Should DH's be held to a different standard among HOF voters?

Question

First, I will admit my bias - I can't stand the DH.

But I will be open minded in reviewing answers to my question. Should guys who are DH for most of their career (E. Martinez, Baines, F. Thomas, Ortiz) have their offensive numbers be held to a higher standard when considered for the HOF. Remember, these guys do not play or contribute to half of the game. Also, out of the five "tools" they are minus in two categories (defense and arm) and are usually poor in a third (base running).

I am NOT saying a long-time DH should not make the Hall, but I do think they must be held to a higher standard - even at the expense of traditional benchmarks like 3,000 hits and 500 home runs.

ANd I am NOT talking about a Mike Piazza who finishes his career as a DH.

Interested in your feedback - most cogent answer gets 10 points

H-Charles - your point is well taken about the defensive liabilities of some pre-DH Hall of Famers. And some other guys may have been able to prolong their career, a.k.a. Mike Piazza, and add to the their offensive numbers.

Answer 1

Certainly, but not to a huge extent.

DHs contribute much less to the game and don't have to have all the requisite skills to play in the field. That certainly removes a significant portion of the voting criteria since fielding is eliminated.

However, there are several mitigating factors that lessen the negative impact of a career DH.

First, the Hall values offense more than defense, particularly in the more recent era. The barometers used to determine qualification are primarily offensive (career homers, batting average, hits, RBIs, etc.). While defense isn't discounted today, it is much harder to quantify and therefore by its nature factored in to a lesser extent. To appreciate D, one has to spend a signifiant amount of time watching the player play.

Second, there are many HOFplayers who did play in the field but had no business being there. These guys would have been DHs had they been around, but the position didn't exist. Guys like McCovey and Killebrew were defensive liabilities much of their careers whose offense won the day. DHs shouldn't be penalized any more than they were.

Third, there is a weaker argument that the DH is a specific postition and players should be judged soley by their merit at a particular position. Just as you would require less offensive production from a catcher than a right fielder for Hall purposes, you can require less defensive production from DHs.
After all, we don't discount AL pitchers because they never have to hit.

Answer 2

There are not too many players in the HOF because of their defensive abilities. Most ball players will tell you that it is more difficult to come off the bench and hit than coming to the plate after playing a defensive position. Those that vote players into the HOF are not held to any standards, as it is, and they can vote someone down just because they don't like them, which I believe will eventually be the problem that Bonds will face, but we will save that for another question. Therefore, I don't believe they should be held to a higher standard and I don't believe they will.

Answer 3

The DH is a very hard position to grade for as skill level. Mostly their just their for hitting and hardly any fielding. But most of your DH' are great hitters that have alto of power. I admit I also don't like the DH but its just something you have to live with. As for as your question goes I think DH's should be held at the same standard as a regular position player. I say this because DH's are just as important any other player on the team. They play a little different but they are should and are supposed to be set to the same standards in my book.

Now give me the ten points please!

Answer 4

I personally think that the standard should be different for each position. A first baseman doesn't need the same arm as a center fielder. DH's should be held to what they do, which means that the other three "tools" should be upped to compensate for defense and arm (they should still be able to run the bases, as offence is their whole existence on the team).

Answer 5

In the era of a permanent DH - someone like Harner for Cleveland - I believe they will be held to a different standard.

Answer 6

Most DH aren't dh when they first began their career so it will be hard to come up with HOF numbers when they haven't DH their whole career