Universal designated hitter Seems Smart At First, But Terrible Idea For MLB
Universally adopting the designated hitter in both leagues might seem like a good idea at first, but would actually cause a lot of problems for Rob Manfred and MLB.
The great Durham Bulls backstop Crash Davis said it best: “I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter.”
He believed a lot of other things too, some of which were even printable, but we’ll stick to baseball this time around.
Moving away from Astroturf? Universally good for the health of many a professional athlete. Athlete knees across MLB and the NFL sing the praises of the groundskeepers and scientists who have made that innovation possible over the thirty years since Bull Durham came out and changed the way baseball fans talk about baseball forever.
However, the DH, the designated hitter rule, has been a source of controversy since it was first adopted by the AL in 1973. The NL never approved it, and continues to make the starting pitcher bat. But in the AL, teams get to use a better hitter in his place. Nearly every sports fan is familiar with the curious quirk. Certainly, all baseball fans have a distinct opinion on it.
The controversy continued late last week when MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred suggested talks were progressing in the right direction for making such a move. For Manfred, and many others, the right direction is universal adoption. That’s right. In AL and NL alike, the pitcher will never take another at bat in a baseball game.
To DH or Not to DH: MLB’s Oldest Question
Ultimately, the question often comes down to what you were brought up on. Take two baseball-loving kids in Chicago. White Sox fan? The designated hitter is for you. Cubbie? Naturally, the designated hitter is lazy and stupid. To a lot of fans, it’s that black and white. Most people hate change and approve of what they know.
Delving a little deeper, and the issue boils down to strategy. Yes, most pitchers are terrible hitters. Historically, the DH supporter will tell you the added offense is more exciting to watch. Pure and simple. By the same token, the DH naysayer will tell you all about the added strategy of having to deal with the fact most pitchers couldn’t hit water if they fell out of a boat. NL managers have to decide where and when to pinch hit. When they go to the bullpen effects both aspects of the game, not just the defense.
In an extra-innings affair last Thursday between the Giants and Marlins, two relievers batted. In one instance, the bases were intentionally loaded so that a reliever could bat. I found this fascinating, watching in full baseball-geek awe. On the other hand, I appreciate an Orioles fan might have found that sickening.
Recently, protecting pitchers has become a big part of the call for change. Fans hate the rare instance where an ace starter gets hurt while batting. More importantly, owners who are paying more than ever to said ace starters hate it too. Combined with a decrease in offensive performance by pitchers overall, even by their low standards, and the time seems ripe to discuss change.
“Fixing” NL With DH Slows Down MLB, Lowers Scoring
The thing is, implementing the DH in both leagues would trip progress on what Manfred seems as the biggest evil in all of MLB.
Yep, we’re gonna talk pace of play here.
More from Call to the Pen
- Philadelphia Phillies, ready for a stretch run, bomb St. Louis Cardinals
- Philadelphia Phillies: The 4 players on the franchise’s Mount Rushmore
- Boston Red Sox fans should be upset over Mookie Betts’ comment
- Analyzing the Boston Red Sox trade for Dave Henderson and Spike Owen
- 2023 MLB postseason likely to have a strange look without Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals
Baseball is too long; Manfred has said this from day one of his tenure. Pitch clocks, limiting mound visits, and many other fixes have all either been implemented or seriously discussed as ways to shave off minutes.
So why does MLB seem interested in eliminating four to six really quick at bats from half their games? Going full DH will only serve to lengthen game time, not shorten it. Another case of thinking only hurting the ballclub.
Another issue worth considering is how long DH adoption will even continue to technically improve offensive production? Last year still saw a significant run scored difference between the leagues of .13, advantage AL. Now, the AL has always held an edge here. In 2016 though, the gap was the closest it had been since the 1970s, with only a .08 differential. That .05 resurgence in 2017 can easily be explained away by how many NL teams were terrible last year, with multiple squads tanking.
A big part of this drop in scoring is the analytics age, and how relievers are now being used. Anyone considering having the NL go full DH should consider the likelihood of that leading to shorter benches….and deeper bullpens. You do the math on how that will ultimately impact the box scores.
Again, I’m likely not writing any of this if I grew up in an AL market. I love my NL strategy, don’t care how many mound visits happen, and think baseball is fine just the way it is.
However, if the goal is “fixing” baseball, the universal DH just seems likely to create more problems than it does to offer solutions.