Designated hitter (DH)? Make your best argument. . .?

Question

Personally, I hate the DH rule . . . but here's your chance to make your best arguement - pro or con and why? Good answers all get a thumbs up - best argument for either side gets the points.

Answer 1

It is very simple for me, if you are in the game you hit in the lineup and play defense, this is the way the game was designed to be played. Take David Ortiz for example, his lack of defensive ability is masked because all he has to do is hit. If the Red Sox want to take advantage of his unbelievable offensive talent they should have to find a spot for him defensively and accept the downside consequences.

Answer 2

Honestly I don't really like the DH rule... I think that it gives the AL an unfair advantage over the NL. You can plainly see this as a result of recent All-Star Games, World Series and even Interleague play. When playing in a National League stadium, by NL rules with a pitcher hitting in the 9 spot, everything is fair and balanced, however when the game is played on AL turf, the AL team has an extra hitter and typically a good one at that, whereas the NL has to use a bench or platoon player. I think it should be kept constant between both leagues.

One other positive... Gives aging superstars a way to stay in the league longer... A superstar is going to generate some good ticket revenue.

Thanks for the interesting question!

Answer 3

The DH rule always brings differing opinions. I personally like to see the DH in the AL. I am a fan of Baseball and I like to see offense explode at some times. I also like pitching duels, the DH rule in the AL gives me the offensive explosion and lets me see high octane baseball where as the NL gives you a pure form of baseball, where you produce runs by going station to station, hit and run, steal bases, sacrifice....

It is nice to have the difference in the leagues to me. Also when looking at this I think you have to look at what the DH does for the "business" of baseball. By having a DH in the AL you see big name players that can no longer field but can still swing the bat rather well...it draws fans to the stadium and gives people a good feeling that they got to see that guy play before he hung them up.

Answer 4

The DH rule simply isn't baseball. There ARE other ways to use a rule that allows a player like Tony Oliva or Big Pappi Ortiz to be DHs without changing the game. The current incarnation of the DH just isn't baseball.

Answer 5

I usually agree with Frizzer and Gene, but not on this one. It's only my opinion, but I personally like the DH rule.

I know that people talk a lot about the strategy involved in the NL game, since pitchers hit for themselves. However, there's really not a great deal of strategy to it - you either have the pitcher bunt, swing away, or pinch hit for him depending on the situation. There's just as much strategy involved in the AL because having the DH takes away that easy out and forces managers to juggle their pitching staffs around a lineup with no obvious holes.

Again, I think this one comes down to opinion, and I don't believe there's any right or wrong. I completely understand the arguments about guys not playing defense, but I guess it just doesn't bother me. I think of the DH rule as part of the game's evolution, even if some think of it as a step backwards.

Answer 6

First of all, the Players Association would never approve of abolising the DH. Reason, it keeps players in the game that would otherwise be 'done'. Many sluggers can still hit well but are poor defensively. The DH prolongs careers of many who can hit but can't field. Where would teams be without such players like Edgar Martinez, Barry Bonds (doesn't apply here but he should've been in the AL DHing), David Ortiz, Jason Giambi (when he's healthy ofcourse) etc.

Answer 7

Excuse me, but I think we are talking about PROFESSIONAL baseball here. I personally agree with the purists who think you should have to use all 5 tools (regardless of their state), but the fact is that most "fans" prefer an offensive fest to a defensive struggle / pitchers duel.

Bring on the DH, which brings more fans, which brings more money. Professional baseball is a business. And it has been ever since the Yankees paid Catfish Hunter millions back in the day (or maybe even before that).

Answer 8

i think of that the DH rule could be dropped on the national League. With the DH place, greater eligible hitters could be waiting to hit on a prevalent foundation. additionally, the pitcher is paid by way of the group to pitch. in the event that they bat, they'll get drained and could no longer pitch besides. besides, the pitcher in no way provides a stable contribution with the bat. The DH rule additionally rests some batters who're very stable at hitting yet have a decrease staying power. So, my vote is for the national League to undertake the DH device.

Answer 9

I agree with you...i hate the DH rule too. I think that major league baseball players should have to play in the field and be able to bat too. plus, major league pitchers most likely have had to bat in previous years of playing baseball and should still be able to. if all a player does is bat during a game, that's only half of the skill it takes to be a good major league baseball player. so i think that there should not be a DH because some baseball players only have to play half the game everyone else plays, and in order to be in Major League Baseball, a player should definitely be able to bat and field very well.

Answer 10

I agree. I hate the DH rule. It takes away a lot of strategy in the game. Pinch hitters are rarley found in the AL. It is overall, a really stupid idea.