
Short and to the point.  I can respect that opinion.

Offline _sturt_

  • Posts: 570
  • "Le Grande Orange"...Colt 45/Astro/Expo(Nat) Great
Then why change the freaking rule?

I'm going to humor you even though the answer to my question in that paragraph predisposes me to say that you're just too dug-in to even have an honest conversation on this topic.

You don't change the rule until the customer base demands it.

Your reply, "Well the customer base isn't demanding it."

My reply, "That's like going back in time and saying to Steve Jobs, the customer base isn't demanding this new iPhone gadget and all of these things you call 'apps'..."

Smokes, the customer base hasn't even ascended to the question's existence, let alone understanding the question, let alone an answer to the question.

People haven't even thought about the possibility of a compromise rule (existence), let alone contemplated why it might be the prudent way to go (understanding), let alone come up with any potential actual compromises that could work (answers).

With that, unless you've got something less defensive, given your evident foreclosure no matter what to your desired conclusion, I think our answers to the cliff question make it kinda futile and purposeless to carry on running down your rabbit holes... there are better uses of your time and mine.

Offline _sturt_

  • Posts: 570
  • "Le Grande Orange"...Colt 45/Astro/Expo(Nat) Great
because you saying the rule needs to be changed isn't a predetermined conclusion? You jumped to solution without evidence that a problem actually exists

Going to have to pull rank here. Forgive me. It's not something that I want to do, but these posts kinda call me out as-if I'm a traitor to the cause.

When one of you can legitimately claim, not in theory but in actuality, to have so loved traditional baseball that you left your Senators or Expos or Nationals (or insert team name here) that were being forcibly removed from playing the game the way it was meant to be played, then, at that point only, will you have walked in my shoes and have the standing to talk about this issue at eye-level with me.

I despise the DH. There's no other way to put it. It robs the game of the strategic element that makes it otherwise so exceptional.

So, I'm sorry if anyone thought they could talk down to me on this one and make any headway.

Having said that, I need to take issue with some of my friends here on two basis.

First, regarding the romantic notion that once you change one rule, you automatically have spoiled the entire game for infinity, no. Just no.

That might sound like sweet music to some itching ears, but it's just not borne out when you look at other games we sports fans in the US commonly enjoy. There have been changes of some significance in football and basketball, some of which are annoying, but some of which have actually seemed to have improved those games. Two point conversions, for instance, have added to the drama of pro football in a big way. Similarly, the institution of the 24-second clock has done so for basketball.

My point in bringing that out is simply that it ought not be an automatic assumption that a rule change in any given sport dooms the game to becoming a lesser one. Baseball is no exception.

For that reason, I don't hold on to my repugnance for the DH based on some romantic rationale. It's not simply a matter of spoiling a tradition. It's a matter of spoiling an entire major element of the game.

For the same reasons I don't watch pro bowling, essentially, I don't watch American League baseball.

Second, stop beating your head against the wall.

Not just because I don't want you to, but for these reasons:

(a) It's been 40+ years now, and entire generations now don't know a DH-less baseball like you and I do... clearly, you or I can despise it all I want, but it's not going away.

(b) As-is, we have to play x-number of interleague games, and if you’re like me, I cringe to even sit through those. It's a form of baseball, but something is terribly missing... maybe this is overstating it, but it reminds me of the old Bobby Bare song The Merimaid... “from her head to her waist, she was just my taste, but the rest of her was a fish.”

Baseball without both elements, the athleticism AND the cerebral part is just inferior and dissatisfying.

If we can’t have the pure traditional game--and clearly after 40 years we’re just not going to be able to that toothpaste back in the tube--it’s time we found something that, at least, restores some part… hopefully, a large part… of the cerebral game to all of the game.

(c) I may totally disrespect the imposition of the DH, but as an adult… yes, it’s a kids game, but I’m an adult in love with a kids game… as an adult I have a responsibility to be respectful of people who disagree with me. They may not see things the way I see them, and they have that right.

And they have that same responsibility toward me and you, of course.

When respectful people disagree, what comes naturally is to look for where there is common ground, and attempt to craft some concept that capitalizes on where they agree.

(d) I won’t belabor this one b/c I’ve already spoken to it as much as I have… it simply is incoherent, and thus nonsensical, to play one game that has one championship by two different rules. Not only is it not heard-of in any other sport, but for good reason. That championship tournament ends up being a farce as a result. As opposed to conducting a best-of-seven phases experiment to determine which team is superior, what MLB is actually doing is conducting a best-of-seven phases experiment that only tells us which form of the game is more likely to have the desired result.


I recognize it’s highly unlikely that the majority reading this thread will let this affect their previous way of thinking to any degree.

But for all I know, there is just one person who has read it and has changed his/her thinking, and that person being a more effective communicator than I, others will eventually re-think… no one can steal that hope, anyhow.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19188
Smokes, the customer base hasn't even ascended to the question's existence, let alone understanding the question, let alone an answer to the question.


the DH has been around for forty years without any major uproar to change it yet you see this as equivalent to a new product launch :lmao: yep I'm the one running down rabbit holes, not the person foreseeing some great uprising in favor of the DH (I'm pretty sure the tipping point in favor of the DH was when George Will - the guardian of baseball tradition- came out in favor of it; of course that was thirty years age so just a matter of time now)

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 10974
I like that it differentiates the leagues.  As the other poster noted we have lived with two sets of rules for forty years and civilization has not come to an end.

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17646
I like that it differentiates the leagues.  As the other poster noted we have lived with two sets of rules for forty years and civilization has not come to an end.

Cause we have beer

Online varoadking

  • Posts: 21525
  • This is Howie do it...
:popcorn:

I'm gonna need more popcorn...

Offline _sturt_

  • Posts: 570
  • "Le Grande Orange"...Colt 45/Astro/Expo(Nat) Great
the DH has been around for forty years without any major uproar to change it yet you see this as equivalent to a new product launch :lmao: yep I'm the one running down rabbit holes, not the person foreseeing some great uprising in favor of the DH (I'm pretty sure the tipping point in favor of the DH was when George Will - the guardian of baseball tradition- came out in favor of it; of course that was thirty years age so just a matter of time now)

Dang. You ARE one of those plain disingenuous types, aren't you.

If you can't read my posts accurately and respond to them in like fashion, you really just ought to move on, my friend.

That's because the people who embrace what you're selling are not going to be convinced by anything I say anyhow, so you don't really gain anything there.

And concurrently, the other people, those who recognize your re-wording and rabbit holes for what they are, are just made to be more curious about what I'm selling.

I'll engage in respectful discussion if you happen to change direction, but no more rabbit holes.

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 10974

Offline _sturt_

  • Posts: 570
  • "Le Grande Orange"...Colt 45/Astro/Expo(Nat) Great


=============================================================

Nah. We've had beer for centuries.

But mass consumption of weed interestingly began about that same time... so maybe that explains the avoidance... 8)

Regardless... beer or weed... time to sober up and/or lay off the IQ-buster, imho. We're more intelligent than this.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19188
Dang. You ARE one of those plain disingenuous types, aren't you.

If you can't read my posts accurately and respond to them in like fashion, you really just ought to move on, my friend.

That's because the people who embrace what you're selling are not going to be convinced by anything I say anyhow, so you don't really gain anything there.

And concurrently, the other people, those who recognize your re-wording and rabbit holes for what they are, are just made to be more curious about what I'm selling.

I'll engage in respectful discussion if you happen to change direction, but no more rabbit holes.

yes, direct quotes are rewording. I'm still waiting to hear what problem your solution solves

Offline _sturt_

  • Posts: 570
  • "Le Grande Orange"...Colt 45/Astro/Expo(Nat) Great
yes, direct quotes are rewording. I'm still waiting to hear what problem your solution solves

Let's view some examples, shall we?

Rabbit hole: "direct quotes are rewording."

Truth: Where Smokes has "directly quoted" me, go back and look to see if he didn't provide some part of the quote, and then proceeded immediately after to interpret the quote in some way that wasn't authentic to the original meaning.

Rabbit hole: "waiting to hear what problem your solution solves"

Truth:

because you saying the rule needs to be changed isn't a predetermined conclusion? You jumped to solution without evidence that a problem actually exists

Going to have to pull rank here. Forgive me. It's not something that I want to do, but these posts kinda call me out as-if I'm a traitor to the cause.

When one of you can legitimately claim, not in theory but in actuality, to have so loved traditional baseball that you left your Senators or Expos or Nationals (or insert team name here) that were being forcibly removed from playing the game the way it was meant to be played, then, at that point only, will you have walked in my shoes and have the standing to talk about this issue at eye-level with me.

I despise the DH. There's no other way to put it. It robs the game of the strategic element that makes it otherwise so exceptional.

So, I'm sorry if anyone thought they could talk down to me on this one and make any headway.

Having said that, I need to take issue with some of my friends here on two basis.

First, regarding the romantic notion that once you change one rule, you automatically have spoiled the entire game for infinity, no. Just no.

That might sound like sweet music to some itching ears, but it's just not borne out when you look at other games we sports fans in the US commonly enjoy. There have been changes of some significance in football and basketball, some of which are annoying, but some of which have actually seemed to have improved those games. Two point conversions, for instance, have added to the drama of pro football in a big way. Similarly, the institution of the 24-second clock has done so for basketball.

My point in bringing that out is simply that it ought not be an automatic assumption that a rule change in any given sport dooms the game to becoming a lesser one. Baseball is no exception.

For that reason, I don't hold on to my repugnance for the DH based on some romantic rationale. It's not simply a matter of spoiling a tradition. It's a matter of spoiling an entire major element of the game.

For the same reasons I don't watch pro bowling, essentially, I don't watch American League baseball.

Second, stop beating your head against the wall.

Not just because I don't want you to, but for these reasons:

(a) It's been 40+ years now, and entire generations now don't know a DH-less baseball like you and I do... clearly, you or I can despise it all I want, but it's not going away.

(b) As-is, we have to play x-number of interleague games, and if you’re like me, I cringe to even sit through those. It's a form of baseball, but something is terribly missing... maybe this is overstating it, but it reminds me of the old Bobby Bare song The Merimaid... “from her head to her waist, she was just my taste, but the rest of her was a fish.”

Baseball without both elements, the athleticism AND the cerebral part is just inferior and dissatisfying.

If we can’t have the pure traditional game--and clearly after 40 years we’re just not going to be able to that toothpaste back in the tube--it’s time we found something that, at least, restores some part… hopefully, a large part… of the cerebral game to all of the game.

(c) I may totally disrespect the imposition of the DH, but as an adult… yes, it’s a kids game, but I’m an adult in love with a kids game… as an adult I have a responsibility to be respectful of people who disagree with me. They may not see things the way I see them, and they have that right.

And they have that same responsibility toward me and you, of course.

When respectful people disagree, what comes naturally is to look for where there is common ground, and attempt to craft some concept that capitalizes on where they agree.

(d) I won’t belabor this one b/c I’ve already spoken to it as much as I have… it simply is incoherent, and thus nonsensical, to play one game that has one championship by two different rules. Not only is it not heard-of in any other sport, but for good reason. That championship tournament ends up being a farce as a result. As opposed to conducting a best-of-seven phases experiment to determine which team is superior, what MLB is actually doing is conducting a best-of-seven phases experiment that only tells us which form of the game is more likely to have the desired result.


I recognize it’s highly unlikely that the majority reading this thread will let this affect their previous way of thinking to any degree.

But for all I know, there is just one person who has read it and has changed his/her thinking, and that person being a more effective communicator than I, others will eventually re-think… no one can steal that hope, anyhow.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19188


Going to have to pull rank here. Forgive me. It's not something that I want to do, but these posts kinda call me out as-if I'm a traitor to the cause.


what does that even mean? Are you an internet general?

Quote
When one of you can legitimately claim, not in theory but in actuality, to have so loved traditional baseball that you left your Senators or Expos or Nationals (or insert team name here) that were being forcibly removed from playing the game the way it was meant to be played, then, at that point only, will you have walked in my shoes and have the standing to talk about this issue at eye-level with me.

I despise the DH. There's no other way to put it. It robs the game of the strategic element that makes it otherwise so exceptional.

So, I'm sorry if anyone thought they could talk down to me on this one and make any headway.

Having said that, I need to take issue with some of my friends here on two basis.

First, regarding the romantic notion that once you change one rule, you automatically have spoiled the entire game for infinity, no. Just no.

That might sound like sweet music to some itching ears, but it's just not borne out when you look at other games we sports fans in the US commonly enjoy. There have been changes of some significance in football and basketball, some of which are annoying, but some of which have actually seemed to have improved those games. Two point conversions, for instance, have added to the drama of pro football in a big way. Similarly, the institution of the 24-second clock has done so for basketball.

My point in bringing that out is simply that it ought not be an automatic assumption that a rule change in any given sport dooms the game to becoming a lesser one. Baseball is no exception.

For that reason, I don't hold on to my repugnance for the DH based on some romantic rationale. It's not simply a matter of spoiling a tradition. It's a matter of spoiling an entire major element of the game.

For the same reasons I don't watch pro bowling, essentially, I don't watch American League baseball.
so you don't like the DH, but want to foist a variant of it on all of base ball? seems intellectually consistent
Quote
Second, stop beating your head against the wall.

Not just because I don't want you to, but for these reasons:

(a) It's been 40+ years now, and entire generations now don't know a DH-less baseball like you and I do... clearly, you or I can despise it all I want, but it's not going away.
true, also true, over the past 40 years there has been no clamor to bring it to the NL, not sure why one point is more valid than  the other
Quote
(b) As-is, we have to play x-number of interleague games, and if you’re like me, I cringe to even sit through those. It's a form of baseball, but something is terribly missing... maybe this is overstating it, but it reminds me of the old Bobby Bare song The Merimaid... “from her head to her waist, she was just my taste, but the rest of her was a fish.”

Baseball without both elements, the athleticism AND the cerebral part is just inferior and dissatisfying.

If we can’t have the pure traditional game--and clearly after 40 years we’re just not going to be able to that toothpaste back in the tube--it’s time we found something that, at least, restores some part… hopefully, a large part… of the cerebral game to all of the game.
I can have the game I want, I follow an NL team, and aside from a few interleague games, only watch NL games. problem solved
Quote
(c) I may totally disrespect the imposition of the DH, but as an adult… yes, it’s a kids game, but I’m an adult in love with a kids game… as an adult I have a responsibility to be respectful of people who disagree with me. They may not see things the way I see them, and they have that right.
who are these people demanding the imposition of the DH? the occasional writer- that's been around since the beginning. Absent more (are NL ratings tumbling compared to AL, is the NL gate down compared to the AL?) there is no reason to believe that there is any demand to change the rule. Without more, it seems like tilting at windmills
Quote
And they have that same responsibility toward me and you, of course.

When respectful people disagree, what comes naturally is to look for where there is common ground, and attempt to craft some concept that capitalizes on where they agree.

(d) I won’t belabor this one b/c I’ve already spoken to it as much as I have… it simply is incoherent, and thus nonsensical, to play one game that has one championship by two different rules. Not only is it not heard-of in any other sport, but for good reason. That championship tournament ends up being a farce as a result. As opposed to conducting a best-of-seven phases experiment to determine which team is superior, what MLB is actually doing is conducting a best-of-seven phases experiment that only tells us which form of the game is more likely to have the desired result.[/b][/color]
you're right, mow the ivy, tear down the monster standardize everything
Quote
I recognize it’s highly unlikely that the majority reading this thread will let this affect their previous way of thinking to any degree.
seems to be the case

Offline _sturt_

  • Posts: 570
  • "Le Grande Orange"...Colt 45/Astro/Expo(Nat) Great
More rabbit holes?

What a surprise.

Hey, Smokes, I have a question.

Does it occur to you at all that by being this way with your rabbit hole strategy and just generally being so persistent, you broadcast the implicit... and terribly counterproductive from where you're sitting... message that you only reply because you feel your position is threatened?

So, effectively, you validate the very discussion you don't want validated because you continue as you do... if you didn't feel it mattered and was substantive, you wouldn't be here and trying so hard to find some way to distract from what I've laid out.

Dang... and yet you're still here, and no doubt, even still, will reply to this post... hehe...

Tough dilemma, to be sure.


******EDIT******

Heyyyyy... where'd Smokes go? Whyyyyyy... he was here pretty much all day, and now he's disappeared? I see he's still online... what happened?



Offline Clever

  • Posts: 2342
too many words

why do i keep opening this thread

Offline _sturt_

  • Posts: 570
  • "Le Grande Orange"...Colt 45/Astro/Expo(Nat) Great
In the words of Ms. Molly Hatchet... "it ain't for everybody."  :mg:

Offline Vega

  • Posts: 5281
  • On the Cutting Edge
I don't care either way. DH or no DH is fine with me. I just want the rule to be the same in both the NL and AL.

Offline _sturt_

  • Posts: 570
  • "Le Grande Orange"...Colt 45/Astro/Expo(Nat) Great
I don't care either way. DH or no DH is fine with me. I just want the rule to be the same in both the NL and AL.

Then, join with me on this Vega...

=====================================================================

General Premise of this Thread

All of the points made in the initial post of this thread remain valid.

Essentially, the thrust of the thread is that the "DH/No DH" discussions we tend to have are posited on a false dichotomy--i.e., we need a national conversation about all of the other options beyond the adoption of the pure DH or the total elimination of the DH, i.e., options that we might consider that do not require the other ~50% of baseball fans to completely capitulate to the preference of the other side.

And moreover, are posited on a false assumption that businesses ever make decisions that are in their own economic disinterest--and, baseball, of course, being a business. Business won't willingly antagonize 10%, let alone ~50% of their customer base.

In case anyone doubts that, the new commish recently just reaffirmed that reality when asked to comment. He stated that he's perfectly content with the status quo where the DH is concerned.

We'll continue with this stalemate unless/until the paying customers decide it's time to end the stalemate.

So, this now-40-year-old idea... that's f-o-r-t-y, not f-o-u-r... that someway somehow the other side is going to give up and give in seems a bit idealistic, if not moronic. Not only do you not have any clear movement toward one of the polarities, but you even have some fan bases whose team plays in one league, yet seemingly prefers the other game. I'm not only talking about HOU fans who largely remain pizzed that they've been forced into playing the AL game. I'm actually referring to a 2013 non-scientific online poll on the NESN (Red Sox' cable network) site that found about 60% of the ~2000 fans indicating a preference for the traditional game.

Taking a thumb to the wind, the only movement that seems to be gaining ground is that it is incoherent for a major league revenue-producing sport to impose on half of its teams one version of a rule, and a different version for the other half. There is an increasing recognition that we as fans wouldn't put up with it if, tomorrow, the NBA were to allow designated free throw shooters, let alone do so for half of the teams to the exclusion of the other half... nor if the NFL were to allow tackles to be pass-eligible, let alone do so for half of the teams to the exclusion of the other half.

So what to do?

As strongly polarized as the abortion issue is, it is instructive that, in spite of two sides being dug-in, the reality is that neither side has things exactly as they want them to be. There is, like it or not, compromise.

What to do? Compromise.

The basis of a more-satisfying compromise is identifying the key priorities that each side holds most salient, and focusing on addressing those.


General Premise of this Concept

This concept gives weight to the assertion that the drama of the overall game benefits when

(a) managers' strategic decisions--specifically as related to pitchers' place in the batting order--are re-introduced to the half of MLB that currently does not have that at all, and preserved in perpetuity to the applause of our half, "anti-DH," of baseball fan-dom; and,

(b) better hitters come to the plate in the midst of better run-scoring opportunities... and conversely, that the game is least affected when worse hitters come to the plate (i.e., when that isn't the case)... all of which addresses the contention of the other half, "pro-DH," of baseball fan-dom.

Sooooo... both sides finding just enough common ground. Pitchers still hit. But not always. Designated hitters still hit. But not always.


The Concept... in Two Simple Points

1. DH bats for the pitcher without consequence only when there are runners in scoring position (RISP).

2. However, if the DH bats for the pitcher when there are not RISP, it will cause someone to come out of the game: either the pitcher (likely), himself, or another position player who the DH replaces in the field. In either of the last two cases, the DH role also leaves the game. That is, the team may only retain the DH as-is if the current pitcher is removed.


Expected Outcomes
At-bat with no runners on base

- Pitchers very likely to bat in earlier innings, about as likely as now to bat in later innings since DH will ordinarily be used and relief pitchers taken down--however, notably, there is a consequence to the DH's at-bat in that case that doesn't exist in the pure-DH game

At-bat with runner on first

- Pitchers likely to be asked to sacrifice in earlier innings, whereas for relief pitchers the same situation exists for the DH decision as would with no runners on base

- Batter immediately before the P/DH slot will be asked to sacrifice routinely to get the runner on 1st to scoring position so that there is no consequence to batting the DH instead of the P

At-bat with runners in scoring position

- DH will always bat for the P in that situation

Overall

- Strategic element of the game preserved for NL fans, and for AL fans, greatly enhanced

- Offensive element of the game remains mostly intact for AL fans, and for NL fans, greatly enhanced

- The game is unified as it was in the beginning, and as it is and has been for every other revenue sport in the world... the Incoherency Era of Baseball comes to an end

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 19589
  • I Didn't Believe
No. Sorry. I just honestly mistook your post for being a reduction-to-the-absurd argument against pursuing a DH compromise.

Now that I know you're not necessarily headed that direction, okay...

While I get it that someone can make the argument that the game could blossom like football by going to a format where you have a set of 9 defensive specialists and 9 offensive specialists, I personally think there's a difference simply based on the fact that every baseball player in the line-up has the potential to be good at pitching, hitting or fielding regardless of his body frame and size... whereas football isn't at all like that... body frame and size matters because the game requires physical contact... not so, baseball, of course.

Therefore, I feel there's something better about baseball that the players on the field each represent the best "total talent" players on the roster... each factors into the offense AND defense for good reason, ie, though each will naturally have some strengths and weaknesses, no player is necessarily limited by the nature of his physical body to not excel in this game in both halves of the inning in his particular role.

It's the "whole man" versus the "specialist" thing... I just think I prefer "whole man" for baseball, even while I think "specialist" suits football well.

I was talking with pazzo...  but whatever.....

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 19589
  • I Didn't Believe
i like the DH

dont care to see a pitcher hit

I do too.  I'd even go further and say that I don't want to see crappy hitters hit just because they can play second base.

:stir:

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 19589
  • I Didn't Believe
I recognize it’s highly unlikely that the majority reading this thread will let this affect their previous way of thinking to any degree.

Yourself included.  So why start it?

You claim to have the moral highground and that popularity doesn't seem to dictate whether something is "right" or not - yet you seem to be BEGGING to have the popular opinion in your favor.

How about just STFU and watch NL baseball?

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 19589
  • I Didn't Believe
I like that it differentiates the leagues.  As the other poster noted we have lived with two sets of rules for forty years and civilization has not come to an end.

I do too - the problem then is inter-league play (which I hate).

Online dracnal

  • Posts: 1089
I do too - the problem then is inter-league play (which I hate).

Does that mean you feel the Pennant is the real goal and the World Series is just an afterthought? Not trolling - serious question.