What the Designated Hitter Rule Eliminates

by Harold Friend

Toronto Blue Jays' manager Clarence "Cito" Gaston was familiar with the situation. In the eighth inning of a scoreless game at Atlanta, the Blue Jays had Scott Rolen on second base and one out. Rod Barajas was the batter, with pitcher Roy Halladay on deck. Through seven innings, Halladay had faced 26 batters, making 95 pitches.

No Designated Hitter

Games hosted by National League teams do not use the designated hitter rule. Clarence Gaston and Braves' manager Bobby Cox were forced into a battle of wits. Cox could intentionally walk Barajas to force Gaston's hand.

Pinch-Hit for Roy Halladay?

Halladay would be the scheduled batter with two runners on base. Gaston could let Halladay bat or use a pinch hitter. If Halladay batted, would he hit away or try to move the runners up, which would put Blue Jays on second and third, two outs, and lead off batter Marco Scutaro at the plate.

Clarence Gaston Pinch-Hit for Roy Halladay and the Jays Lost

Bobby Cox did not walk Barajas. With a full count, the Blue Jays' catcher hit a harmless fly ball to right field for the second out. Gaston pinch-hit for Halladay with Joe Inglett, who failed to bring in Rolen from second. The Braves scored a run against Halladay's replacement, Jesse Carlson, and won the game, 1-0.

Mets-Padres in 1970

Clarence Gaston had been in a similar situation many years ago as a player for the San Diego Padres in 1970. The Mets scored a run off Padres' starter Clay Kirby in the top of the first inning when Tommie Agee led off with a walk, stole second, stole third, and scored on an Art Shamsky ground out.

Preston Gomez Pinch Hit With Clarence Gaston

In the eighth inning, the Mets still led 1-0, but they were still hitless as the Padres batted. Ed Spiezio grounded out to shortstop Bud Harrelson. Bob Barton came to the plate, and Clay Kirby waited in the on deck circle. Mets' starter Jim McAndrew got the offensively challenged Padres' catcher on a harmless fly ball to right field. Padres' manager Preston Gomez made his move.

Gomez sent Clarence "Cito" Gaston to bat for Kirby as 10,373 fans booed. "It would have been the easy way out for me to let the kid go up and hit. I don't play for the fans. I play to win. In fact, if Ed Spiezio had led off the eighth with a hit, I would have bunted him over and the pinch-hit for the pitcher. I did the same thing in Spokane by taking Phil Ortega out after seven innings and we eventually won the game"

(Note: On September 4, 1974, managing Houston, Gomez pulled Don Wilson, who had no-hit the Reds for eight innings. Houston lost 2-1).

So Many Possibilities

Gaston struck out to retire the side. Gomez brought in Jack Baldschun, who gave up three hits and two runs. The Padres were retired in order in the ninth, but IF Kirby had remained in the game, he might have gotten a hit (unlikely), he might have kept the Mets scoreless and hitless in the ninth, the Padres, down by only a run, might have scored (unlikely). If the Padres didn't score, Kirby has the dubious distinction of losing a no-hitter. If the Padres did tie the game, how long does Kirby pitch if he still had the no-hitter?

What great situations, Did Gomez make the right move? The Padres were going no where, the Mets were trying to win the Eastern Division title, and Kirby might never have another chance at pitching a no-hitter. Unlike the Blue Jays-Braves, the potential tying run was NOT on second when Gomez pinch-hit for Kirby.

The designated hitter rule eliminates all of the above. The beauty of two managers matching wits is rarely seen in American League games. Managers are supposed to manage. Fans love to argue about strategy. So much is eliminated because the designated hitter rule has not been and never will be eliminated.

References:

By JOSEPH DURSO Special to The New York Times. (1970, July 22). BALDSCHUN GIVES 3 SAFETIES IN 9TH :Harrelson Gets First Met Hit Off Reliever--Kirby Pulled Out for a Pinch-Batter. New York Times (1857-Current file),68. Retrieved May 23, 2009, from ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2005) database. (Document ID: 105306768).

By JOSEPH DURSO Special to The New York Times. (1970, July 23). 8-Inning No-Hitter Irks Fans on Coast. New York Times (1857-Current file),p. 34. Retrieved May 23, 2009, from ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2005) database. (Document ID: 78792541).

HeywoodJablomeWaterboy

188 days ago

Score 1

Finally, the old man speaks the truth. I think the Designated Hitter rule adds as much as it subtracts. Pitchers in the American League are allowed to pitch till, essentially, they cannot whereas in the National League its, as you put it, "two managers match wits" I enjoy both, but without the DH, we would also be forced to see players like David Ortiz play first base.

Permalink | Reply

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

188 days ago

Score 1

Pitchers getting blown away by 80 MPH isn't entertaining. I watch Major League Baseball to see the best in the world. Pitchers are not the best hitters in the world. Although the strategizing is fun, it's also boring.

I don't want to see Dustin Pedroia pitch, and i don't want to see Jon Lester hit.

Permalink | Reply

Tmil42AAA-er

188 days ago

Score 2

There's a joke in there about Jamie Moyer, but I'm too classy to make it.

Or am I?

Permalink

LouGehrigRed-Shirting

188 days ago

Score 0

That's because they can't, but that's not why they are in the majors. The DH compromises the game.

Permalink

Steel TownDraft Pick

186 days ago

Score 1

Maybe after every interception the QB could run off the field and be replaced by a cornerback because no one wants to see a QB make a tackle. Perhaps the kickers could do the same thing after they kick off too.

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

185 days ago

Score 2

Interesting comparison ST, since after he throws that interception and the play is over, he and his 10 offensive teammates are all replaced with defensive players.

Permalink

Steel TownDraft Pick

185 days ago

Score 1

Touche...but you know what I am getting at.

Permalink

Tyrone BriggsHall of Famer

188 days ago

Score 2

Well I can testify that Carlos Zambrano has been more productive with the bat than a lot of his compadres. And perhaps more sadly, Mark Grace (even today) probably could outpitch Neal Cotts.

Permalink | Reply

RomiezzoLegend

188 days ago

Score 2

What about Wade Boggs? He pitched 2 1/3 innings in his career with that knuckleball of his. ;)

Permalink

RomiezzoLegend

188 days ago

Score 2

This is a good article, LouGehrig. However, I like to think negatively about the designated hitter rule.

I HATE IT. Although I am an American League fan, I do not like the designated hitter rule for a couple of reasons, the main one being that it changes what the game was at first. I've always used this analogy, and I will use it again for old time's sake:
What would happen if we had a designated free throw shooter in the NBA? Let's go back to the 2006 NBA Playoffs, shall we? Game 1 between the Heat and the Mavericks in the NBA Finals. The Heat lost that game 90-80. Shaquille O'Neal missed 8 free throws, and Dwyane Wade missed 4. Now, what would happen if someone on the team (let's say someone like Dorrell Wright or Jason Kapono... someone who wasn't a starter and "didn't really do much for the team") who had a really good free throw percentage became their designated free throw shooter? Probably 9, maybe even 10 if the Heat got lucky, of those shots would've gone in, and the Heat would've had a much better chance of winning that game. Also, the Mavs would've definitely had to change their game plan, as they knew that Shaq couldn't shoot well from the free throw line so they'd just foul him hard. This is the exact same thing that's happening in baseball. Although the designated hitter rule would've eliminated all those things that you mentioned above, Lou, the game was still fair, wasn't it? Other than the fact that maybe a National League pitcher got more at-bats than an American League pitcher (but that would bring up why I think interleague play is stupid too, which isn't the point). However, they could still pinch hit for Halladay, like you said, and put in Joe Inglett. Sometimes, it doesn't work for the team though, as he might fail to bring in a guy in scoring position.

This is a game where if you fail only 7 out of 10 times, you're successful. Baseball is a strategic game where you have to take chances and/or make sacrifices. I don't like the DH rule since it takes away what all baseball players should do... and that's field and hit. The DH doesn't field, so he's getting off easy, and the pitcher is not a hitter, so he's getting off easy and he might throw an inning or two more than he would if he was pitching in the National League. There should only be one thing that makes the pitchers different from everybody else, and that's the fact that they PITCH. They should hit, just like everyone else on the team.

Permalink | Reply

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

188 days ago

Score 2

What if goalies still weren't allowed to wear pads?

Permalink

RomiezzoLegend

188 days ago

Score 1

Does that really change the way the game itself is played? Sure, now, goalies can go "all out" and dive without getting hurt, but the rule is null and void because they want to see everyone at their best and to avoid injuries. And goalies are meant to dive and their objective to make sure the nothing gets by them. Did old school catchers have the gear that you see MLB catchers wear now? No. Sports revolutionize. I'm just saying that the DH rule didn't change the game for the good. Sure, when you think about it, giving goalies the opportunity to wear pads gives them a break, just like DH rule gives pitchers a break, but the idea of pads helps change sports for the good and doesn't really change the integrity of the game as much as the DH rule.

Permalink

CheezerAll-Star

188 days ago

Score 2

Rawb. I respect your position on the issue, but I do not like specialists. DH's, kickers, punters, I don't like any of 'em. Like Lou and Romi say, strategy is more important without specialists.

You say, "What if goalies weren't allowed to wear pads." I don't follow. How is that relevant to this discussion? The discussion is about specialists and their impact on strategy and you bring up equipment. What if fielders weren't allowed to wear gloves=what if goalies weren't allowed to wear pads. What if there were no DH =/= What if goalies weren't allowed to wear pads. (/picking at nits)

Permalink

LouGehrigRed-Shirting

188 days ago

Score 1

I agree with you completely. The National League is the only real baseball league left.

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

187 days ago

Score 3

What if the 5 opposing skaters could treat a goalie like they treat the other players on the ice. What if quarterbacks were treated the same as offensive lineman?

If I want to watch a crappy hitter look foolish at the plate, I'll get a bat, a tee, a ball, and a mirror.

Permalink

CheezerAll-Star

188 days ago

Score 3

Let Pitchers Hit

This user is a Ban the Designated Hitter fan.

Permalink | Reply

Davis21wylieMVP

188 days ago

Score 1

Bill James wrote an article in his Historical Baseball Abstract called, "1973: DH Rule Increases Strategy":

"What the DH rule actually does…is to eliminate from the game a series of forced, obvious moves, which involve in fact no option on the part of either manager, and thus no strategy. You've got a .113 hitter at the plate. A runner on first, and nobody out in the fourth, and you have to bunt don't you? Where's the strategy? With a DH up there at least you can do something. You're down four runs in the seventh with the pitcher leading off, and you have to pinch hit for him, don't you? What's strategic about that? The DH rule saves the pinch hitters, and thus in effect makes the roster larger. As such it creates, not eliminates, strategic options for American League managers."

He looked at how bunts and pinch hitters were used in the AL vs. the NL from 1968 to 1986, and compared the standard deviation in the AL and NL in how the options are used. What James discovered was that although they are used less in the AL, the situations they are used in vary much more than they do in the NL. Plus he found that in the NL there existed a uniform type of team, because of the damn pitcher having to bat, that would play for the 1-run game rather than the big inning, whereas in the AL you'd find all styles of teams. The DH rule actually increased strategy!

"What the truth comes down to here is, a question of in what does strategy reside? Does strategy exist in the act of bunting? If so, the Designated Hitter Rule has reduced strategy. But if strategy exists in the decision about when a bunt should be used, then the DH rule has increased the differences of opinion which exist about that question, and thus has increased strategy. But if strategy is an argument, then I would argue that there is more of a difference of opinion, not less, in the American League."

Besides, who wants to watch a mediocre single-A (or worse) caliber hitter bat once every time through the order? Pitchers are in the majors for their pitching, nobody picks them because they can hit (Micah Owings is just a pleasant surprise, and this point he might want to bag the pitching thing and hit full-time). It's simply not possible to be an MLB-caliber hitter and pitcher at the same time anymore. So we have to watch some ridiculous scrub-level hitter either bunt or strike out once every 9 hitters for the sake of tradition? I'm sorry, but I love the DH rule -- aesthetically it's a million times better for the game, and the numbers say it actually increases strategy. The only argument against it is just one of inertia, "we've always done it that way". I'd rather watch MLB-caliber hitters hit, if you don't mind.

Permalink | Reply

LouGehrigRed-Shirting

187 days ago

Score 2

Mr. James generalizes, which is can lead to misleading or invalid conclusions. What he categorizes as forced, obvious moves may be that to him, but not to baseball managers.

With a .113 batter at the plate and a runner on first, the best move might be to tell the batter to not swing at anything. Or, it might be to attempt a bunt. Or, it might be let him swing away and send the runner if the runner is fast, the pitcher has a bad move to first, the catcher has a poor throwing arm, etc.

James generalizes and simplifies.

What is a "uniform type of team?" Are the Dodgers similar to the Phillies? How about the Rockies compared to the Giants. What a ridiculous statement. Of course, the Yankees, before playing in the their new abomination of a home run wind tunnel ball park, were similar to the Red Sox.

"Strategy" was illustrated in the Roy Halladay situation. It was illustrated in the two Preston Gomez situations. It is not illustrated when Joe Torre used to bring in Mariano in the eighth inning to get five outs.

Pitchers are athletes, and from Babe Ruth on down, there have been some fine hitting pitchers. Brett Myers provided some of the greatest moments in playoff history last year when he hit against the Brewers. That possibility alone is enough to condemn the DH to the dog pile.

Why doesn't Mr. James take it one step further. He can speak to Mr. Selig and, since next to pitchers, catchers have been the most offensively challenged group of players, have a part time DH rule. A manager can have a DH hit for the catcher TWICE a game. Hey, Jorge Posada would love it.

Permalink

Davis21wylieMVP

186 days ago

Score 1

Yeah, because the Rockies, Coors Field, steroids, and the livelier ball obviously were significantly in play during the early 80s, when James wrote that...

Permalink

Anonymous Fanatic #1

186 days ago

Score 1

I am a Yankees fan and follow AL much more closely than NL but I hate the DH rule. I accept that there are positive aspects to it but if you want to see the effect specialization has on a game look at NFL. In baseball's closest living relative (apart from softball) namely cricket, each side names its team and sticks to it unless there's an injury. Seeing fast bowlers facing fast bowling themselves is all part of the game. It also gives the opportunity for revenge. In AL pitchers know they will not be facing a beanball themselves and I think they should.

Permalink | Reply