wutka@gitpyr.UUCP (Mark Wutka) (05/13/85)
I have an interesting idea about approaching the DH rule. If it is
so significantly different, why don't we let the American league use the
DH rule in the All-Star game and make the National league do without
it. Both leagues would be functioning under the rules they are used to
and if it makes that much of a difference, then the All-Star game would
no longer be as lopsided as it has been in the past.
--
Mark Wutka
Office of Computing Services
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Ga.
...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,masscomp,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!wutka
...!{rlgvax,sb1,uf-cgrl,unmvax,ut-sally}!gatech!gitpyr!wutka
this is what happens when I roll my head on the keyboard:
b mfdfgm ,iutfrdffdbfv jkhgtxdhl;kuje il;'li5rdjil.idreagle@ihuxf.UUCP (John T. Blumenstein) (05/15/85)
From: Roger L. Mills, Bell Labs. Comments on the DH. Personally, I dislike the DH and think it shouyd be banned. BUT, I really don't care one way or the other. What I think is important is that both leagues should either have the DH, or both leagues should not use the DH. Oh well, my two cents.
djvh@drutx.UUCP (VanHandelDJ) (05/17/85)
>>YES!!! Dump the DH!!! Sport implies balance of offense and defense, with >> strategy playing an important part in the outcome. The DH takes away >> from that. Excitement is fine, but not when it is commonplace. >> (see the 1930 NL hitting averages) > >Gee Whiz Dave, I can't imagine the excitement around your living room >when NBC shows a closeup of Tommy Lasorda deciding whether or not to >use a pinch hitter. Gosh Gee Golly... Its just to much...I need a >sedative...oh ..oh... oh > >P.S. You had to go back to 1930 to find an example???? > >P.S.S If you don't think defense matters in the N.B.A, please explain >how the Nuggets went from a 500 ball club to division champions. Did you hear that they made an off-season trade? >( I know you will say their defense is the worst in the league in points >scored against, but please consider the fact that they run, and run >and run giving more and more and more offensive chances to the other >team before sending flames.) They led the league in steals >nd takeaway/giveaway ratio. > Roy > Gosh Gee Golly Roy, My point isn't that sports should be all defense. But what thrill is there in watching players pile up impressive stats when the game has been changed to insure that even the marginal players have good stats. I didn't HAVE to go back to 1930; I just gave that as an example of how carried away you can get with manufactured excitement. Would you like to see that kind of offense every year? I never said that defense doesn't matter in the NBA. I stated that the NBA has become an offensive show, and that offensive players are given more advantage than the defenders. Once again, there should be a balance. But we're in the wrong newsgroup for this argument. Dave Van Handel
stevev@tekchips.UUCP (Steve Vegdahl) (05/23/85)
> I have an interesting idea about approaching the DH rule. If it is > so significantly different, why don't we let the American league use the > DH rule in the All-Star game and make the National league do without > it. Both leagues would be functioning under the rules they are used to > and if it makes that much of a difference, then the All-Star game would > no longer be as lopsided as it has been in the past. This would probably not have as much of an effect in the All-Star game as it would in a normal game, because pitchers are limited to three innings of pitching. Their time at bat would often come in the inning they would be lifted anyway. Come to think of it, not having a DH would probably give more players an opportunity to play, if only as a pinch-hitter for a pitcher. Isn't that the idea for a showcase. > this is what happens when I roll my head on the keyboard: > b mfdfgm ,iutfrdffdbfv jkhgtxdhl;kuje il;'li5rdjil.idr this is what happens when I roll the keyboard on my head: zx jmnhbvbfgth cxdjnmk,ihjnbuy Steve Vegdahl Computer Research Lab. Tektronix, Inc. Beaverton, Oregon Things I dislike about baseball: the DH artificial turf domed stadiums playoffs that run almost into November fan-balloting for the All-Star game Things I like about baseball: watching Billy Martin argue with an umpire Wrigley and Fenway the World Series a close play at the plate the absence of Charlie Finley
stevev@tekchips.UUCP (Steve Vegdahl) (11/13/85)
> > Having the DH may marginally increase the challenge to a pitcher, but > > it significantly DECREASES the challenge to a manager. One of the beauties > > of baseball is the tradeoffs that a Manager must in balancing players > > strengths against their weaknesses. Do I put in a poor fielder at > > the expense of weakening my defense? Do I make a defensive substitution > > in the late innings? Do I pinch-run for a slow player in a close game or > > do I leave his bat in the lineup in case the game goes into extra innings? > > Funny how all of the strategy questions you mentioned have little to do with > the DH... The mentioning of strategy questions having little to do with the DH was INTENTIONAL. The point that I was making was that having to make such strategic decisions is "in the spirit of baseball". Eliminating the DH is consistent with this. Having the DH is not. If a player is a "complete" player, (e.g., good hitting pitcher, switch hitter, good fielder, whatever), it makes his manager's job that much easier. If a player is not a complete player, his manager must "manage around his weaknesses". That's part of baseball. > The only diminished strategy is whether or not to pinch-hit for > the pitcher late in the game. Not quite. If a team is in the field, and their pitcher is due to bat the next inning, it may affect a manager's decision whether to replace the pitcher--or whom to replace him with. There's also the so-called "two-for-one" swap, and likely other maneuvers (some not yet thought of, now doubt). > For that trade off, you end up with a game whose > early innings aren't full of rallies that can't excite you, because you know > the pitcher is due up, I thought that Ken Holzman's (sp?) batting heroics were one of the highlights of the the 1974(?) World Series. But I know what you mean about boring games without early-inning rallies. One saw a game once where the pitcher had a no-hitter going into the ninth inning. It was so boring that nearly all the fans left the ballpark. :-) Interestingly enough, the game of cricket has a fair amount of similarity to baseball; a "hit" is the norm, while an "out" is the exception (they show the "outs" on the evening news). The thing that makes hits and runs more exciting in baseball than outs is that the outs happen more frequently. > and you get more realistic strikeout totals for pitchers > (instead of the near automatic 2 to 4 strikeouts that NL pitchers get per game). What is "realistic"? how a pitcher would do against an "average" hitter? I consider pitchers to be hitters, so an "average" lineup would have the a pitcher coming to bat every nine times or so. DH's are generally quite a bit better than an "average" hitter. Let a pitcher be a complete player. The manager must balance a pitcher's contribution to the team *pitching* against his contribution to the team (or lack thereof) *hitting* (and fielding). > Most teams have other weaknesses in the lineup. The manager should still be > pinch-hitting and maneuvering for those... While this is certainly true (being a SF fan, I should know), my experience is that those involving pitchers batting have a more profound effect on the outcome of the game than the sum-total of the others mentioned above. Steve Vegdahl Computer Research Lab. Tektronix, Inc. Beaverton, Oregon
goguen@cheers.DEC (Don Goguen 381-2565) (11/25/85)
> If a player is a "complete" player, (e.g., good hitting pitcher, switch > hitter, good fielder, whatever), it makes his manager's job that much easier. > If a player is not a complete player, his manager must "manage around his > weaknesses". That's part of baseball. The decision to pinch-hit for any pitcher is virtually automatic. Any fan could do it. How many times have you watched a game and guessed wrong about whether or not the manager would pinch-hit for the pitcher? Even if he is a good hitter, he will be pinch-hit for in any clutch situation, unless the bench is loaded with dead-wood... Besides, the "strategy" arguments seem to me to all stem from managerial decisions. As a fan, I would rather watch a player play than a manager manage.. > Not quite. If a team is in the field, and their pitcher is due to bat the > next inning, it may affect a manager's decision whether to replace the > pitcher--or whom to replace him with. There's also the so-called > "two-for-one" swap, and likely other maneuvers (some not yet thought of, > now doubt). This is the same strategy as whether or not to hit for a weak-hitting shortstop. Any decent manager would always consider a 2-for-1 here, too. Since many AL teams have such batting ninth, there's not much difference. And don't give me the "why not DH for the SS" business... > I thought that Ken Holtzman's batting heroics were one of the highlights > of the the 1974(?) World Series. Yawn... > But I know what you mean about boring games without early-inning rallies. > One saw a game once where the pitcher had a no-hitter going into the > ninth inning. It was so boring that nearly all the fans left the > ballpark. :-) Huh? Who said anything about no-hitters? I'm talking about the 2nd inning, runners on 2nd and 3rd, two outs, #8 hitter due up. I'll go get a hot dog, cause anyone knows that an intentional walk and a strikeout will follow ... > Interestingly enough, the game of cricket has a fair amount of similarity > to baseball; a "hit" is the norm, while an "out" is the exception (they > show the "outs" on the evening news). The thing that makes hits and > runs more exciting in baseball than outs is that the outs happen more > frequently. Does that mean that you're against the DH because you like low-scoring games better? I admit that I prefer seeing offense (I guess being from N.E., you get used to 8-7 games as opposed to 1-0 games :-] )... maybe that is a part of why I prefer the DH... > What is "realistic"? how a pitcher would do against an "average" hitter? > I consider pitchers to be hitters, so an "average" lineup would have > the a pitcher coming to bat every nine times or so. DH's are generally > quite a bit better than an "average" hitter. "Nolan Ryan struck out 12 today...." That's probably 9 strikeouts, and 3 weak whiffs by the opposing pitcher(s). > Let a pitcher be a complete player. The manager must balance a > pitcher's contribution to the team *pitching* against his contribution > to the team (or lack thereof) *hitting* (and fielding). Maybe it's the ideal that pitchers should be complete players. In younger leagues (LL, HS), the pitcher is often the best athlete, therefore the best hitter, too. But as time goes on, pitchers and hitters are practicing the two principal arts of the game, hitting and pitching. Since they are so diverse, why have one do the other. Except for quirks/blowouts, hitters don't pitch, do they? Since hitters don't pitch, does that make them an "incomplete player"? I don't see anything wrong with having a roster of 9 or 10 PITCHERS and 15 or 16 HITTERS. BTW, the most ridiculous non-use of the DH is in the All-Star game. Even though the pitchers are mostly pinch-hit for anyway, the starter often gets to the plate. With so many hitters on the bench, isn't it a bit odd that the DH rule isn't used? -- Don Goguen DEC/Nashua, NH Posted: Mon 25-Nov-1985 14:17 EST To: @DIST:NETBASE
wurzelma@aecom.UUCP (John Wurzelmann) (11/30/85)
> > If a player is a "complete" player, (e.g., good hitting pitcher, switch
Friends, For how many years do we have to hear the same hackneyed arguments
about the DH? Believe me it's here to stay, whether or not the Senior
Leaguers adopt it, and who the hell cares if they do or they don't.
I personally think there ought to be designated runners, who can pinch run
at anytime for anyone as often in a game as possible. By the same token,
there ought to be pinch fielders, so those poor "good field- no hit" slobs
in the minors can make a living too. By this I mean, there ought to be a
defensive team and an offensive team, just like in football.
Yeah!! Let's give everyone a job.
As a matter of fact, now that I think about it, there ought to be
designated fans too. So that America, instead of sitting in front of
it's tv tube, guzzling beer and getting fat; can do something worthwhile
instead.