Momentum growing for DH in NL

Good. I somewhat get the reasoning behind people that like that pitchers hit, I just mostly disagree with it. It seems crazy and creates an unnecessary imbalance between leagues both competitively and #'s wise. The union certainly isn't going to oppose it, and I'm fairly confident that in either the upcoming CBA or the following one that the DH will be implemented in the NL. I'm actually amazed it hasn't happened yet purely out of the owners/GMs being terrified of a pitcher getting hurt (albeit unlikely realistically) doing something they are not "pros" at

It's inevitable. Over time, the batting average of pitchers approaches zero. At some point (I'd argue we're well past that point in fact), it just become absurd to have them in the lineup. Plus, there's obvious financial incentives both in terms of protecting pitchers and because higher run scoring tends to drive attendance. I can understand some of the arguments for keeping pitcher hitting around, but I don't think any of them are particularly appealing to the people who are ultimately going to make the decision.

I feel like any major proponent of keeping pitchers in the lineup is the same sort of person who endlessly spouts about some modern players "not playing the game the right way."

Get bats out of the pitchers' hands and make our sport more fun, and actually allow displaying emotion.

Because maintaining tradition is a lot more important to some than making sense.

Thankfully the half of baseball that is stuck in the 19th century is almost ready to move on. I know all of baseball will miss watching a great pitcher get taken out of a game because a slightly better, but still below average hitter, needs to take his spot in the order in the 7th inning. What will baseball ever do without that type of strategy?

If they had the DH back in 1960, Ted Williams would have played another 10 years.

Mediocre starters who probably have more difficulty in the AL are totally against it. On the same vain, 35+ year old hitters who still have the ability to put up good numbers, but can't field anymore are all for it.

I'd rather have more offense. I'd rather not see 99% of the pitchers not with-in one mile of the bat rack. I hate it for the pitcher (and to some degree for the owner) when a multi-million dollar pitcher has to be placed on the DL because he pulled a hammy running to 1st base.

I'm all for seeing an athlete do what he does best, and not what he does worse. Bad fielder and good hitter? I want to see good hitting. Good pitcher and injury prone pitcher.....keep the pitcher healthy and let him do what he does best.

One last thing, the DH being used by both leagues would permit premier hitters to stay in a line-up even when there is inter-league play and they are playing in the NL city. If you are looking for the most entertainment, there is no question a fan would like to see the exceptional hitter up at the plate 4 times per game instead of watching their pitcher hitting.

I'm guessing that the ownership will use it as a negotiating tool (read carrot/cheese) for the next collective bargaining agreement. I can't see the players union not wanting it.

Multi-billions of dollars means that pretty much everything is a negotiating tool.

Do you hate interleague play because of the DH or for other reasons?

I'm with you. I can't stand interleague play and feel it takes away from the World Series and the All-Star game and the mystique of separateness between the two leagues. I honestly feel it only exists because the powers that be were all too hot-to-trot for a Yankees/Mets series.

The Sox get stuck playing Atlanta and Philly where there is no rivalry and for most part so do the other teams - get stuck playing teams where they really aren't true rivals.

To me, the mystique is gone a little bit, especially when two teams play each other, and then wind up facing each other in the World Series, which is supposed to be a contest between the best team (left standing) in the two leagues.

I think I'm a "traditionalist" of sorts. I still don't like the Wild Card. I like the thought of "first place" actually meaning something. I've always been of the mindset that a league or division should never have less than 6 teams in it or more than 8 teams in it.

I grew up in the 26 team era (the Jays and M's were new teams), when there were 4 divisions, 7 teams in the AL East, 7 teams in the AL West, 6 teams in the NL East, and 6 teams in the NL West. First place really meant something back then.

That's why, even though I still don't like the wild card concept, I do like the idea of the wild-card playoff, because it does make finishing in 1st place significant, even if you're only better than 4 other teams in your division.

I admit I have outdated thinking here in that 6 to 8 team divisions don't work. In the "traditional" baseball era there were two 8 team leagues. With the first wave of expansion the leagues were featuring 10 team leagues which is way too many teams not making the play-offs, so when there was the second wave of expansion, four six team divisions were created under the two leagues, which to me, made better sense.

So basically we went from a 12.5% chance of making the post-season to a 16.7% chance of making the playoff-s in 1969, which became 15.4% in 1977. The Wild Card increased it to 21.4% in 1993, and by 1998 it was 20%. Now with the new rules, it's 33.3%, but at least I console myself with the fact that now you only have a 10% chance of winning when in the post-season as opposed to the 50% it used to be when there was just two leagues and 16 teams.

I got a sense of why this wasn't a bad things, even though the idea of the Wild Card seemed to run counter to my intuitiveness of what made baseball uniquely itself and not like football, hockey, or basketball. I realized that with Yankee money, the late 90s dynasty was small potatoes to what American League fans dealt with for a big stretch of time between 1921 - 1964 when unless your team was the Yankees, you weren't going to be watching/following October baseball for your team. So I guess the Wild Card helps prevent a stacked deck franchise like the Yankees or whoever else has more money to spend than whoever. Of course, now we're in an era where we know dollars spent than everybody else doesn't necessarily translate into more wins than everybody else, although it is still an advantage.

And as far as the DH goes, I admit being influenced by the fact that I've never witnessed the AL without it. My first favorite player was Yaz who was DHing by then, and I was glad to be able to watch him play. I just think evolution of the game has made the idea of the pitcher hitting silly.

To the first point: people who want to watch Jose Fernandez or Giancarlo Stanton instead of seeing the Orioles for the 63rd time that year?

To the second, playing a wider variety of teams would seem to lead to a more balanced schedule, no? What's so balanced about the NL East now? Any halfway decent team in that division has a tremendous advantage. The Mets were a .500 team last year when playing outside the NL East.