DH or No DH? That is the question

If there was ever an argument to be made against the designated hitter, it would be made by the pitching staff of the Chicago Cubs.  Before tonight’s (Oct. 19) game the Cubs hitters were pathetic thus far in the post-season, so much so that 1/6 of the team’s 24 RBI’s were batted in by pitchers.  Not exactly what was expected of the high-scoring club when they qualified for October baseball.

But the fact remains that the time has finally come to end the schism between the National League and the American league and adopt the designated hitter for all of Major League Baseball.

When the AL adopted the designated hitter rule in 1973 (that’s 43 years ago), it was considered either an interesting little experiment or an abomination.  Since then the rule has been adopted by virtually every professional and amateur baseball organization, save for the National League and the Nippon Professional Baseball's Central League.

For a while it was an interesting aberration, having pitchers bat in the National League but not in the American.  It was a natural experiment that demonstrated just how connected all the elements in baseball are.  Older hitters had extended careers, there was more offence, games took longer, pitching changes became more complicated (or maybe less complicated, because you didn’t have to worry about keeping a pitcher in until it was his turn to bat?).

Things have changed in 43 years.  With the DH being ubiquitous in the lower leagues and college, fewer pitchers get any experience hitting, making them even less effectual (with exceptions like Madison Bumgardner and Clayton Kershaw).  The leagues no longer have any separate identity except for the DH, as league presidents cease to be some time ago.  Umpires now work across all MLB teams, and there is uniformity in how games are called.  The league umpires used to have different kinds of chest protectors, and the bulkier AL version led umps to stand further back which affected the perceived strike zone.  But all umps wear the same equipment, and technology now monitors the accuracy of umps calling balls and strikes.

The only meaningful difference between the NL and AL is the DH.  It was a minor inconvenience when inter-league play consisted only of the All-Star Game and the World Series, disadvantaging the AL teams when they lost their DH playing in a National League Park (the All Star Game wisely adopted the DH for both teams in 2010).  The problem became more pronounced when Commissioner Bud Selig instituted occasional in-season inter-league play in 1997, a move that invigorated interest in baseball (after the player’s strike of 1994) even while it aggravated purists.

Inter-league play was initially only dine early in the season, but it became year-round in 2013 after the Astros switched leagues to give each one 15 teams.  And there’s the rub.  As an example, this year the Detroit Tigers went into their last series of the season within a game of the second AL wild card.  Unfortunately, they played that final series in Atlanta against the National League Braves.  That meant they were playing in a critical series without their DH, Victor Martinez, who got only 2 at bats in the last three games of the season.  Without Martinez, who hit .289 for the season with 27 home runs and an OPS of .827, the Tigers lost the final two games and were eliminated from the playoffs.

With the one remaining difference between the American League and the National League starts impacting playoff races, it is time to end the “experiment.”  After 43 years the verdict is in, and the decision is that chicks really do dig the long ball.  The offense produced by having an extra professional hitter in the lineup has been accepted almost everywhere but in the National League.  Yes, good hitting pitchers like Bumgardner and Kershaw are a joy to watch, but they can still be used as pinch hitters.  It is time to end the National League’s hold out and adopt DHs throughout Major League Baseball.

And while I am on the subject, can we please get past the nonsense that DH’s should be in the Hall of Fame because they “didn’t contribute on defense.”  The Hall has lots of entrants who didn’t contribute much on offense—Ozzie Smith, Bill Mazeroski, Brooks Robinson, both Tinkers and Evers (Chance put up some good offensive numbers for the era).  Plus there are Hall of Famers who were defensive liabilities, like Harmon Killebrew; isn’t not being a liability as a DH more of a positive? 

With David Ortiz’s retirement the debate has already started on his Hall credentials. Similarity scores have only two HoFers in the top ten most similar players, but Hall member Frank Thomas is numero uno most similar; the other is legendary first baseman Willie McCovey.  The top ten players most similar to Big Papi also includes Rafael Palmeiro, who is not in the Hall due to his steroids connection and finger wagging, and Jeff Bagwell, who has some vague link to steroids but should make it someday, maybe 2017.  The top ten also includes future HoFer Albert Pujols, possible Hall candidate Manny Ramirez (more steroids), and likely candidate Jim Thome (612 home runs and no link to steroids).

FiveThirtyEight puts him right on the margin, but I think that understates his non-quantifiable contributions in the post-season.  He helped end an 86 year World Series drought and three times hit over .500 in a post-season series.  In the 2013 World Series he hit .688 with an OPS of 1.95!   In the 2007 ALDS against the Angels he hit .714 with an OPS of 2.418!  I think he is a clear Hall of Famer, maybe not first ballot, but the fact he played DH for the bulk of his career shouldn’t affect the voting at all.

But of course, it will.  Old fuddy-duddy baseball writers will penalize him for not being as good on defense as Willie Mays or Steve Garvey (which is silly), and for having a link to steroids (which is legit).  But let’s get him in the Hall, as well as Thome and Edgar Martinez.  There are some good reasons for keeping guys out of the Hall, but playing DH is not one of them.