Hank Steinbrenner is the biggest...uh...kitty...I've ever seen

I dont care if the DH exists or not. Play with it, play without it.... no issue to me. I do think that it should be consistent in MLB....either the NL adopts it... or the AL divorces it.

Nah. That difference is part of the charm of MLB, to me. I think it's perfect just the way things are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

Well, there is alot of theory and speculation in this thread.

First off, as I mentioned I back steinbrennars comments 100%. I don't see why we don't protect the pitchers from injury, as they are far and away the most succeptible to it while running the bases and swinging the bat because of all the other leg work they have to do while on the mound. It's obviously also an area they don't excel in as todays pitchers are much much more specialized artists and perfectionists than ever before. In the NFL they recognized this about the QB position and have gone out of their way to try and protect them while keeping a balance. The MLB can do the same with the DH.

To the extremists who want to talk about designated runners, and defensive team units and all the other ****...thats just unrealistic jargen to get in the way and muddy a realistic argument. Nobody is discussing going to those extremes, they are only discussing a balance to protect the pitchers. If ever those extreme situations come into the discussion I most certainly would argue in your favor that they should not be allowed.

As for the DH giving an advantage, I most certainly believe it does to the AL as do most of the professional analysts/journalists who discuss this ad-nauseum every World Series and interleague matchup. Some want to dispute this, they are welcomed to do so.

The short of my argument is that pitching is now more than ever a specialized trait that very few can do. They now make millions of dollars because of that specialty and as a fan that is what I pay to see. That should be protected to keep as best as possible the most talented individuals on the field. Sure pitchers can hit and run physically, but it does expose them to additional injury unnecessarily. In addition, in almost every case the manager will chose if the option were available to bat a DH over the pitcher, meaning protecting the pitcher has value to the teams as well. Nobody says in the AL a pitcher CAN'T hit...the fact the teams choose not to let them should say something.

Finally, as for the arguement that the game hasn't changed, that is laughable. We had dead ball era's, live ball era's, sterioid era, high mound, low mounds, pre-integration, post-integration, changes to the balls, bats, the batters now wear armor at the plate. There was a time where substitutions could ONLY be made due to an injury. There were pitchers that threw well over 100 pitchers per game every 3rd or 4th day, and well...you know what we have today. As mentioned earlier, the game initially never was 9 innings, it was the first to score 21 runs (correction from my earlier 22 run comment). We now have september call-ups and 25 man rosters, those have changed over the years. The bases were initially 42 'paces', pretty unscientific...thats now changed. We had 12 game series, 10 game series, and now have 7 & 5 game series. We now have interleague play and wild cards. There's a rule on the book demanding players be of a certain height that wasn't always there. There was a time where baseball was a game, then a parttime job, then a career. We can go on and on...each one of those effected the 'traditionalists' arguement. I'm all for tradition, but the tradition of baseball is that things DO change.

---

You bring up a good point about changes & traditions - actually if Steinbrenner REALLY wants changes to the Pitcher/DH rule all he has to do is ADD in a proposed rule change at the NEXT MLB meeting (whenever it is) & try & convince his co owners its advantages.

Personally,& contradictory to my own teams' favour,I am AGAINST the DH.Originally it was brought in to increase RUN production & add more spectacular games in a period when Baseball was in a dormant/dying phase.

That whole argument is no longer valid since the 2000's,if anything the DH only helps the "rich teams" who can sign great veteran bats at over the market price knowing they DONT have to play D & at the same time remove strategic managerial plays such as double switches & having a full bench,but that is me. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

That whole argument is no longer valid since the 2000's,if anything the DH only helps the "rich teams" who can sign great veteran bats at over the market price knowing they DONT have to play D & at the same time remove strategic managerial plays such as double switches & having a full bench,but that is me.

---

That is a fair point which I agree with you on to a point. I don't think it 'only ' helps the rich teams but I agree they have an advantage. But there are many exceptions ie. Frank Thomas and the A's. Anyone can have Barry Bonds right now if they wanted him. I'm sure if I look through the AL rosters of the teams that aren't considered 'rich' I would find more Thomas-like examples, however there is not doubt that their is a benefit to the rich teams in acquiring the great hitters with poor defense because not only are they limited to AL duty but they are then limited to AL teams that have the resources. Less of a market for them.

All that aside, the DH does protect the young arms coming up through all AL rotations, even the 'not so wealthy' lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

That is a fair point which I agree with you on to a point. I don't think it 'only ' helps the rich teams but I agree they have an advantage. But there are many exceptions ie. Frank Thomas and the A's. Anyone can have Barry Bonds right now if they wanted him. I'm sure if I look through the AL rosters of the teams that aren't considered 'rich' I would find more Thomas-like examples, however there is not doubt that their is a benefit to the rich teams in acquiring the great hitters with poor defense because not only are they limited to AL duty but they are then limited to AL teams that have the resources. Less of a market for them.

---

Um,the Thomas deal is a SPECIAL case - he ONLY signed because he got 10 odd million from the Jays already & signed with the A's at "discount" to showcase he could still bat (& thus get ANOTHER large deal) but in most cases no SMALL market can sign a 10-20 million player just to bat!

Examples abound from Giambi,Thome,Papi.... whereas a team like the Rays have to use a Johnny Gomes ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

All that aside, the DH does protect the young arms coming up through all AL rotations, even the 'not so wealthy' lol.

---

That is another debate....BUT how many pitchers' have been lost over the course of time BECAUSE of Batting injuries ? LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Überpöster

well its DEFINATLY hard to dispute that however you may want to say greatest BASEBALL team ever. Manchester United i believe is the winningest franchise.
( i dont follow soccer so i could be wrong however)

---

Try Real Madrid ;)

Domestic

* La Liga

Winners (31 - record): 1931–32, 1932–33, 1953–54, 1954–55, 1956–57, 1957–58, 1960–61, 1961–62, 1962–63, 1963–64, 1964–65, 1966–67, 1967–68, 1968–69, 1971–72, 1974–75, 1975–76, 1977–78, 1978–79, 1979–80, 1985–86, 1986–87, 1987–88, 1988–89, 1989–90, 1994–95, 1996–97, 2000–01, 2002–03, 2006–07, 2007–08
Runners-up (17): 1928-29, 1933-34, 1934-35, 1935-36, 1941-42, 1944-45, 1958-59, 1959-60, 1965-66, 1980-81, 1982-83, 1983-84, 1991-92, 1992-93, 1998-99, 2004-05, 2005-06

* Copa del Rey

Winners (17): 1904–05, 1905–06, 1906–07, 1907–08, 1916–17, 1933–34, 1935–36, 1945–46, 1946–47, 1961–62, 1969–70, 1973–74, 1974–75, 1979–80, 1981–82, 1988–89, 1992–93
Runners-up (19): 1902-03, 1915-16, 1917-18, 1923-24, 1928-29, 1929-30, 1932-33, 1939-40, 1942-43, 1957-58, 1959-60, 1960-61, 1967-68, 1978-79, 1982-83, 1989-90, 1991-92, 2001-02, 2003-04

* Supercopa de España

Winners (7): 1988, 1989*, 1990, 1993, 1997, 2001, 2003
Runners-up (3): 1982, 1995, 2007
(* Won Copa del Rey and La Liga)

* Copa de la Liga

Winners (1): 1984–85
Runners-up (1): 1982-83

European

* UEFA Champions League

Winners (9 - record): 1955–56*, 1956–57, 1957–58, 1958–59, 1959–60, 1965–66, 1997–98, 1999–00, 2001–02.
Runners-up (3): 1961-62, 1963-64, 1980-81
(* First ever winners)

* Intercontinental Cup

Winners (3): 1960, 1998, 2002
Runners-up (2): 1966, 2000

* UEFA Cup

Winners (2): 1984–85, 1985–86

* UEFA Cup Winners' Cup

Runners-up (2): 1970-71, 1982-83

* UEFA Supercup

Winners (1): 2002
Runners-up (2): 1998, 2000


Manchester United are ALL sports richest FRANCHISE however,valued at 1.6 Billion $ & rising since they just won the 2008 Premier League & UEFA Champions' League (NY Yankees are valued by Forbes' at 1.2 Billion but set to increase IN 2009 when they go to new Yankees stadium - unfortunately for MLB the World fan base is limited & Sports economists believe that by 2020 the top US based sports franchise will be the LA Lakers or the Celtics & Soccer will hold 5 of the top 10 of the richest franchises in the world)

thanks frenchie :p

Just a couple of notes....

1) The vast majority of baseball analysts believe that world series/interleague rules favor the National League, not the American League. Not using the DH and forcing pitchers to hit (AL) is a much greater disadvantage than simply using a DH in lieu of your pitcher batting (NL).

2) The argument against the DH for years... maybe decades now.... is that it does NOT protect starting pitchers from overuse. When you do not have to allow your pitcher to bat, especially when trailing (or tied) in a game, there is a tendency to let the pitcher throw additional innings. While I have not conducted a scientific study myself, that has been the debate for quite some time now.

very good point swampdog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

Just a couple of notes....

1) The vast majority of baseball analysts believe that world series/interleague rules favor the National League, not the American League. Not using the DH and forcing pitchers to hit (AL) is a much greater disadvantage than simply using a DH in lieu of your pitcher batting (NL).

2) The argument against the DH for years... maybe decades now.... is that it does NOT protect starting pitchers from overuse. When you do not have to allow your pitcher to bat, especially when trailing (or tied) in a game, there is a tendency to let the pitcher throw additional innings. While I have not conducted a scientific study myself, that has been the debate for quite some time now.

---

Not much I can do to argue...i think you're dilusional however. Every WS broadcast I've ever watched or intro i've read that has discussed the matter has stated that the rules favor the AL. Maybe i'm reading it wrong, but your next sentence states that "not using the DH and forcing pitchers to hit is a much greater disadvantage." So...that reads to me like you agree that the DH is an advantage and because the AL has someone who is a constant DH they should be at an advantage?? Where am I going wrong here?

#2 is pretty delusional too. I've never heard such an argument and find it laughable since pitchers are on such tight pitch counts now-a-days.

I find all this commentary about protecting pitchers....laughable.

We have a good sample of what happens to pitchers when you don't "protect" them. It's called the National League. Their pitchers don't exactly appear to be suffering.

Since the NL pitchers aren't exactly dropping like flies, apparently it isn't quite the highly specialized profession that requires extra care that some people think.

The only conclusion I can reach if AL pitchers really run into trouble rounding the bases, is that their conditioning is horrible. I really can't defend that, but it's the only possible explanaton that jives with Steinbrenner's rant.

Either that, or someone should tell Hank there's no crying in baseball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filihok

Similarly, an AL team, better have the pitchers take a few rounds of batting practice, and base running, every now and then, because it IS going to come up at some point.

---

Or just mix it up a little. The Yankees have rotation problems with Wang out. So why not just pinch hit every time the pitcher comes up, and see if you can put together 9 innings with 3 or 4 long relievers. Also gives you a nice offensive boost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

#2 is pretty delusional too. I've never heard such an argument and find it laughable since pitchers are on such tight pitch counts now-a-days.

---

th reason I agree with #2 is not so much AL pitches longer but the AL may get pulled a little sooner for a Pinch Hitter in late innings. It happened to tim hudson a week or so ago he was pulled after I believe the 7th with about 90 pitches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clay Dreslough

Or just mix it up a little. The Yankees have rotation problems with Wang out. So why not just pinch hit every time the pitcher comes up, and see if you can put together 9 innings with 3 or 4 long relievers. Also gives you a nice offensive boost.

---

lol I like it. have farnsworth pitch 4 innings blow out his arm then you can get some $$$ from insureance (I think) from being on the dl

Strangely enough, I have followed baseball closely for well over 30 years. I read about baseball constantly, and do my own research. I have never, ever, heard anyone suggest that the AL gains an advantage against the NL due to using the DH... except one poster in these forums. Dickay...I would really like you to provide me with something that might suggest why the AL could possibly have an advantage when the DH is not being used and pitchers have to hit and run the bases. Please....give me a reference for this position.

ofensivly AL has advantage with DH
NL has advantage without DH

its pretty simple :p

Thats somewhat true, but its an oversimplification. Every NL team has a couple of guys on the bench who can hit the ball.

When the NL has to use the DH, in some cases, they are at a slight disadvantage. In other cases, there is no disadvantage at all. When the AL can not use the DH, they are put at a more significant disadvantage. Thats the point.

I dont know about being "dillusional", as someone suggested, since that isnt a word. But if he means delusional....well then, my belief is that anyone who thinks the AL gains an advantage in the DH/no-DH exchange....is delusional.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CatKnight

I find all this commentary about protecting pitchers....laughable.

We have a good sample of what happens to pitchers when you don't "protect" them. It's called the National League. Their pitchers don't exactly appear to be suffering.

Since the NL pitchers aren't exactly dropping like flies, apparently it isn't quite the highly specialized profession that requires extra care that some people think.

The only conclusion I can reach if AL pitchers really run into trouble rounding the bases, is that their conditioning is horrible. I really can't defend that, but it's the only possible explanaton that jives with Steinbrenner's rant.

Either that, or someone should tell Hank there's no crying in baseball.

---

I believe the thought process is flawed. A big deal has been made out of this instance solely because it was a high level AMERICAN LEAGUE pitcher that got hurt and Steinbrennar b!tched. I'm certain you can rationalize and will agree that there have been NL pitchers hurt while running. A hammy, twisted or broken ankle, etc. etc. They don't get the headlines because its not so uncommon. I'm not saying they're dropping like flies, but surely they get injured.

I don't see the reason to research it because I think we can all agree that yes it happens periodically. My feeling is, if it happens once it happens too often. They don't need to be put into that position, pitching is too valuable now-a-days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

Strangely enough, I have followed baseball closely for well over 30 years. I read about baseball constantly, and do my own research. I have never, ever, heard anyone suggest that the AL gains an advantage against the NL due to using the DH... except one poster in these forums. Dickay...I would really like you to provide me with something that might suggest why the AL could possibly have an advantage when the DH is not being used and pitchers have to hit and run the bases. Please....give me a reference for this position.

---

Here is your moment of zen;

http://www.salon.com/sports/col/kauf...ay/index1.html

Took me all of 10 seconds to google it. Funny a thread from sports mogul came up where although not many posted in it those who did felt the AL had an advantage;

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php?p=1095490

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

They don't need to be put into that position, pitching is too valuable now-a-days.

---

Since pitching is so valuable, teams better take more steps to ensure that their pitchers can do what is required of them without getting hurt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filihok

Since pitching is so valuable, teams better take more steps to ensure that their pitchers can do what is required of them without getting hurt.

---

BINGO!!!!!

that means being in BASEBALL shape!!!

Here's another;

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...nates_the.html

And another;

http://sirtheory.wordpress.com/2007/...e-to-dominate/

And another;

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playof...ard&id=3081587

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filihok

Since pitching is so valuable, teams better take more steps to ensure that their pitchers can do what is required of them without getting hurt.

---

Explains again why givin the choice (AL) the teams CHOOSE to not allow their pitchers to hit and run the bases. Nothing says pitchers can't bat in the AL. Its just widely recognized by those in that league, and would be so by those in the NL that it's smarter not to bat them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

Explains again why givin the choice (AL) the teams CHOOSE to not allow their pitchers to hit and run the bases. Nothing says pitchers can't bat in the AL. Its just widely recognized by those in that league, and would be so by those in the NL that it's smarter not to bat them.

---

Of course I'd rather have Big Papi hitting instead of Clayton Kershaw in terms of getting offensive production. I'd also rather have Big Papi hitting instead of Lugo, VTek, Crisp...doesn't mean it's a good rule.

OMG, say it isn't so....an NL pitcher hurt running the bases?? Impossible!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...072402336.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filihok

Of course I'd rather have Big Papi hitting instead of Clayton Kershaw in terms of getting offensive production. I'd also rather have Big Papi hitting instead of Lugo, VTek, Crisp...doesn't mean it's a good rule.

---

whats not good about it? get more offensive production and protect your commodity. rather than b!tch about it, explain what rationale other than 'tradition' makes it not a good idea. Lack of tradition in fact was something that caused this, because if interleague play wasnt' there he wouldn't have been running the bases. Again, the tradition of MLB is that things change. Hopefully for the better, and every MLB team would take a DH if offered, it has been successful, it avoids injury......I think its been for the better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

OMG, say it isn't so....an NL pitcher hurt running the bases?? Impossible!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...072402336.html

---

do me a favor, get all the SP injuries (due to non pitching/fielding in the NL) and tell me which position overall has the LEAST DL appearances? I bet its pitchers. I dont know thats why im asking

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

and every MLB team would take a DH if offered...

---

um... then why every time its voted on the NL votes no

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet

do me a favor, get all the SP injuries (due to non pitching/fielding in the NL) and tell me which position overall has the LEAST DL appearances? I bet its pitchers. I dont know thats why im asking

---

seeing that they field and hit much less than everyday fielders and hitters...i'll agree with your assessment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet

um... then why every time its voted on the NL votes no

---

Do the research son...actually during the 'first vote' the NL voted for it and the AL voted against it!! Back then however they needed both leagues to approve it.

In a future vote (mid-20th century) the NL voted 6-4 for it and needed a 7th vote to pass it but two owners were not available. One of the two was on record of being for it.

I don't know when the last time they voted for it was. I do know that the AL has the option to play a pitcher if they chose, and Billy Martin once did. I think that was the only time it's happened purposely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

Do the research son...actually during the 'first vote' the NL voted for it and the AL voted against it!! Back then however they needed both leagues to approve it.

---

Um...you realize you're referring to 1928?

NL President Chub Feeney is largely responsible for keeping the DH OUT of the league in 1973. This was one of Charlie Finley's more interesting ideas. (And when the time came, he voted AGAINST it...though out of pique rather than really changing his mind.)

From Wiki:
However, momentum to implement the DH did not pick up until the pitching dominance of the late 1960’s. In 1968, Denny McLain won 31 games and Bob Gibson had a 1.12 ERA, while Carl Yastrzemski led the American League in hitting with a .301 average. After the season, the rules were changed to lower the mound from 15 to 10 inches and change the upper limit of the strike zone from the top of a batter's shoulders to his armpits. In addition, in 1969 spring training, both the American League and National League agreed to try the designated pinch hitter (DPH), but they did not agree on the implementation. Most NL teams chose not to participate. On March 6, 1969, two games utilized the new DPH rule for the very first time. Two newly formed expansion teams, the Montreal Expos and the Kansas City Royals would participate in one such game, and the New York Yankees and Washington Senators in the other. On March 26, 1969, Major League Baseball nixed the idea for the time being. Like other experimental baseball rule changes of the 1960's and 70's, the DH was embraced by Oakland A's owner Charlie O. Finley. On January 11, 1973, Finley and the other American League owners voted 8-4 to approve the designated hitter for a three-year trial run

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

whats not good about it? get more offensive production and protect your commodity.

---

You're right. Also PED's and corked bats should be legal because they increase production.

A pitcher is a baseball player. If he's on the team and in the line-up, he should bat. That's my opinion. And the opinion of a lot of other people here.

Quote:

---

1901 Catchers were compelled to remain continuously under the bat.

1903 Foul strike rule was adopted by the American League.

1904 Height of the mound was limited to 15 inches higher than the level of the baselines.

1908 Pitchers were prohibited from soiling a new ball.
Shinguards were reintroduced.
The sacrifice fly rule was adopted.

1910 The cork center was added to the official baseball.

1917 Earned-run statistics and definitions were added to the rules.

1920 All freak deliveries, including the spitball, were outlawed.
The failure of a preceding runner to touch a base would not affect the status of a succeeding runner.
The batter was given credit for a home run in the last of the ninth inning if the winning run was on base when the ball was hit out of the field.
The number of runs batted in were to be included in the official score.
Frivolous ninth-inning uncontested steals in one-sided games were discarded.

1925 Pitcher was allowed to use a resin bag.
The minimum home-run distance was set at 250 feet.

1931 Sacrifice fly rule was brought back, this time with a man scoring after the catch only.
Defensive interference was changed from an offense solely by a catcher to one by a fielder as well.
No fielder could take a position in line with a batter's vision with the deliberate intent to in any way distract the batter.
Regulations referring to a batter contacting his own ball were clarified as was the area of bases awarded a batter when a defensive player threw his glove at a batted or thrown ball or in the case of spectator interference.

1953 Players were to remove their gloves from the field (in 1954) when batting and no equipment was to show on the field at any time.

1959 Regulations were set up for minimum boundaries for all new parks, 325-400-325 feet.

1968 The anti-spitball rule was rewritten and tightened up because of the wave of moistened pitches that floated plateward the prior season.

1969 The pitcher's mound was dropped five inches.
The strike zone was shrunken to the area from the armpits to the top of the batter's knees.
The save rule was added to the official rules for the first time.

1971 All major-league players were ordered to wear protective helmets.

1973 The rule on glove size and color was minutely outlined for standardization.
The American League began using designated hitter for pitchers on an experimental basis.

1974 The save rule was rewritten.
Minimum standards for individual championships were outlined.

1975 The ball was permitted to be covered with cowhide because of the shortage of horses.
Suspension for three days became mandatory if batter were to hit a fair ball with a filled, doctored or flat-surfaced bat.
The save rule was changed again.

---

yes every rule ever invented was perfect right

Quote:

---

1877 Canvas bases 15 inches square were introduced.

Home plate was placed in the angle formed by the intersection of the first and third base lines.
The hitter was exempted from a time at bat if he walked.

1879 Player reserve clause was for the first time put into a contract.
The number of "called balls" became 9 and all balls were either strikes, balls or fouls.
The pitcher had to face a batsman before pitching to him.
A staff of umpires was first introduced.

1880 Base on balls was reduced to 8 "called balls."
The base runner was out if hit by a batted ball.
The catcher had to catch the pitch on the fly in order to register and out on a third strike.

1883 The "foul bound catch" was abolished and the pitcher could deliver a ball from above his waist.

1884 All restrictions on the delivery of a pitcher were removed.
Six "called balls" became a base on balls.
Championships were to be decided on a percentage basis.

1885 One portion of the bat could be flat (one side).
Home base could be made of marble or whitened rubber.
Chest protectors worn by catchers and umpires came into use.

1887 The pitcher's box was reduced to 4 feet by 5 1/2 feet.
Calling for high and low pitches was abolished.
Five balls became a base on balls.
Four "called strikes" were adopted for this season only.
Bases on balls were recorded as hits for this season only.
The batter was awarded first base when hit by a pitch.
Home plate was to be made of rubber only - dropping the marble type and was to be 12 inches square.
Coaches were recognized by the rules for the first time ever.

1888 Player reserve clause was written into the contracts of minor leaguers for the first time.
The base on balls exemption from a time at bat was restored.
A batsman was credited with a base hit when a runner was hit by his batted ball.

1889 Four balls became a base on balls.
A sacrifice bunt was statistically recognized.

1891 Substitutions were permitted at any point in the game.
Large padded mitts were allowed for catchers.

1893 Pitching distance increased from 50 feet to 60 feet 6 inches.
The pitching box was eliminated and a rubber slab 12 inches by 4 inches was substituted.
The pitcher was required to place his rear foot against the slab.
The rule exempting a batter from a time at bat on a sacrifice was instituted.
The rule allowing a flat side to a bat was rescinded and the requirement that the bat be round and wholly of hard wood was substituted.

1894 Foul bunts were classified as strikes.

1895 Pitching slab was enlarged to 24 inches by 6 inches.
Bats were permitted to be 2 3/4 inches in diameter and not to exceed 42 inches.
Infield-fly rule was adopted.
A held foul tip was classified as a strike.

---

lets go back to 4 strikes for a strikeout as well. That will help increase productivity too.
and lets go back to

we can let them call for a high or low pitch as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet

lets go back to 4 strikes for a strikeout as well. That will help increase productivity too.
and lets go back to

we can let them call for a high or low pitch as well

---

I can use your argument against your 'tradition' stance as to why the DH should be allowed...oh, you really haven't given a reason as to why the DH shouldn't be.

If pitchers should have to bat than others should have to throw 95 consistently, and nibble corners with great breaking stuff. Sure they'd get more arm injuries, but who cares??

Every position is now more specialized. Pitching is the rarest of them all. Protect it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filihok

You're right. Also PED's and corked bats should be legal because they increase production.

A pitcher is a baseball player. If he's on the team and in the line-up, he should bat. That's my opinion. And the opinion of a lot of other people here.

---

Good analogy, so all baseball players should be able to throw 95MPH with great breaking pitches that nibble corners.

It works both ways you see. Fact is, pitchers have to spend more time perfecting their craft which is why even NL pitchers do poorly at the plate. They now make millions of dollars, and fans should get to see Chin Mein Wang pitch and not some third rate bum because Wang got hurt doing something he really shouldn't have to do any longer.

I really don't see a valid argument, and its funny you touch on the production piece and leave the piece of my quote regarding protection of the commodity out. Way to pick arguments and try to divert the discussion. You can't argue 'tradition, its how the game was meant to be played' because you all have been citing old rules that are no longer in existince proving the game is no longer played how it was 'meant to be.

Can't we all just get along? If you don't like the DH, watch the NL. If you like the DH, watch the AL. If you don't give a ****, watch either league.

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Can't we all just get along? If you don't like the DH, watch the NL. If you like the DH, watch the AL. If you don't give a ****, watch either league.

:)

---

Agreed, until the next pitcher gets hurt unnecessarily and paying fans get stuck watching Sidney Ponson like types.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

Agreed, until the next pitcher gets hurt unnecessarily and paying fans get stuck watching Sidney Ponson like types.

---

I've never even heard the "it's bad because pitchers risk getting hurt" line until a star pitcher on a team with a whiney owner got hurt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

I've never even heard the "it's bad because pitchers risk getting hurt" line until a star pitcher on a team with a whiney owner got hurt.

---

i'm honest, neither did I but it makes sense to me. ;)