OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

Anyone · 05-21-2015, 11:17 AM

At the risk of being accused of accepting "inevitability" and thus looking for a hybrid, which isn't what I'm doing at all, I read the hybrid solutions linked in kq76's signature, and they inspired my own hybrid idea that isn't quite as good for me as "no DH at all" but is at least 80% as good; and should be about as good to DH supporters because it would eliminate about 80% of pitcher plate appearances, maybe more.

My idea (based on the best aspects of Starting Pitcher Only DH idea in kq76's links) would be the "6 Inning DH."

The vast majority of the strategy from the DH rule occurs after the 6th inning. The only part that really doesn't is that "no DH" makes the batting order more intricate. If you pinch hit for the pitcher before the 7th inning most of the time that's an obvious case that comes from being far enough behind that it's not that big of a deal for you to pull the starter, as he can't be pitching that well.

So, for 6 innings the DH rule is in force. In the 7th inning either the pitcher's spot becomes the former DH's spot or the DH can be moved to the field in a form of double switch that can be done in the AL now but the DH is lost if you do so almost no one does it. However, in this case, you're losing the DH anyway, so you might do it to keep that batter in the game, especially if he replaces a fielder not due up soon (as it becomes like a double switch).

Even in the NL, the pitcher doesn't bat that often after the 6th inning. When there's a real decision about whether to have him bat in the 7th or later, if the score is close that's when it's often a more difficult and interesting strategic decision where losing the pitcher vs. gaining the batter can make people think. Just tying it to the starting pitcher isn't enough (though would improve on the AL rules) because often the decision is about whether or not to let the starter hit so he can stay in to pitch.

It's not as good to me as "no DH" because of the pitchers' spot influence on batting order selection and because it lets a guy who can't field at all bat for 6 innings without making his team suffer his (lack of) glove. It wouldn't be as good for people who love the DH because to them any time the pitcher bats is boring, and there would still be times that the pitcher bats.

But if you look at it from a standpoint of making everyone as happy as possible, it would preserve about 80% of what I like about not having the DH, while removing (I'd figure) about 80% of the pitcher plate appearances that DH supporters find so boring (and aren't really in themselves what I'm adamant about protecting). So, on balance, I think the average fan would be happier than with either AL or NL rules, even if few would be as happy as they are with their preferred league's rules. It's worth some thought.

05-21-2015, 11:17 AM	#152
Anyone Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 405	At the risk of being accused of accepting "inevitability" and thus looking for a hybrid, which isn't what I'm doing at all, I read the hybrid solutions linked in kq76's signature, and they inspired my own hybrid idea that isn't quite as good for me as "no DH at all" but is at least 80% as good; and should be about as good to DH supporters because it would eliminate about 80% of pitcher plate appearances, maybe more. My idea (based on the best aspects of Starting Pitcher Only DH idea in kq76's links) would be the "6 Inning DH." The vast majority of the strategy from the DH rule occurs after the 6th inning. The only part that really doesn't is that "no DH" makes the batting order more intricate. If you pinch hit for the pitcher before the 7th inning most of the time that's an obvious case that comes from being far enough behind that it's not that big of a deal for you to pull the starter, as he can't be pitching that well. So, for 6 innings the DH rule is in force. In the 7th inning either the pitcher's spot becomes the former DH's spot or the DH can be moved to the field in a form of double switch that can be done in the AL now but the DH is lost if you do so almost no one does it. However, in this case, you're losing the DH anyway, so you might do it to keep that batter in the game, especially if he replaces a fielder not due up soon (as it becomes like a double switch). Even in the NL, the pitcher doesn't bat that often after the 6th inning. When there's a real decision about whether to have him bat in the 7th or later, if the score is close that's when it's often a more difficult and interesting strategic decision where losing the pitcher vs. gaining the batter can make people think. Just tying it to the starting pitcher isn't enough (though would improve on the AL rules) because often the decision is about whether or not to let the starter hit so he can stay in to pitch. It's not as good to me as "no DH" because of the pitchers' spot influence on batting order selection and because it lets a guy who can't field at all bat for 6 innings without making his team suffer his (lack of) glove. It wouldn't be as good for people who love the DH because to them any time the pitcher bats is boring, and there would still be times that the pitcher bats. But if you look at it from a standpoint of making everyone as happy as possible, it would preserve about 80% of what I like about not having the DH, while removing (I'd figure) about 80% of the pitcher plate appearances that DH supporters find so boring (and aren't really in themselves what I'm adamant about protecting). So, on balance, I think the average fan would be happier than with either AL or NL rules, even if few would be as happy as they are with their preferred league's rules. It's worth some thought.