Quote:
Originally Posted by BusterKing
It's more fun to manage a non-DH team. Makes you think and in how creative you can be with the double switch.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wolf
Which is exactly why the DH never should've been implemented.
|
Actually (and this is a point I steal from Bill James), the DH opens up more strategic options for managers. Yes, the double-switch is gone, but a lot of other things are present that the DH takes away.
With no DH, the pitcher bunting in a lot of situations is an automatic move (and moreover, it makes NOT bunting, or doing a H&R, with the #7 and #8 hitters automatic moves, too). With the DH, traditionally you see a lot more variation, with some AL teams bunting a lot, and some teams almost never.
Especially in the modern era of 6 and 7 man bullpens, not having a DH means you have to be very careful how you use your bench, and forces teams to be a lot more predictable. You only have 5 position players on the bench to work with (4 if you subtract the backup catcher), and you never want to be in the situation of having used up all your pinch-hitters, so you're really constrained. With the DH, you don't have to worry about holding guys back for use as pinch-hitters later, and so you can choose -- or not -- to be more aggressive and creative in using your bench. e.g. You can do a lot more Earl Weaver-style platoon switches of position players, or you can keep guys on the bench who have a very specific role (pinch-runner, defensive specialist, only hits lefties, etc.).
I'm a NL fan, and prefer the pitcher hitting just because aesthetically, I prefer everyone playing both ways. But the DH does actually open up a lot of possibilities, and it's unfortunate that few teams have really exploited it.
Actually, what I think would be cool would be to have DH/non-DH be part of the ground rules -- that is, the home team decides which is in effect. That would really add an interesting strategic dimension to the game...