The ultimate baseball debate

Michael Boylan's picture

Designated hitter or no designated hitter?

That is the question.

Whether 'tis nobler to have someone who can actually hit a ball in the nine spot or to place arms in harms way, and end innings with strikeouts; to die and swing no more (until a few innings later at least).

Seriously, now that interleague play is over and fans of baseball have seen it both ways, which do you prefer?

I am leaning towards DH - it is not as if pitchers are going to become great hitters again (if they ever were great hitters - not counting Babe Ruth) - and wouldn't you rather have someone that can help make your lineup more competitive 1-9?

Michael Boylan's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
yes
Submitted by Zutouga on Thu, 06/28/2007 - 2:09pm.

I completely agree Tony.

The DH also has attracted the better pitchers to go to the AL b/c with the added run support of a DH they are more likely to win a game. I feel that the DH is a major reason that the AL is better than the NL and has been for quite some time.

login to post comments
The only real baseball...
TonyF's picture
Submitted by TonyF on Wed, 06/27/2007 - 9:54am.

is played in the National League. No DH (dead hands),small-ball, you know: get 'em on, get 'em over, get 'em in. AL managers have it soooooo easy, nothing to do but pencil in a lineup, scratch the appropriate places when on camera, and argue with the umps once in a while. Death to the DH (was that PC?).

"The memories of a man in his old age, are the deeds of a man in his prime.You shuffle in the gloom of the sick room,and talk to yourself as you die."
(R. Waters)


login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.