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

[Überpöster]

In the end it comes down to this fact: The YANKEES are the greatest team ever.

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)

[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.

[RickD]

Now if you can just agree the YANKEES are the greatest Baseball team ever you'd be at 100%

[metsguy234]

Now if you can just agree the YANKEES are the greatest Baseball team ever you'd be at 100%

He wouldn't say that though, he's not a liar...

[JayC]

He wouldn't say that though, he's not a liar...

Ah, the irony of your signature!

[Swampdog]

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.

[ohms_law]

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

[FRENCHREDSOX]

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.

[dickay]

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.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

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

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

[FRENCHREDSOX]

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)

[Überpöster]

thanks frenchie

[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.

[Überpöster]

very good point swampdog

[dickay]

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.