2006-06-28 00:30:35 · 11 answers · asked by mouthbreather77 1 in Sports ➔ Baseball
i think so, i believe if ur goin to bat in the starting lineup thn u should play some defense. some of the best hitters r DHs, cuz i think thy jus spend the whole practice working on hitting since thy not playing the field, and DHs careers seem to last longer since thy only play half the game, but i prefer all the batters playing the field and seeing the pitcher bat, its a lot more interesting. its fun seeing Pedro pitch against Roger Clemens and see how it will turn out evn tho Clemens most likely will strike out. and some picthers are really good hitters like Carlos Zambrano and Dontrelle Willis.
2006-06-28 00:37:18 · answer #1 · answered by Matt P 6 · 7⤊ 4⤋
A resounding NO!!!! I think it makes the game more interesting to have all nine players potential threats at the plate. What a let down it is when your team is rallying with a chance to go ahead, to have the pitcher come up, usually a given out. Sure, there have been some good hitting pitchers, but those have been VERY few in the history of baseball. I know others will say having the pitcher hit is part of the strategy of the game, and, to an extent, that is true. However, the designated hitter makes for a much more exciting game!! Who cares abut strategy!! I want excitement!!
I need to call them as I see them!!
2006-06-28 10:41:03 · answer #2 · answered by No one 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the DH was banned in baseball there would be a lot of good hitters whose careers would have ended sooner than expected. I think the DH makes the game more exciting. An idea may be just bat 10 guys and make the pitchers hit. This way the managers in the AL will have to work a little harder.
2006-06-28 08:08:00 · answer #3 · answered by kenway1023 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's been a fun "experiment" but I think it should go. I know we might lose players like Harold Baines, Eddie Murray, Paul Molitor and David Ortiz, but those players would have found a way onto the field if not for the rule. It should go away. I prefer baseball at it's purest roots. I think that baseball is more interesting with pinch hitters and bunting pitchers.
2006-06-28 08:07:15 · answer #4 · answered by spudric13 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. They hit for pitchers for a reason. Pitchers have one job and that is to pitch. They focus on their pitching and you don't want to risk them injury up to bat if they were to slide on their arm or get hit. They get paid to pitch and nothing else. Besides, pitchers are usually a given out so why sit a great hitter? Also, you'll have a whole field of hitters plus the DH. There is no need to put your DH in the field and sit someone who can field and hit just so the pitcher can try and hit.
2006-06-28 13:07:57 · answer #5 · answered by meghanw1 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i would say NO because there are many good hitters out there that are DH and cant play the field that great. Its a way of giving players that can hit a chance to get in the game
2006-06-28 08:35:02 · answer #6 · answered by Push_mb20girl 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that designated hitter rule should be changed so that the designated hitter can hit for anyone in the lineup EXCEPT the pitcher.
2006-06-28 07:51:27 · answer #7 · answered by John B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it is what seperates the NL from AL. I like the NL because I like to see the pitchers bat. But pitchers weren't meant to bat. They weren't even meant to field. The AL is more formal(if you want to put it that way) and the NL is more....you get the point.
I dont think they are ever going to ban the DH anyway.
2006-06-28 08:31:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Heck no! It makes the American league so much more exciting. it would be a shame for it to be taken out.
2006-06-28 10:15:45 · answer #9 · answered by taitaia12 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes - the same could be said about inter-league games!
2006-06-28 07:58:55 · answer #10 · answered by Herffie1 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋