MLB All Star Game

[air_hog]

Bummer, and the NL blows it again!

But honestly, I don't like the "This time it counts idea" but whatever the AL has won like the past 10 years so I'm cool.

But besides that, that had to be on of the boringest (word???) All Star Game in history. The second innings were cool, and from there to the 9th it sucked.

But what can you expect, it's baseball

[tcwest10]

I love that Hoffman, who is sometimes touted as the best closer ever, blew this game, and Mariano (who actually IS the best closer ever) saved it.
Nobody is saying that the NL isn't stronger than it's been in years past...but they do have a ways to go. It's generally weaker.
Being a you-know-who fan in NY, I cringe at the comparisions being made between my team and the Mets. The flippin' Expos could hold a comfortable lead in that division with the featured four batters the Mets have.

[joebagadonuts]

I agree with you, tc. I get a kick out of how everyone is saying that the sox blew it by trading Arroyo (who I happen to like) since he's kicking ass for Cinci. But look at who he's up against. You can't tell me that the batters he's facing are equal with having to go agains the Yankees line up 20 times a year, plus the White Sox, Texas, even Toronto. It's not like he's gotten that much better this year. It's that the hitters are that much worse.

[Deadskins]

The AL game sucks. The DH rule takes half of the strategy away.

[Fios]

I TOTALLY disagree ... why in god's name do I want to watch the WORST hitter on the team a few times per game? Oooooooooh, this is exciting, an automatic out.

[Fios]

I agree with you, tc. I get a kick out of how everyone is saying that the sox blew it by trading Arroyo (who I happen to like) since he's kicking ass for Cinci. But look at who he's up against. You can't tell me that the batters he's facing are equal with having to go agains the Yankees line up 20 times a year, plus the White Sox, Texas, even Toronto. It's not like he's gotten that much better this year. It's that the hitters are that much worse.

Don't forget my Cleveland Indians:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggregate?statType=batting&group=9&seasonType=2&type=type1&sort=OPS&split=0&season=2006

Sigh ... it's been a trying year ... thankfully, the team is young. Also, Travis Haffner wuz robbed. Best hitter in the AL, hands down, and, yes, I can provide reams of stats to back that up.

[Deadskins]

I TOTALLY disagree ... why in god's name do I want to watch the WORST hitter on the team a few times per game? Oooooooooh, this is exciting, an automatic out.

Because you may have to pull him for a better hitter, and lose your pitcher in the process. Changes the entire game strategically. Also, why do I want to watch a great hitter who can no longer field his position on defense? Hitting isn't the entire game. Baseball would be entirely boring if it weren't for the strategy involved.

[Fios]

The game has plenty of strategy with a DH: outfield/infield shifts, pitching matchups, day/night splits ... I love the cat and mouse game between a good pitcher and a good hitter, that is totally lost when you see some dude hitting .156 trotting to the plate.

[Deadskins]

All the strategy you just mentioned is still there without the DH. You still have pitcher/batter duels. I disagree about the pitcher's batting average making that big a difference. The 9th guy in an AL lineup is still batting somewhere just over .200. A .156 hitter is still going to get hits, just slightly less often than a .230 hitter. Also, do you have him sacrifice, or swing away?

[Fios]

All the strategy you just mentioned is still there without the DH. You still have pitcher/batter duels. I disagree about the pitcher's batting average making that big a difference. The 9th guy in an AL lineup is still batting somewhere just over .200. A .156 hitter is still going to get hits, just slightly less often than a .230 hitter. Also, do you have him sacrifice, or swing away?

.254
.268
.279
.240
.284
.237
.234
.265
.253
.242

That is a sampling of the batting averages of 9th hole hitters in the AL as of the All Star break. Nothing phenomenal but, as you can see, .250 is sort of the average. That's much better than most pitchers and certainly not just over .200. Additionally, when you have that ninth hole hitter who can extend an inning and allow you to get bakc to the top of an order, he becomes that much more valuable. Putting a pitcher in that spot is, the overwhelming majority of the time, simply conceding that out. And the list above obviously doesn't take into account the more accurate measures of offensive performace like on-base percentage and OPS. That's where you begin to see the real gap between a professional hitter and a pitcher who bats a few times (at most) every fourth or fifth game.

[Deadskins]

All the strategy you just mentioned is still there without the DH. You still have pitcher/batter duels. I disagree about the pitcher's batting average making that big a difference. The 9th guy in an AL lineup is still batting somewhere just over .200. A .156 hitter is still going to get hits, just slightly less often than a .230 hitter. Also, do you have him sacrifice, or swing away?

.254
.268
.279
.240
.284
.237
.234
.265
.253
.242

That is a sampling of the batting averages of 9th hole hitters in the AL as of the All Star break. Nothing phenomenal but, as you can see, .250 is sort of the average. That's much better than most pitchers and certainly not just over .200. Additionally, when you have that ninth hole hitter who can extend an inning and allow you to get bakc to the top of an order, he becomes that much more valuable. Putting a pitcher in that spot is, the overwhelming majority of the time, simply conceding that out. And the list above obviously doesn't take into account the more accurate measures of offensive performace like on-base percentage and OPS. That's where you begin to see the real gap between a professional hitter and a pitcher who bats a few times (at most) every fourth or fifth game.

Even a batter with a .250 average is only going to get a hit 1 in 10 times more than a pitcher with a .150 average. IMO, that is not worthy of removing that much strategy from the game, just to prolong the career (and pad the stats) of some fat, aging, home run hitter, who can't even run down a fly ball in left field or play first base with any consistency.

[Fios]

Again, batting average isn't the best statistic for measuring offensive output. Were we to compare OPS, slugging percentage, on-base percentage, etc. the seemingly miniscule differences we see when comparing batting averages become massive differences.
To say, flatly, person A gets a hit 2 out of every 10 at-bats while person B gets a hit 1 of every 10 ABs simply isn't a valid measure. I posted the BAs to indicate that ninth-hole hitters aren't simply Mendoza line hacks.
Travis Haffner is not a very good infielder but the DH allows me to watch one of the game's top hitters on a consistent basis. It extends the life of the pitching staff and ultimately makes for more compelling baseball.

[air_hog]

I love the cat and mouse game between a good pitcher and a good hitter,

You mean intentional walks?

But seriously, you guys better look out for The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim in the second half.

Our pitching is coming around, especaially our bullpen and look for us to make a big trade (either Carl Crawford or the Nats very own Alfonso Soriano)

YANKEES SUCK

[Deadskins]

Again, batting average isn't the best statistic for measuring offensive output. Were we to compare OPS, slugging percentage, on-base percentage, etc. the seemingly miniscule differences we see when comparing batting averages become massive differences.
To say, flatly, person A gets a hit 2 out of every 10 at-bats while person B gets a hit 1 of every 10 ABs simply isn't a valid measure. I posted the BAs to indicate that ninth-hole hitters aren't simply Mendoza line hacks.
Travis Haffner is not a very good infielder but the DH allows me to watch one of the game's top hitters on a consistent basis. It extends the life of the pitching staff and ultimately makes for more compelling baseball.

I agree about the other metrics for judging offensive performance. That being said, by prolonging the careers of some players in today's game, you take away from players who played before the inception of the DH, or who played their entire careers in the NL. What would the Babe's stats have been if he could have been a DH at the end of his career? Baseball is, more than any other sport, a game where stats provide continuity between eras. And that's my .

[yupchagee]

Again, batting average isn't the best statistic for measuring offensive output. Were we to compare OPS, slugging percentage, on-base percentage, etc. the seemingly miniscule differences we see when comparing batting averages become massive differences.
To say, flatly, person A gets a hit 2 out of every 10 at-bats while person B gets a hit 1 of every 10 ABs simply isn't a valid measure. I posted the BAs to indicate that ninth-hole hitters aren't simply Mendoza line hacks.
Travis Haffner is not a very good infielder but the DH allows me to watch one of the game's top hitters on a consistent basis. It extends the life of the pitching staff and ultimately makes for more compelling baseball.

I agree about the other metrics for judging offensive performance. That being said, by prolonging the careers of some players in today's game, you take away from players who played before the inception of the DH, or who played their entire careers in the NL. What would the Babe's stats have been if he could have been a DH at the end of his career? Baseball is, more than any other sport, a game where stats provide continuity between eras. And that's my .

Fans would rather watch these aging sluggers hit than watch managers think.

[Deadskins]

Again, batting average isn't the best statistic for measuring offensive output. Were we to compare OPS, slugging percentage, on-base percentage, etc. the seemingly miniscule differences we see when comparing batting averages become massive differences.
To say, flatly, person A gets a hit 2 out of every 10 at-bats while person B gets a hit 1 of every 10 ABs simply isn't a valid measure. I posted the BAs to indicate that ninth-hole hitters aren't simply Mendoza line hacks.
Travis Haffner is not a very good infielder but the DH allows me to watch one of the game's top hitters on a consistent basis. It extends the life of the pitching staff and ultimately makes for more compelling baseball.

I agree about the other metrics for judging offensive performance. That being said, by prolonging the careers of some players in today's game, you take away from players who played before the inception of the DH, or who played their entire careers in the NL. What would the Babe's stats have been if he could have been a DH at the end of his career? Baseball is, more than any other sport, a game where stats provide continuity between eras. And that's my .

Fans would rather watch these aging sluggers hit than watch managers think.

I'm a fan, and I wouldn't. Besides Fios and yourself, I don't know anyone who likes the DH rule..

[JansenFan]

I like it.

[tcwest10]

Sure you do. There's me, the Yankees fan. How could I not like it?
The only problem I have with the position is, despite the fact that it is an official MLB-sanctioned role on a team, a great DH isn't seriously considered for the league MVP over a "regular" position player. While it hurts to say this, I really don't think Ortiz should've been passed over for A-Rod last season...especially when I'm not entirely convinced that A-Rod was even the TEAM MVP last year. Ortiz, on the other hand, was pivotal in the success the Sox had. For comparisions sake, envision the Sox without Papi...then, the Yanks with out A-Rod (this was before the injuries to Shef and Godzilla, BTW)...and tell me which team would've suffered more. I hate that Ortiz, because he doesn't play a "regular" position in AL games (for Interleague, he's a 1st Baseman), his value cannot be recognized by awarding him baseball's highest individual achievement outside of the HOF...the MVP.
That's my only beef with the DH role. In this day and age, pitchers don't usually do CG's anymore, so the "wear and tear" argument doesn't hold much water with me...but you have to admit, aside from Dontrelle's GS the other day...there's not a whole lot of fireworks when the pitcher steps up to the plate.
(Except, of course, the whole Clemens-Piazza debacle. )

[Deadskins]

OK. That's four. And I'm sure others will chime in with their approval as well, especially fans of AL teams. But to be fair, I don't really know any of you!

[JansenFan]

I'm sure most AL fans like the rule and most NL fans do not. That's because either you grew up rooting for a team with/without the DH and that's the way you like it, or you chose to root for a team in one of the leagues because you wanted to see a DH/a pitcher hitting in the extra slot.

[Fios]

Sure you do. There's me, the Yankees fan. How could I not like it?
The only problem I have with the position is, despite the fact that it is an official MLB-sanctioned role on a team, a great DH isn't seriously considered for the league MVP over a "regular" position player. While it hurts to say this, I really don't think Ortiz should've been passed over for A-Rod last season...especially when I'm not entirely convinced that A-Rod was even the TEAM MVP last year. Ortiz, on the other hand, was pivotal in the success the Sox had. For comparisions sake, envision the Sox without Papi...then, the Yanks with out A-Rod (this was before the injuries to Shef and Godzilla, BTW)...and tell me which team would've suffered more. I hate that Ortiz, because he doesn't play a "regular" position in AL games (for Interleague, he's a 1st Baseman), his value cannot be recognized by awarding him baseball's highest individual achievement outside of the HOF...the MVP.

Travis Haffner faces that very same, unjustifiable criticism. He should have been an All Star this year, no question but his role as a DH means he wasn't:
AVG .322 | HR 25 | RBI 74 | OBP .461 | SLG .650

In the geek stat catergories (VORP, etc.) he blows everyone else away:
http://mistakesports.blogspot.com/2006/07/in-case-there-was-any-doubt.html

In an age when we can, in fact, quantify a player's impact to such a degree, there is no excuse to exclude a DH.

[Deadskins]

I liken it to Deion Sanders HOF status. I don't think he belongs because he only plays half of his position. Sure he can cover, but how is he in run support? Sure a DH can hit, but how well does he play defense?

[Fios]

Deion's time as a Redskin was not spectacular but he's definitely a HOFer, he wasn't much for tackling but he didn't have to be, as a cover corner he was second to none. He shut down an entire side of the field, he arguably helped two teams to SB wins who, sans him, may not have been there in the first place.
As an athlete, if you distinguish yourself in the role you've been given, you shouldn't be penalized because you don't excel in all facets.
Put it another way: are you going to deny a pitcher a HOF berth if his every at-bat was an automatic out and he was terrible at fielding his position? Just because someone trots out to a position on the infield/outfield doesn't mean they are a good defender, look at the sheer number of outstanding hitters who play right field.
The bottom line is you can measure a player's impact on his team's won/loss record. The Indians would have fewer wins without Travis Hafner, the Red Sox would have fewer wins withou Papi, etc, etc.
So these guys play hard, they excel at what they do and their teams benefit in a quantifiable way and that isn't enough?
Sorry, I don't buy that.

[tcwest10]

I liken it to Deion Sanders HOF status. I don't think he belongs because he only plays half of his position. Sure he can cover, but how is he in run support? Sure a DH can hit, but how well does he play defense?

It isn't his job to play defense. The Designated Hitter role was aptly named.
If a player stands out in that role, his assigned role, so well that he contributes substantially to the success of his team, he oughta be eligible to win the MVP.
Deion Sanders, no matter what I think of his time here, was the most effective player at his position for a good many years...regardless of how he stacked up in all categories of that position (i.e. run blocking, tackling), if a ball was thrown to his man, he usually wound up stealing it and taking it the other way. If you're a HOF selector, and you decide to pass on Deion Sanders because he didn't meet all your criteria for the perfect DB...well, then. Have lunch with Dr. Z and Peter King...they hold players accountable for those same things, and not the bottom line...and misery loves company.