Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 11/03/84 (WLS Mods); site fisher.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!fisher!david
From: david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin)
Newsgroups: net.sport.baseball
Subject: RE:dump the DH
Message-ID: <607@fisher.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 5-May-85 09:02:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: fisher.607
Posted: Sun May  5 09:02:33 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 6-May-85 01:47:00 EDT
References: <2597@ihuxf.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Princeton University Department of Statistics
Lines: 52

>I don't know what it is about all of you vocal "dump the DH" fans out there
>but given the choice I would prefer to watch an American league game over a
>national league game (any team) any day of the week.  It is simply a better
>contest having 9 batters who bat on a daily basis.  I too am not fond I 
>watching a pitcher sacrifice bunt or strike out.  What does it add to the game?

Tsk, tsk.  DH-proponents ask the wrong question.  The proper question
is "what does the DH add to the game?"; the burden of proof rests upon
the proponents of change.  Moreover, all responses to my anti-DHism
ignore my most salient points, probably because they are not
answerable:

	(1) Why are we so hung up on the pitcher?  What of other weak
	    hitters?
	(2) How much free substitution is enough? Too much?
	(3) Does the extra hit (that's the average offensive
	    difference between an AL game and an NL game) provide so
	    much of a thrill that it warrants radical surgery on the
	    game?  Are all thrills offensive?  Are no thrills
	    strategic?
	(4) Anti-DH'ers list all sorts of reason for opposition:
	    tradition, ineffectiveness of the DH, horror at free
	    substitution, repulsion at players permitted to remain in
	    a game without being called upon to display more than one
	    skill, distortion of careers and player evaluations, etc.
	    Pro-Dh'ers have only one reason: offense gives 'em a rush.
	    Where do you pro-DH'ers draw the line, and why?
  
Summary: why limit the logic favoring the DH to one position?  If the
logic is flawed, ban the DH; if the logic is true, expand it to more
(even nine) positions.  If you don't like the idea of separate
offensive and defensive units, you are not yet at peace with the logic
of the DH.

> As far as the comment of not allowing baseball to move in the direction of
> trying to spice up the offense, what of the lowering of the pitcher's mound
> (was it the late sixties) in both leagues to aid the offense.  I don't feel
> that that was a mistake, do you Dave?
 
Lowering the mound is of the same order of magnitude as switching from
a "live" ball to a "dead" ball or requiring some uniformity of fence
distances or adjusting the batter's box: rules which change the
balance of the game without changing the game itself.  The DH, on the
other hand, represents radical surgery.  If you pro-DH'ers are
indifferent as to whether changes are textual or contextual, why not
make us obstinate purists happier by lowering the mound again, if it's
offense you want, and banning the DH?  At least then NL and AL
baseball would be the same game under similar circumstances rather
than similar games under the same circumstances.

					David Rubin
			{allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david