Skip to comments.Is the designated hitter coming to a National League park near you?
Posted on 03/08/2012 7:35:27 PM PST by TBP
Major League Baseball has expanded its pool of postseason teams to 10 -- up from four just 19 years ago -- and next year will re-align into 15-team leagues that make for at least one interleague series all season long. But the biggest change of all may be around the next corner: the end of baseball as it was originally designed.
"I would be shocked if 10 years from now there's not a DH in both leagues," said one influential baseball source.
(Excerpt) Read more at sportsillustrated.cnn.com ...
I agree with you about adding two teams. You could go to 4-team divisions, get rid of interleague (except for a very few matchups, nobody cares about it), and create a much more competitive environment.
That also strengthens the All-Star Game and World Series.
You could even make the rosters 28 (as they used to be from Opening Day to May 1), with 25 suiting up. It helps manage injuries and rotations, allows a little more strategy, and gives more players time in the bigs. Phase out the DH, keeping it until the expanded rosters and the new clubs are in place. (That also provides a transition period for DH-only types like Big Papi.)
The player talent is at a higher level proportionally than ever. We do need to allow for more minor-league clubs (and use pitchers differently), but there is plenty of talent to stock the clubs. Maybe cities Bud won't consider can get a chance then. Bud's adamancy was one reason it took so darn long for DC to get back in.
Expansion is a good source of easy revenue.
There are places to go. Unfortunately, one of the best has three territorial vetoes, most likely: New Jersey. But a third team in the market would do pretty nicely. The Carolinas could be viable (call them the Carolina Cougars), Portland is bigger than at least 3 current MLB markets, there is a movement to revive baseball in Montreal, and there are all the usual choices, such as Nashville, New Orleans, Buffalo, Vancouver, Las Vegas, San Antonio, the Tidewater area (largest metro without a team in any of the 4 major sports), etc. Brooklyn?
FWIW, Brooklyn and Montreal are the only places that have lost MLB and not gotten it back. Buffalo is the only one of the Continental League cities never to get a major-league team.
I’m not exactly happy about the expanded playoff but I can live with it. But the DH in the NL? NO WAY.
Wish the AL would get rid of it, but the Union will never allow it.
I will fight the dh with as much fervor as I do Islam and liberalism.
I don’t watch the AL. The DH would be a death knell for me. I would still follow my Giants, but as for watching any other games, I would say screw them. DH ball sucks.
Bread and Circuses.
SCREW the DH rule!!!!
It’s the reason I won’t even watch the AL anymore.
I hope the NL keeps their big boy pants on and kills this idea forever so future generations can always know what old school baseball is all about.
I’m not thrilled about the expanded playoffs either, but if you’re going to have wild cards, then you may as well do something to make it harder for the wild card than for teh division winners.
That’s why I offered some of the suggestions in my post. In order for them to get rid of it, you’d have to give the union something significant. Perhaps three more players per club plus two new clubs (16 new everyday players, 10 new starting pitchers, 2 new closers, and a bunch of new bench players) would make up for losing the DH.
Besides, it’s time to tell the Players Association to get lost.
Great post. I agree 100% about getting rid of interleague play. I’m on the fence about the DH; if they got rid of I definitely wouldn’t lose any sleep over it.
How about Indiana for a new baseball francise?
Gin and raisans.
And while I understand it, I'm not crazy about pinch-runners either.
Baseball has it over football in ONE respect. You play offense AND defense. None of the "return specialist" players. I support it in the NFL, not in MLB.
The number one reason for not having a DH in my opinion. There are a number of pitchers who are decent hitters and that number needs to grow. There is really no excuse, however, for a pitcher to not be at least a passable bunter.
I'd be in favor of roster expansion to 28 if it was limited to 11 or 12 pitchers. Pitching talent is too watered down as it is. Any more and you'd be getting one batter specialty pitchers. That's overkill!
However, I have no problem if the team wants to use a roster spot for a pinch runner. The great Oakland A's teams of the 1970's actually did that with some success.
Sure, why not? The AL is defiled with the DH, so we need to bring the NL down to the same level. It’s just plain ol’ PC equality.
There was a guy named Art Agnotti who wanted to put a team in Indianapolis. He was going to call it the Indianapolis Arrows. He couldn’t manage to put together funding for a stadium for the Arrows.
I seem to recall once there was this pitcher who was a pretty good hitter.....I think his name was Ruth or something like that.
The other thing about Indiana is that the Reds, a regional team, might object.
Oh, come on. What kind of a name is "Babe" for a ballplayer? And his last name is a girl's name? Puh-leeze. Like he's ever gonna amount to anything. I say trade him...yeah, to the Yankees, that's the place for him. He'll probably never pitch again.
I grew up with the mantra “Pitchers can’t hit”. Fun when we were young.
The DH should be eliminated.
Soon they’ll be playing baseball until Thanksgiving.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.