MLB Thread

[The Wedge]

Continuing from the previous weak hitters arguments, I just had to get this in:

Ozzie Smith became a good hitter. He ended up with 2,460 hits. Don't be dissing on Ozzie Smith.

And he hit one of the greatest, most unexpected walk off home runs of all time in game 5 of the 1985 NLCS against the Dodgers. Would that home run have been more memorable if it was George Hendrick who hit it? It would have counted the same, but no way it would have been more memorable.

Don't be dissing on Ozzie Smith.

Thank you.

Back to your regularly scheduled discussion of current baseball...

[Week]

repost here to continue the discussion:

[quote name='Caliban']Right. Im not using a slippery slope argument; but by your logic baseball would be best suited if the SS and C positions would be DHed also. Taken further, it would be best to have a football style specialized offense and defense.

Week and WJ are saying theyd rather see another talented hitter in the batters box who might not be able to see the field otherwise do to poor defense. I like players justifying bad defense by mashing the ball or just flat out be able to play baseball well, which includes fielding.[/quote]
Pitchers generally bat with an OPS BELOW .400-.500!!!! Other than Owings, the best hitting pitchers MIGHT crack .700 and that is rare as well.

There are 23 catchers that get regular or fairly regular time that have an OPS above .800. Including Soto at 1.036 and McCann at .958, both are fantastic hitters. You don't see that coming from any pitchers other than 1, whose OPS is only that high because he was still being pitched to as if he were a pitcher (read: all fastballs) so his OPS will drop significantly.

There are probably 15+ SS with an OPS above .700, again a plateau that almost no pitchers will hit. The weaker hitting catchers and shortstops may play on teams because an organization chooses to value their defense over getting offense from that position. Whereas with pitchers they have no choice, they need to go out and get the pitchers that will give them a chance to win from the mound not the plate. Planning a team the other way around would be idiotic to say the least.

I want someone capable to fucking hit for these pitchers that were drafted for their talent PITCHING and for no other reason (except for maybe a few 2 way players, but still they don't practice hitting enough to refine their skill). I can't believe you just tried to make that argument. DH for Hanley Ramirez? Fuck's sake.

[quote name=' (Myshkin @ May 19 2008' date=' 01.46) ']As for the double switch: I happen to enjoy the strategy of baseball. But since you don't have strategy in the AL I guess I really can't blame you for not understanding it.[/quote]

Not understanding it? I've watched plenty of NL games with the double switch. I've played seasons of NL style baseball in MLB05-08 and would double switch nearly every game. None of it even begins to make up for the fact that watching (or hitting with) a pitcher fucking sucks. Calling it real strategy is glorifying it to say the least. I prefer strategy on the basepaths and in the batter's box rather than on the lineup card. Adding a DH will not destroy that sort of strategy at all, hell have you ever watched a Twins or Angels game? There is no reason that a NL style of baseball can't survive with a DH. There is no rule that states that a DH has to be this big lumberjack that can only hit homers, unless I'm mistaken.

[Mexal]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1360228' date='May 19 2008, 08.23']There is no rule that states that a DH has to be this big lumberjack that can only hit homers, unless I'm mistaken.[/quote]

Billy Butler doesn't hit home runs :(

[Fez]

I have only a couple things to add to the DH discussion:

Without the DH David Ortiz would only be a pinch hitter instead of being a constant threat in the lineup, without being a constant threat in 2004 the Red Sox would not have won the ALCS, which means the Red Sox would probably still be looking for that first title in over 80 years. That only is enough to justify the DH in my mind. He became the most obscenely clutch player ever in October of '04 (and for much of '05), reached national hero status in the minds of every Red Sox fan, and became the face of the franchise. And what he did was so much better than seeing Schilling, Lowe, and Wakefield flailing away and getting swept by the Yankees.

Ortiz may suck defensively, but when someone is as talented as he is at batting, there needs to be a permanent spot in the lineup. Not only for how he helps the team, but also for how he helps baseball. Someone in the last thread quoted that line "Chicks dig the longball" and that holds true for an awful lot of fans. People want to see highpowered offenses with the lead going back and forth, not 2-1 score games. Sure maybe the purists don't, but the causal fans, the kind that didn't join Red Sox Nation until Spring 2005, they do, and baseball needs that revenue. Some of that money may be pocketed, but it also lets teams go out and spend more on other, better players; hopefully making the whole team better.

In my mind that far outweighs the very occasional pitcher hit and the double switch. And the DH brings a new level of strategy anyway; close game, late innings: walk him and risk another baserunner or challenge him to try and get the out? Also of course, every other aspect of strategy is still there. Guys like Lugo and Molina (Yankee version) lay down bunts fairly often, Ellsbury has been prolific at stealing, hell the entire Angels team relies on small ball.

[Week]

[quote name='FezRock' post='1360262' date='May 19 2008, 09.03']I have only a couple things to add to the DH discussion:

Without the DH David Ortiz would only be a pinch hitter instead of being a constant threat in the lineup, without being a constant threat in 2004 the Red Sox would not have won the ALCS, which means the Red Sox would probably still be looking for that first title in over 80 years. That only is enough to justify the DH in my mind. He became the most obscenely clutch player ever in October of '04 (and for much of '05), reached national hero status in the minds of every Red Sox fan, and became the face of the franchise. And what he did was so much better than seeing Schilling, Lowe, and Wakefield flailing away and getting swept by the Yankees.

Ortiz may suck defensively, but when someone is as talented as he is at batting, there needs to be a permanent spot in the lineup.[/quote]
Without the DH the team would have been structured completely differently. Most likely Millar would have been jettisoned to allow Ortiz to play first. I think DHing certainly helps his hitting, but the dropoff would not be terribly significant I don't think. People keep saying that Ortiz is a bad fielder, he actually has pretty sure hands and an accurate arm. He doesn't like to field, but he has been very steady in interleague and in the WS when necessary (in the AS game too actually). He certainly is a better fielder than Prince or Howard.

Re: homers, so far this year the MLB is on pace to hit 500 fewer homers than last year, which was 500 homers less than the year before. Banning and testing for steroids is having an impact it seems and the result of that will be an increase of 'small ball' to a certain extent.

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote]I could dig up a bunch of future hall of famers and actual HOFers that were similiarly bad in there first 240ABs (in many cases way more then 240) at the age of 22-23. Look at A Rod's first 2 seasons.

Year Ag Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG *OPS+ TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
+--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
1994 18 SEA AL 17 54 4 11 0 0 0 2 3 0 3 20 .204 .241 .204 16 11 1 1 0 0 0
1995 19 SEA AL 48 142 15 33 6 2 5 19 4 2 6 42 .232 .264 .408 72 58 1 0 0 0 0

Im sure seattle was glad they gave him 600 ABs in 1996.[/quote]

I won't nitpick your argument, but will point out that the first two seasons of stats you post for A-Rod are when he was playing at the age of 18-19. So in 1996 he plays full time and has 600 ABs. And away we go, right? ;) The overall difference here? A-Rod was, and is, the real deal.

Look, Cal, I certainly hope Pie makes it. I'm not saying I want him to fail. My point has always been that you do not allow your struggling, yet supposed, 5 tool player work out the kinks during a playoff type season. Lou Pinella obviously sees something that tells him that the light switch isn't popping on any time soon and he isn't going to waste time letting Pie figure things out when he has a chance to take a Cubs team and possibly win (long time to go I know) the World Series. Lou hasn't done anything to make me distrust him thus far. Every move he made last season was right, even when we wondered what the hellhe was doing. This season he's got things clicking even better (Jim Fucking Edmonds not with standing yet :P ). So I say, have fun in AAA Mr. Pie, here's hoping you figure things out so when you're called up in September you can show us what you're really about.

***

Okay, enough arguing about the DH. We'll never agree, right? Let's argue something else! For instance: After the Delgado "homerun" last night, does the MLB need some form of instant replay? The umps got the call wrong last night, but I still say NO REPLAY!

[Lord O' Bones]

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1360369' date='May 19 2008, 07.58']Okay, enough arguing about the DH. We'll never agree, right? Let's argue something else! For instance: After the Delgado "homerun" last night, does the MLB need some form of instant replay? The umps got the call wrong last night, but I still say NO REPLAY![/quote]
I was avoiding this discussion because I know it will never end.



And it's just fucking wierd to be strongly agreeing with Myshkin.

[Myshkin]

[quote name='Lord O' Bones' post='1360901' date='May 19 2008, 14.12']And it's just fucking wierd to be strongly agreeing with Myshkin.[/quote]
Yeah! But at least I can respect the Giants for playing real baseball. Something I can't say about any team in the AL.

So, it seems like one of the big arguments in favor of the DH is that with a DH the AL teams score more runs than the NL teams, therefor making them better, therefor making their style of baseball better. Here's what I have to say to that: tomorrow the NL could start allowing aluminum bats, and with aluminum bats the NL would score a hell of a lot more runs than the AL. But would that make them better? No. The DH makes the game [i]easier[/i], not [i]better[/i]. Baseball isn't supposed to be easy.

[Week]

Pitchers are drafted for their pitching ability with no concern for their hitting ability. Many of them don't hit much or simply haven't hit for years because they focus on their craft, pitching. I don't want to see them struggling hitting at the highest level. That is not where their talent lies and they shouldn't be put in that position. Nuff said.

You guys keep bringing up these ridiculously absurd arguments that you believe my logic should support. It isn't cute. I have not, nor will I ever, argue that there should be 9 DHs nor aluminum bats. If the best way you can think of to argue is to straw man mine, then maybe you ought to realize you don't have a leg to stand on.


And seriously, I can't say I respect the Giants for anything. What a piece of shit franchise. Not only the pathetic team they through out there everyday, but the fact they've been a haven for the most egregious cheater in sports history for the last 10 years.

[Lord O' Bones]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1361156' date='May 19 2008, 16.54']Pitchers are drafted for their pitching ability with no concern for their hitting ability. Many of them don't hit much or simply haven't hit for years because they focus on their craft, pitching. I don't want to see them struggling hitting at the highest level. That is not where their talent lies and they shouldn't be put in that position. Nuff said.[/quote]
:lol:
[quote]You guys keep bringing up these ridiculously absurd arguments that you believe my logic should support. It isn't cute. I have not, nor will I ever, argue that there should be 9 DHs nor aluminum bats. If the best way you can think of to argue is to straw man mine, then maybe you ought to realize you don't have a leg to stand on.[/quote]
:rofl:
[quote]And seriously, I can't say I respect the Giants for anything. What a piece of shit franchise. Not only the pathetic team they through out there everyday, but the fact they've been a haven for the most egregious cheater in sports history for the last 10 years.[/quote]
:lmao:

[Week]

Thank you for adding to the discussion Lord O' Bones, very enlightening. Perhaps you should go back to lurking in this thread instead of posting something stupid like that. Don't act like a prick.

[Lord O' Bones]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1361182' date='May 19 2008, 17.14']Thank you for adding to the discussion Lord O' Bones, very enlightening. Perhaps you should go back to lurking in this thread instead of posting something stupid like that. Don't act like a prick.[/quote]
I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was supposed to take that nonsense seriously. The random and pointless digression about Bonds I thought put it over the top quite nicely.

And I'm not acting.

[The Wedge]

Week, I'm not sure if you're seriously angry that folks don't agree with you about the superiority of the DH, or whether you're just taking the proverbial piss out of those who can see the value of the NL pitchers stepping to the plate.

In either case, it's starting to weird me out.

[Week]

[quote name='Lord O' Bones' post='1361202' date='May 19 2008, 20.31']I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was supposed to take that nonsense seriously. The random and pointless digression about Bonds I thought put it over the top quite nicely.[/quote]
Then you could have responded to that.

[quote name='The Wedge' post='1361207' date='May 19 2008, 20.38']Week, I'm not sure if you're seriously angry that folks don't agree with you about the superiority of the DH, or whether you're just taking the proverbial piss out of those who can see the value of the NL pitchers stepping to the plate.

In either case, it's starting to weird me out.[/quote]
I don't care if people disagree, it's just when they disagree for the wrong reasons or misrepresent what I'm saying. Saying that my argument is weak because I would, by the same logic, support 9 DHs or aluminum bats is just stupid and obnoxious.

[The Wedge]

Okay. Gotcha.

In my initial statement on why I like the pitcher to bat I mentioned that they have the same potential to change the complexion of a game at bat, whether it be a leadoff walk, laying down a sac bunt, an unexpected bloop RBI, or with that rare HR. I don't have any stats to back this up, but one of the quickest ways to get an opposing team to unravel is to have a pitcher succeed at the plate.

It has nothing to do with strategy at that point and everything to do with the mental aspect of the game. When a DH hits a HR, it's not going to mentally cripple a hurler for the most part, but give up that walk to a pitcher and it often derails a hurler.

This is not a quantifiable argument, but something I love to see happen. And it only happens in the NL.

Dig?

ETA: You don't have to agree with me, by the way. I see your side, too, and it's a valid argument for the DH.

[Lord O' Bones]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1361227' date='May 19 2008, 18.02']Then you could have responded to that.[/quote]
I did. You didn't appreciate my brevity.

[quote]I don't care if people disagree, it's just when they disagree for the wrong reasons or misrepresent what I'm saying. Saying that my argument is weak because I would, by the same logic, support 9 DHs or aluminum bats is just stupid and obnoxious.[/quote]
I think you're taking this too personnally. If anything, I'd say Myshkin was responding to the "Chicks dig the long ball" type commentary.

[BLU-RAY]

In happier news (unless you root for the Royals), Jon Lester has 8 innings of a no-hitter going right now.

[Week]

[quote name='The Wedge' post='1361236' date='May 19 2008, 21.09']Dig?[/quote]
I dig, but I think you are overstating the effect of a pitcher coming through. There is also the issue of rarity.

[quote name='Lord O' Bones' post='1361237' date='May 19 2008, 21.11']I did. You didn't appreciate my brevity.[/quote]
Nope.

I don't think any of you dislike me for my view and I don't dislike anyone for their views.

edit: You aren't supposed to say it! FFS. Say something like...looks like Lester is doing interesting things.

[BLU-RAY]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1361249' date='May 19 2008, 18.24']I dig, but I think you are overstating the effect of a pitcher coming through. There is also the issue of rarity.


Nope.

I don't think any of you dislike me for my view and I don't dislike anyone for their views.

edit: You aren't supposed to say it! FFS. Say something like...looks like Lester is doing interesting things.[/quote]


I hope he does it, but I stopped believing in sports superstition years ago.

[Lord O' Bones]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1361249' date='May 19 2008, 18.24']edit: You aren't supposed to say it! FFS. Say something like...looks like Lester is doing interesting things.[/quote]
I just had this very moment at work. :lol: I'm tellling Coworker 1 (Red Sox fan) to check out his pitcher, and he's like, "Why, we've got a 7 run lead?" I keep saying "you should check it out anyway." Coworker 2 (douche) Yells out, well, you know what he yelled out.

Edit: CW 2 is a douche on his own merits. This was not to imply that DVD is a douche. ;)