_sturt_ing over: A DH poll.

[mitlen]

PLEASE NO.      <-------------------------------

[whytev]

The answer to the Werth/Zim conundrum.

No. No no no no never.

[Mattionals]

Bring it on. I've wanted the DH for years.

[whytev]

Bring it on. I've wanted the DH for years.

Here you go.  Bye.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/index.php

[Mattionals]

Here you go.  Bye.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/index.php

You do realize that it is going to happen, and it will be sooner rather than later. Have fun crying about it and sounding like an 85 year old talking about the "good ol' days".

[whytev]

You do realize that it is going to happen, and it will be sooner rather than later. Have fun crying about it and sounding like an 85 year old talking about the "good ol' days".

I also know I'm going to die one day. Lots of things are inevitable, but that doesn't make them good things. Every year until this travesty takes over the National League is precious.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Every league in the world other than the NL and I think the Central in NPB uses the DH.  Get used to it.

[PowerBoater69]

Every league in the world other than the NL and I think the Central in NPB uses the DH.  Get used to it.

MDLL does not have the DH, forces managers to manage. I hate watching AL games.

[NJ Ave]

If they want to force managers to manage, just make a rule that you can't have a DH get more than 3 PA in a single game.

You think that's arbitrary and dumb? So is having pitchers hit.

[NJ Ave]

Or link the designated hitter to the pitcher's position in the lineup. You pull the SP? You have to pinch hit for the DH the next time he comes up to bat.

But watching these dummies attempt to hit, simply to create strategic decision points later in the game, is ridiculous in my opinion. There are better ways to accomplish that without resorting to wasting 5-10% of the game's PAs on flailing dummies.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

MDLL does not have the DH, forces managers to manage. I hate watching AL games.

MDLL?

[mitlen]

MDLL?

It's code for 1600 the long way.    Must be Obama's fault.   

[PowerBoater69]

MDLL?

Mason District Little League

[JCA-CrystalCity]

It's code for 1600 the long way.    Must be Obama's fault.   

did JVLIVS tell you that back before the Anno Domini?

[mitlen]

did JVLIVS tell you that back before the Anno Domini?

We were hanging out in southern Britain the first time he mentioned it.     VaRK was makin' some beer.

[varoadking]

VaRK was makin' some beer.

Xmas present from the Missus... 

[BrandonK]

NICE

[whytev]

If they want to force managers to manage, just make a rule that you can't have a DH get more than 3 PA in a single game.

You think that's arbitrary and dumb? So is having pitchers hit.

Having 9 hitters and 9 fielders all be the same people is not dumb. It's the default. It's logical. Make any case you want for the DH, but dont pretend it's as intuitive as everyone hitting.

[NJ Ave]

Having 9 hitters and 9 fielders all be the same people is not dumb. It's the default. It's logical. Make any case you want for the DH, but dont pretend it's as intuitive as everyone hitting.

I mean, it hasn't been the default in the AL in 42 years. It is not the default in many other professional and amateur leagues, and it's far from a given that everyone finds it as "logical" and "intuitive" as you.

I find it absurd to watch idiots flail around when they have no interest in hitting the ball, and I find the idea that we keep it around to gin up opportunities for strategic decisionmaking a silly contrivance.

Furthermore, if you're so concerned about the same players on the field batting at the plate, why do you have absolutely no problem with the manager not having to put the PH on the mound, or alternatively choose to PH with a RP?

Oh right, it's totally logical to have the P always bat, except when it's not.

[whytev]

I mean, it hasn't been the default in the AL in 42 years. It is not the default in many other professional and amateur leagues, and it's far from a given that everyone finds it as "logical" and "intuitive" as you.

I find it absurd to watch idiots flail around when they have no interest in hitting the ball, and I find the idea that we keep it around to gin up opportunities for strategic decisionmaking a silly contrivance.

Furthermore, if you're so concerned about the same players on the field batting at the plate, why do you have absolutely no problem with the manager not having to put the PH on the mound, or alternatively choose to PH with a RP?

Oh right, it's totally logical to have the P always bat, except when it's not.

The game was invented with the exact same people hitting and fielding.  That's how it used to be.  That predates the AL having the DH by almost 100 years.

If you were given a foreigner from a country that didn't have baseball and you had to explain the game as quickly as possible, and you just could explain one league's rules, it would be a lot faster to explain the NL rules.  That's what makes it intuitive.  You might not like it, which is fine, we can differ, but it is obviously the default.

What is logical, consistent, and good about substitutions is that you get extra guys, and if you use them, you have to leave them in or replace them, and they are then wasted for the rest of the game.  That works for me.  Soccer has the same rule too.  You can sub all day, but you burn the guy.

What I want and what I like is an offensive and defensive consequence for every personnel change.  I like watching Kyle Schwarber try to catch a ball because he hits so many home runs he actually has to be out there.  I like that after 90 pitches and 7 innings, the manager might be torn over letting the ace hit when rocking a 2 - 0 shutout.  It's just preference.

[NJ Ave]

The game was invented with the exact same people hitting and fielding.  That's how it used to be.  That predates the AL having the DH by almost 100 years.

Yeah, every sport would be better if they just went by the original rules.

Baseball should really get back to being "intuitive" by adopting the following original rules of baseball.

1. having balls knocked over the OF fence count as foul balls
2. balls caught on one bounce should be outs
3. games should not end until a team scores 21 runs

Also, no forward passes in football.

And why on earth would I base a sport's rules on ability to explain something to a foreigner? How about what makes the best sport to watch?

I acknowledge that some people have legitimate reasons for preferring the NL, you're the one being dismissive and patronizing by insisting that one league's rules are "logical," "consistent," and "intuitive" while the rules of the majority of baseball leagues (including half of MLB) are not.

I mean, imagine if football still had limited substitutions and we had to watch players play both ways. Would that be more "true" to the history of the game for some people? I guess. It would also be less fun to watch for others.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

NJ Ave - don't forget the shot clock in basketball.  Watching a great guard run the 4 corners "offense" was a thing of beauty.  The shot clock was simply a contrivance to introduce more offense into the game. If a team did not want the other to kill the clock, then it should play defenders who can steal a ball.  No shot clock leveled the playing field, too.

[mitlen]

NJ Ave - don't forget the shot clock in basketball.  Watching a great guard run the 4 corners "offense" was a thing of beauty.  The shot clock was simply a contrivance to introduce more offense into the game. If a team did not want the other to kill the clock, then it should play defenders who can steal a ball.  No shot clock leveled the playing field, too.

Terp will be here in a minute reminiscing about the 1971 Maryland/South Carolina game.   

[NJ Ave]

NJ Ave - don't forget the shot clock in basketball.  Watching a great guard run the 4 corners "offense" was a thing of beauty.  The shot clock was simply a contrivance to introduce more offense into the game. If a team did not want the other to kill the clock, then it should play defenders who can steal a ball.  No shot clock leveled the playing field, too.

Right, as well as all the subsequent lowering of the shot clock multiple times, adjustments of the 3-second area, 3-point line, etc. I'm sure there are others in every sport, as well.

Anyways, none of this is to say that I don't think there are valid reasons people prefer NL rules, though I disagree. But I think the disagreement should remain in the "what's more enjoyable" realm as opposed to saying one is "logical" and the other is "not". It's enough for us to disagree on the following - whytev enjoys the strategic decisions that accompany pitchers hitting, while I dislike watching pitchers hitting enough that I'm willing to give up those strategic decisions.

[whytev]

Yeah, every sport would be better if they just went by the original rules.

Baseball should really get back to being "intuitive" by adopting the following original rules of baseball.

1. having balls knocked over the OF fence count as foul balls
2. balls caught on one bounce should be outs
3. games should not end until a team scores 21 runs

Also, no forward passes in football.

And why on earth would I base a sport's rules on ability to explain something to a foreigner? How about what makes the best sport to watch?

I acknowledge that some people have legitimate reasons for preferring the NL, you're the one being dismissive and patronizing by insisting that one league's rules are "logical," "consistent," and "intuitive" while the rules of the majority of baseball leagues (including half of MLB) are not.

I mean, imagine if football still had limited substitutions and we had to watch players play both ways. Would that be more "true" to the history of the game for some people? I guess. It would also be less fun to watch for others.

You are deliberately missing the point and it's obnoxious. I want all personnel decisions to have an offensive and defensive consequence. Full stop. I'm done.