Designated Hitter Compromise

[frankbmd]

My original post was more of a random thought, expression of discontent with both the DH and the fact that a professional sport plays a World Series with two leagues that are not playing the same game.

Other random thoughts come to mind. What if the DH were required to play in the field, but he could be used anywhere on the field as a "rover" and be allowed to change his position based on the batter and the situation. He could be a fourth outfielder for power hitters, a short right of left fielder instead of infield shifts for dead pull hitters, or as an additional infielder in bunting situations. Fielder placement would add some of the lost managerial input that could be interesting. A nine man line up would be preserved.

Adding to the roster (to 26) as mentioned would hopefully add another bat to the bench (and not another one batter south paw to the bull pen). This would possibly result in one more platoon player who might be used as a late inning pinch hitter and replacement thereafter. His use would be based either on a lefty-righty matchup or as a superior defensive player. It might help.

I agree with Richard that the longer bench in the bullpen and the shorter bench in the dugout further detracts from managerial offensive options. Add to this that many managers are reluctant to use their second catcher as a pinch hitter, in case he is needed due to injury of the first catcher, and you're left with usually a couple of platoon players and perhaps a utility guy capable of filling in in case of injury. Not many options.

Those of us who grew up with the game in the fifties and sixties remember 25 man rosters with 8-10 pitchers, when relief pitchers (2-3/team) could pitch 2 or even 3 innings and the long reliever was the fifth or sixth starter. Two or three late inning defensive replacements, a utility infielder, three catchers on the roster and a couple of pinch hitters sitting on the bench.

Nostaglia is the past however, and we aren't going back. Instituting the DH was a mistake and using the DH in only one league was a second mistake IMO. Imagine a Super Bowl where one team was required to put 8 players on the line of scrimmage and the other was allowed to use only six.

Let's see what other thoughts are out there, realizing that all our solutions must be considered fantasy.

[steve B]

Some interesting ideas.

I'm not sure about going to 8 batters. The game has so much that seems to revolve around 3 and 9 that having an 8 batter lineup would feel very wrong.
It would also change the number of at bats, and when the later at bats happened. Strategically you might not want a power hitter in the 3 and 4 spots anymore, depending on lineup you might want them in 2-3or maybe 6-7

Putting the DH in the field makes it Softball.
One league I played in had a DH and an extra hitter. We got to year 3 before someone pointed out we were also letting the pitcher hit.....I don't think the 12 man lineup helped us.


Increasing the roster? That could actually happen, the players union would be for it, and probably some owners. Of course there would be more grousing about playing time. Some teams would add pitchers, some batters.

How about reducing the rosters? That would force teams to carry fewer specialized pitchers. That would make the choice of substitutions more interesting since they'd have to decide on the timing. Lineups would change too, likely heading toward more alternating left/right than now, or loading a certain section of the order with lefthand batters.

While the NL game is more complex and traditional, I think it's that style of game that has led to the abundance of specialized pitching and pitch counts, neither of which I'm all that happy with.

Steve B