Master Index of Archived Threads


The DH Thread

batmagadanleadoff Jan 14 2021 05:37 PM

MLB is considering a new version of the DH rule. Stark: The DH idea everyone has been waiting for … or have they? Excerpt: The future of the designated hitter is on the table as we speak. Here's an important thing you may not know about that future, though. The question for Major League Baseball and the players' union is not necessarily as simple as: Universal DH or not? Wait, you say. Why is that? Aha, we say – because there's actually another alternative. So here it comes – the DH idea America has been waiting for, an idea we've mentioned before around here, an idea that has come up in baseball's brainstorming sessions behind the scenes. It goes like this: On one hand, the universal DH would be in effect for all 30 teams, just as it was in the 2020 season. On the other hand, there would be one huge difference. Once a team takes its starting pitcher out of the game, it would also lose its DH for the rest of that game. Cue the shocking Stephen King music! https://theathletic.com/2321909/2021/01/14/mlbl-dh-idea-starting-pitcher/

Fman99 Jan 14 2021 06:40 PM Re: The DH Thread

Yeah, when you put it in this fashion, it actually takes away my biggest problem with it. Because you don't lose the late inning strategy of pinch hitting, bunting, double switches, and so on. Put me down for this, especially with the Dom + Pete roster we're staring at for 2021.

Frayed Knot Jan 14 2021 06:51 PM Re: The DH Thread

I'd still prefer no DH at all, but This DH is certainly better than the total DH as has existed in the AL for going on 50 years now. It probably needs to come with an more permanently expanded roster (likely to happen anyway) seeing as how it would increase the number of 'half-game' position players since, the way I understand it anyway, you don't have to lose the guy in the DH slot but rather you'd lose him OR he can be inserted into the field which of course results in losing the guy he replaces so there'd be that element of strategy as well. What this mostly sounds like is a shot across the bow at those who employ 'The Opener' as a pitching strategy. On a maybe related note, Theo Epstein is taking a job within MLB with at least part of his duties being to look at and revamp rules, particularly with regard to pace of play and 'action' issues.

nymr83 Jan 14 2021 07:19 PM Re: The DH Thread

Frayed Knot wrote: I'd still prefer no DH at all, but This DH is certainly better than the total DH as has existed in the AL for going on 50 years now. It probably needs to come with an more permanently expanded roster (likely to happen anyway) seeing as how it would increase the number of 'half-game' position players since, the way I understand it anyway, you don't have to lose the guy in the DH slot but rather you'd lose him OR he can be inserted into the field which of course results in losing the guy he replaces so there'd be that element of strategy as well. What this mostly sounds like is a shot across the bow at those who employ 'The Opener' as a pitching strategy. On a maybe related note, Theo Epstein is taking a job within MLB with at least part of his duties being to look at and revamp rules, particularly with regard to pace of play and 'action' issues. I don't hate this.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 14 2021 07:54 PM Re: The DH Thread

Or perhaps, rosters wouldn't need to expand to accommodate substitute position players needed because of this new DH. This new proposed DH might encourage longer starts, and thus, less relievers needed - opening up already existing roster spots for position players.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jan 14 2021 08:09 PM Re: The DH Thread

Well could a team then bat their starter and enter a DH when they relive him?

Gwreck Jan 14 2021 09:40 PM Re: The DH Thread

I'll never accept the DH. They can (and may well) add it to the NL over my objection but will forever scar the game by doing so.

Edgy MD Jan 14 2021 09:52 PM Re: The DH Thread

I'm with Gwreck. And the continuing idea that it's a fait accompli puzzles the heck out of me.

seawolf17 Jan 15 2021 06:13 AM Re: The DH Thread

I hate the DH with the passion of a thousand fires, but my team also has two first basemen and I want them both in the lineup. So there's that. I liked the "DH goes when your starter goes" idea at first, but the more I thought about it, the more I hate it. So if your starter gets shelled and you have to take him out in the second, tough shit? It's monkeying with the game for literally no reason. The DH is stupid, but it's a relatively harmless stupid compared to some of the rules they've created in the past year or so, all of which should be loaded into a spaceship and fired into the sun.

bmfc1 Jan 15 2021 06:48 AM Re: The DH Thread

What if your SP gets hurt? We've seen it: the starter comes back from an injury too quickly and leaves in the first inning. You lose the DH for that?

Benjamin Grimm Jan 15 2021 06:56 AM Re: The DH Thread

That really is a double whammy. Maybe the DH gets to remain through the fifth inning, or the sixth, no matter what, and then goes away if the starter is no longer in the game.

Frayed Knot Jan 15 2021 07:04 AM Re: The DH Thread

Or perhaps, rosters wouldn't need to expand to accommodate substitute position players needed because of this new DH. This new proposed DH might encourage longer starts, and thus, less relievers needed - opening up already existing roster spots for position players. I suspect that's part of the thinking behind it, that at worst it might cut down on starters being pulled mid-inning in those cases where that team's DH is due up in the next half-inning - ergo one or possibly two fewer mid-inning pitching changes per game. But overall I think managers are still going to make pitching changes based on what they think/see/feel about their pitcher so I don't think this returns us to an era where the starters are going an additional inning or two or three. And, yeah, I still prefer an elimination of it all together but I don't think that is even a remote possibility at this point particularly since so many look at the rule from the angle of whether or not they see it benefitting their team this season. I still remember NYM fans lobbying for the NL to adopt the rule nearly 40 years ago on account of the presence of Rusty. If you think baseball is a better game with the rule then argue for it, if you don't then argue against it. But looking at it from a hyper-local/short-term viewpoint is how an "experimental" rule which haa long out-lived the original reasons for its adoption persist for going on half a century. It's like those who rail against pork barrel spending and the near 100% reelection rates in Congress but continually vote for their local rep because he/she "brings home the bacon".

Gwreck Jan 25 2021 02:14 PM Re: The DH Thread

Players union wisely says no. https://twitter.com/jonheyman/status/1353775872373886998?s=21

smg58 Jan 25 2021 02:24 PM Re: The DH Thread

The best interests of the game are served twice.

MFS62 Jan 25 2021 02:27 PM Re: The DH Thread

=Gwreck post_id=54739 time=1611609246 user_id=56] Players union wisely says no.

So , is that final, or do they now enter negotiations?

Later

Gwreck Jan 25 2021 02:42 PM Re: The DH Thread

It's always up for negotiation. But this is pretty final for 2021. When the basic agreement expires after the 2021 season, then it's up for negotiation again.

nymr83 Jan 25 2021 05:38 PM Re: The DH Thread

The union isnt against the universal DH. They're for it. What they said "no" to was MLB coupling the Universal DH and expanded playoffs together as a trade off - I would say the players correctly perceived the value in expanded playoffs for the owners being much higher than the perceived additional salary of NL DHs

Edgy MD Jan 25 2021 08:16 PM Re: The DH Thread

Is there a statement indicating they are explicitly for it?

Gwreck Jan 25 2021 09:08 PM Re: The DH Thread

No. But I think it's fairly obvious that having a DH on the NL teams means an additional roster spot for which teams may pay a premium salary. A NL DH is of course still an abomination. But it does not pervert the game the same way that expanded playoffs do. The players should never agree to a system that discourages spending by owners by making it easier to make the playoffs.

Edgy MD Jan 25 2021 09:42 PM Re: The DH Thread

No. But I think it's fairly obvious that having a DH on the NL teams means an additional roster spot for which teams may pay a premium salary. We've been down this road, but the numbers have never supported that notion. The National League outpaces the American League in payroll as often as not, perhaps more. Here's the last season, 2019, without a universal DH, and the National League not only outspent the American League overall on player salaries, but every National League team save one outspent their American League counterpart ranked in the same slot. [TR][/TR] [th]RANK[/th] [th]NL TEAM[/th] [th]PAYROLL[/th] [th]AL TEAM[/th] [th]PAYROLL[/th] [th]SLOT LEADER[/th] 1 [th]Cubs [/th] $211,546,714 [th]Yankees [/th] $205,442,088 =#00BF00]N 2 [th]Nationals [/th] $204,449,127 [th]Red Sox [/th] $204,335,019 =#00BF00]N 3 [th]Giants [/th] $199,729,652 [th]Angels [/th] $177,328,583 =#00BF00]N 4 [th]Dodgers [/th] $170,903,333 [th]Astros [/th] $165,653,000 =#00BF00]N 5 [th]Cardinals [/th] $165,253,599 [th]Mariners [/th] $152,807,076 =#00BF00]N 6 [th]Rockies [/th] $150,805,164 [th]Indians [/th] $122,875,033 =#00BF00]N 7 [th]Mets [/th] $149,002,230 [th]Twins [/th] $114,901,933 =#00BF00]N 8 [th]Phillies [/th] $144,616,127 [th]Rangers [/th] $106,969,999 =#00BF00]N 9 [th]Reds [/th] $133,580,714 [th]Tigers [/th] $104,581,900 =#00BF00]N 10 [th]Brewers [/th] $127,850,342 [th]Royals [/th] $102,570,791 =#00BF00]N 11 [th]Braves [/th] $117,855,753 [th]Athletics [/th] $102,545,000 =#00BF00]N 12 [th]Diamondbacks [/th] $108,040,650 [th]White Sox [/th] $90,652,000 =#00BF00]N 13 [th]Pirates [/th] $76,082,999 [th]Orioles [/th] $80,012,045 =#FF0000]A 14 [th]Padres [/th] $75,795,766 [th]Blue Jays [/th] $71,228,671 =#00BF00]N 15 [th]Marlins [/th] $70,610,020 [th]Rays [/th] $53,500,799 =#00BF00]N [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [TD][/TD] [th]TOTAL[/th] $2,106,122,190 [th]TOTAL[/th] $1,855,403,937 =#00BF00]N [th]MEDIAN[/th] $144,616,127 [th]MEDIAN[/th] $106,969,999 =#00BF00]N [th]MEAN[/th] $140,408,146 [th]MEAN[/th] $123,693,596 =#00BF00]N

Tell your friends! The league laying out two billion dollars in player salaries (at least in 2019) is the one without the DH rule!

batmagadanleadoff Jan 25 2021 10:52 PM Re: The DH Thread

How Much Money Does the Average MLB Player Make? by Scott Jenkins on April 6, 2020 Excerpt: The highest average salary for any position is, somewhat surprisingly, designated hitter. Designated hitters in the American League average $13.4 million, with the median actually higher at $14.3 million. Designated hitters are typically veteran players with proven track records of success, which commands a higher salary than other positions. https://www.sportscasting.com/how-much-money-does-the-average-mlb-player-make/ ______________ Relievers aren't being overpaid… but designated hitters are: An investigation Why are designated hitters still being overpaid? https://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2017/1/11/14214912/relievers-overpaid-designated-hitters-salaries-mlb-free-agents __________________________ Designated Hitter is the Highest Paid MLB Position by Craig Edwards March 18, 2016 Excerpt: A combination of the free agent system, aging, and the decline that puts the spectrum to use mean first basemen and designated hitters make the most money while shortstops tend to make the least when taking all starters into account. https://blogs.fangraphs.com/designated-hitter-is-the-highest-paid-mlb-position/ ______________ MLB: The case against the universal DH by Bill Felber 3 months ago Excerpt: Several reasons, really. First, it's expensive. In 2019 – the last season players were paid their full salaries — the average player signed by an American League team to be its primary DH got $13.65 million. That was three times the average $4.35 million salary for all positions that season. Six of the 15 primary DHs were paid in excess of $20 million, topped by Detroit's Miguel Cabrera at $30 million. Seven were the highest paid players on their team. Only three – Toronto's Rowdy Tellez, Houston's Yordan Alvarez, and the Angels' Shohei Ohtani – failed to hit the MLB salary average. They were also the only three DHs to rank outside their team's top five in salary. The second reason, a companion to the first, is that, even as a highly paid group, a DH made only a relatively modest contribution to team success. The average 1.78 WAR of a primary DH ranked only seventh in that category among players on their own teams who had a minimum of 100 plate appearances. https://calltothepen.com/2020/10/27/mlb-the-case-against-the-universal-dh/ ______________ Also, I'm getting different 2019 team salary numbers than what your chart reflects. https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/2019/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/236206/payroll-of-major-league-baseball-teams/

Edgy MD Jan 25 2021 11:15 PM Re: The DH Thread

Well, I ran these numbers two months ago, and I don't recall what my source was, so until I figure that out, I'll defer to your spotrac numbers.