2019-2020 MLB Offseason Thread

[dont care]

2 hours ago, Lights Out said:

 

I hate this idea. The AL should get rid of the DH instead if they have to standardize things.

No, pitchers have become specialized and them hitting is a joke and an embarrassment, and it’s not going to get better any time soon.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

2 hours ago, McCarthy said:

Baseball purists can drink paint.

 

2 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

The purists are a detriment to the game, not a benefit. 

 

There is no such thing as a "purist", unless you are talking about someone who favours seven balls for a walk and the batter's right to call for a high pitch or a low pitch.  Every fan has his or her preferences; I loved the DH, held my nose for the wild card, and could not abide interleague play.

 

 

2 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

Interleague should have been around since 1901, along with combined [umpire] crews and real playoffs. 

 

This is crazy talk.  First of all, the leagues were founded separately, and were openly at war with each other for the first couple of years of the American League's existence.  If the leagues aren't recognising each other's contracts, then there is no chance at an interlocking schedule.

 

Even after the leagues made peace with each other and established the World Series (in which John McGraw's New York Giants refused to participate in 1904, out of disdain for the A.L. and its founder Ban Johnson), and even after the establishment of the Commissioner in the 1920s, the leagues maintained separate policies on a number of matters well into our lifetimes, such as the number of players allowed in mound conferences, the rules on late-night curfews (the N.L. had none, leading to Rick Camp's claim to fame), and, before divisional play, the tie-breaker format.

The biggest difference between the leagues, apart from the DH, was that the American League umpires used the outside balloon chest protector well into the 1980s, while the National League umpires used the chest protector worn under the shirt.  This led to a systematic difference between the two leagues' strike zones.

The leagues took different trajectories through time, as the National League integrated faster than the American League. The N.L.'s act of drawing from a larger talent pool led to its superiority over the A.L. in the 1960s up thorugh the mid-1970s.  What is shocking to realise is that the American League's first homegrown black superstars were Vida Blue and Reggie Jackson.  (Let us note that Frank Robinson came to the American League after having already been a star in the National League, and that Larry Doby and Luke Easter and Mudcat Grant, while quality players, were certainly not superstars.)  This difference was reflected in All-Star Game results of the period; and a glimpse at the starting lineups shows the National League's vast superiority.

There were plenty of veteran players who identified with each league. Before it became apparent that Pete Rose was going to break Ty Cobb's hit record, Rose's goal was to break Stan Musial's N.L. hit record.  (Every mark had a National League record and an American League record.)  So, when Rose became a free agent in 1978, he told American League teams not to bother making him offers.  Nowadays it might be fun to make a snarky remark about Rose and gambling; but Rose was far from the only player who identified as a National Leaguer or an American Leagure.  During the Yankee broadcasts of the 1970s, the great Giant and Cardinal first-baseman Bill White would often talk with Yankee legend Phil Rizzuto about the distinctions between the leagues, and how each league's players viewed the other league. These conversations were fascinating.

The histories of these two leagues are so rich.  It really doesn't matter that National League fans never got to see Mantle or Carew or Brett, or that American League fans never got to see Mays or Seaver or Schmidt.  To want to throw this history away is equivalent to wiping one's nose on the Mona Lisa.

And the idea of playoffs is entirely ahistorical, as absolutely no one at the time ever conceived of the need for this.  It was obvious then that the winner of the championship competition in the league was the league champion.  This is an idea that still holds true in world football (with a few notable exceptions).  We could probably imagine breaking each league up into two four-team divisions; but this would be a solution in search of a problem.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Sodboy13 said:

1 hour ago, The Six said:

The DH is simply not baseball 

It's been at the highest level of the sport for half a century. It's used in pretty much every adult league, major, minor, or independent, other than the National. This is like claiming the forward pass is "not football" in 1980.

 

Exactly right.  Another problem with the "not baseball" position is that it is based in the empty trope that the DH removes strategy.  Of course, the truth is that the DH adds strategy, because it allows managers to pinch-hit for other players (as the Yankees often did for Bucky Dent) and also to pinch run, without the need to keep a guy on the bench to pinch-hit the next time the pitcher's spot comes up.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, AustinFomBoston said:

Only thing I would miss is watching the pitchers having to bat.

It's fun when you have a player that is good at both. 

 

I would say that watching pitchers hit is fun whether or not the pitcher is a good hitter.  In most cases, the pitcher on the mound is expected to make short work of the pitcher at the plate.  This creates a weird kind of pressure; we have all seen instances in which the pitcher on the mound walks the pitcher at the plate, and then goes completely to pieces.  And, if the pitcher at the plate is a good hitter (like Dwight Gooden, who said that he'd rather hit a home run than throw a no-hitter), then it is fun for other reasons. 

The point is that having it both ways on the question of the DH is ideal, from the standpoints both of history and of fan engagement. 

[Crabcake]

When someone ignites the DH debate again

[monkeypower]

It's so  weird to me as someone born in 1996, that despite the MLB being 93 years older than I am, both interleague play and the MLB officially being one league are both younger than me.

 

That there was a time where teams in the MLB could never play each other is such a weird concept.

[BBTV]

I used to be vehemently against the DH.  I used to be of the mindset that double switches were cool, pitchers bunting was fun, and the AL was boring.

 

Now I think the NL is boring.  The pitching changes and double switches add too much time to the game, the dead spot in the lineup makes anything that happens in front of it less exciting, and I don't need a guy that's being paid $30M to pitch getting hurt running bases once a week.

 

Also - the AL has a distinct advantage when it comes to building teams.  Aging sluggers that can still hit but not field can still be on AL rosters, and then play in the WS against NL teams that have to keep extra pitchers and utility infielders around.  Even if they don't need that roster makeup for the games in the AL stadiums, what can they do about it then?  

 

 

[SFGiants58]

55 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

 

There is no such thing as a "purist", unless you are talking about someone who favours seven balls for a walk and the batter's right to call for a high pitch or a low pitch.  Every fan has his or her preferences; I loved the DH, held my nose for the wild card, and could not abide interleague play.

 

 

 

This is crazy talk.  First of all, the leagues were founded separately, and were openly at war with each other for the first couple of years of the American League's existence.  If the leagues aren't recognising each other's contracts, then there is no chance at an interlocking schedule.

 

Even after the leagues made peace with each other and established the World Series (in which John McGraw's New York Giants refused to participate in 1904, out of disdain for the A.L. and its founder Ban Johnson), and even after the establishment of the Commissioner in the 1920s, the leagues maintained separate policies on a number of matters well into our lifetimes, such as the number of players allowed in mound conferences, the rules on late-night curfews (the N.L. had none, leading to Rick Camp's claim to fame), and, before divisional play, the tie-breaker format.

The biggest difference between the leagues, apart from the DH, was that the American League umpires used the outside balloon chest protector well into the 1980s, while the National League umpires used the chest protector worn under the shirt.  This led to a systematic difference between the two leagues' strike zones.

The leagues took different trajectories through time, as the National League integrated faster than the American League. The N.L.'s act of drawing from a larger talent pool led to its superiority over the A.L. in the 1960s up thorugh the mid-1970s.  What is shocking to realise is that the American League's first homegrown black superstars were Vida Blue and Reggie Jackson.  (Let us note that Frank Robinson came to the American League after having already been a star in the National League, and that Larry Doby and Luke Easter and Mudcat Grant, while quality players, were certainly not superstars.)  This difference was reflected in All-Star Game results of the period; and a glimpse at the starting lineups shows the National League's vast superiority.

There were plenty of veteran players who identified with each league. Before it became apparent that Pete Rose was going to break Ty Cobb's hit record, Rose's goal was to break Stan Musial's N.L. hit record.  (Every mark had a National League record and an American League record.)  So, when Rose became a free agent in 1978, he told American League teams not to bother making him offers.  Nowadays it might be fun to make a snarky remark about Rose and gambling; but Rose was far from the only player who identified as a National Leaguer or an American Leagure.  During the Yankee broadcasts of the 1970s, the great Giant and Cardinal first-baseman Bill White would often talk with Yankee legend Phil Rizzuto about the distinctions between the leagues, and how each league's players viewed the other league. These conversations were fascinating.

The histories of these two leagues are so rich.  It really doesn't matter that National League fans never got to see Mantle or Carew or Brett, or that American League fans never got to see Mays or Seaver or Schmidt.  To want to throw this history away is equivalent to wiping one's nose on the Mona Lisa.

And the idea of playoffs is entirely ahistorical, as absolutely no one at the time ever conceived of the need for this.  It was obvious then that the winner of the championship competition in the league was the league champion.  This is an idea that still holds true in world football (with a few notable exceptions).  We could probably imagine breaking each league up into two four-team divisions; but this would be a solution in search of a problem.

 

Exactly right.  Another problem with the "not baseball" position is that it is based in the empty trope that the DH removes strategy.  Of course, the truth is that the DH adds strategy, because it allows managers to pinch-hit for other players (as the Yankees often did for Bucky Dent) and also to pinch run, without the need to keep a guy on the bench to pinch-hit the next time the pitcher's spot comes up.

 

I would say that watching pitchers hit is fun whether or not the pitcher is a good hitter.  In most cases, the pitcher on the mound is expected to make short work of the pitcher at the plate.  This creates a weird kind of pressure; we have all seen instances in which the pitcher on the mound walks the pitcher at the plate, and then goes completely to pieces.  And, if the pitcher at the plate is a good hitter (like Dwight Gooden, who said that he'd rather hit a home run than throw a no-hitter), then it is fun for other reasons. 

The point is that having it both ways on the question of the DH is ideal, from the standpoints both of history and of fan engagement. 

 

 

 

[Sport]

47 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

I used to be vehemently against the DH.  I used to be of the mindset that double switches were cool, pitchers bunting was fun, and the AL was boring.

 

Now I think the NL is boring.  The pitching changes and double switches add too much time to the game, the dead spot in the lineup makes anything that happens in front of it less exciting, and I don't need a guy that's being paid $30M to pitch getting hurt running bases once a week.

 

This was the thing that flipped me from being a guy who snobbed about the "NL's superior brand of correct baseball" to being pro DH for both leagues. I moved to Seattle in 2014 and started watching every Mariners game, got immersed in the AL really for the first time, and realized how much better it is to not have every other inning ruined by the prospect of the pitcher coming up. It absolutely sucks to have a rally going and then remember the pitcher's about to bat. 

 

Yeah, sometimes a pitcher gets a hit or goes long, but those rare moments aren't worth the overwhelming majority where they're like Luis Castillo who might as well walk to the plate without a bat. 

 

47 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Also - the AL has a distinct advantage when it comes to building teams.  Aging sluggers that can still hit but not field can still be on AL rosters, and then play in the WS against NL teams that have to keep extra pitchers and utility infielders around.  Even if they don't need that roster makeup for the games in the AL stadiums, what can they do about it then?  

 

 

AL teams can develop DH's in their farm systems too. David Ortiz was never going to play for a team in the national league because they'd need him to play defense. He's a hall of famer for the Red Sox, though. 

 

 

[OnWis97]

4 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

I used to be vehemently against the DH.  I used to be of the mindset that double switches were cool, pitchers bunting was fun, and the AL was boring.

 

Now I think the NL is boring.  The pitching changes and double switches add too much time to the game, the dead spot in the lineup makes anything that happens in front of it less exciting, and I don't need a guy that's being paid $30M to pitch getting hurt running bases once a week.

 

Also - the AL has a distinct advantage when it comes to building teams.  Aging sluggers that can still hit but not field can still be on AL rosters, and then play in the WS against NL teams that have to keep extra pitchers and utility infielders around.  Even if they don't need that roster makeup for the games in the AL stadiums, what can they do about it then?  

 

 

I don't run into too many people like me: lifelong AL fan who hates the DH.  Baseball's a long season and I like there to be opportunities for odd things to happen.  I still remember the Twins Johan Santana hitting a triple at Joe Robbie (or whatever it was called) in a game I was watching in about 2006. 

 

About the bold...is this true?  I've always understood that AL games take a little bit longer than NL games. And I've wondered (never seen it confirmed) whether AL teams have too much freedom to have mid-inning pitching changes because they don't have to make a switch when they pinch hit for the pitcher.  Who knows, maybe the two leagues would have equal-length games if we eliminated the Red Sox / Yankees contests. 

 

I do think the AL game is kinda boring...I prefer the NL game.

 

I am a fan of competitive integrity and it's hard to argue with the idea that NL and AL teams are building teams differently. They should probably have the same rules.  And while I'd have the rule be "current NL rule" I know that can't happen. I'm going to St. Louis this year to see a new ballpark.  I'd better savor it...it might be the last time I see traditional baseball in person.

[Sport]

 

12 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

 

There is no such thing as a "purist", unless you are talking about someone who favours seven balls for a walk and the batter's right to call for a high pitch or a low pitch.  Every fan has his or her preferences; I loved the DH, held my nose for the wild card, and could not abide interleague play.

 

Nonsense. Your preference is for baseball to exist as it did in the past, to hold onto old structures and traditions. You stopped watching because they changed the schedule. You couldn't be closer to the dictionary definition of a purist. 

 

12 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

The histories of these two leagues are so rich.  It really doesn't matter that National League fans never got to see Mantle or Carew or Brett, or that American League fans never got to see Mays or Seaver or Schmidt. 

 

That was a huge problem! The greatest players in the game never played in half the cities at the highest level of the sport and never played against each other. Imagine if Kobe Bryant had never played in New York or Miami or Chicago, never played against Lebron or Jordan. Anyone who's an actual fan of the game of baseball should be bothered by that.

 

12 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

To want to throw this history away is equivalent to wiping one's nose on the Mona Lisa.
 

 

No it isn't. That history is already behind us and written down. It doesn't vanish if they realign. It'd be equivalent to wiping one's nose on the Mona Lisa if they revised the history books, which they're not going to do. 

[JayMac]

No one ever liked my radical Plan C and that is to have 8 batters! But seriously, purists yell "you're taking away strategy!" but honestly there isn't much difference. The only thing is whether or not to pinch hit for your pitcher in the 6th inning. I wouldn't miss that to be honest. Also, I'm tired of seeing the equivalent of a college hitter bat 9th and look foolish against a professional pitcher.

 

P.S. - We are just about two weeks away from most teams' pitchers and catchers report to Spring Training! 

[Sport]

19 minutes ago, jmac11281 said:

No one ever liked my radical Plan C and that is to have 8 batters! But seriously, purists yell "you're taking away strategy!" but honestly there isn't much difference. The only thing is whether or not to pinch hit for your pitcher in the 6th inning. I wouldn't miss that to be honest. Also, I'm tired of seeing the equivalent of a college hitter bat 9th and look foolish against a professional pitcher.

 

P.S. - We are just about two weeks away from most teams' pitchers and catchers report to Spring Training! 

 

I'd even say that's generous. You have some outliers like Shohei Ohtani, Michael Lorenzon, Madison Bumgarner who probably could've made the majors at any position, but the majority of pitchers are closer to Trevor Bauer who'd rather strike out than run the bases and risk injury.

[monkeypower]

The DH is better than having the pitcher bat. For every Bartolo home run and Dae-Sung Koo plate appearances,

 

 

There are three or four or more Santiago Casilla plate appearances.

 

 

Bartolo and Koo are almost the exceptions that prove the rule. The reason they are so celebrated is because pitchers rarely do what they did.

 

Plus double switching isn't a hard concept.

[LMU]

As a NL fan who keeps score at games, I for one welcome our new DH overlords.

[JayMac]

1 hour ago, McCarthy said:

 

I'd even say that's generous. You have some outliers like Shohei Ohtani, Michael Lorenzon, Madison Bumgarner who probably could've made the majors at any position, but the majority of pitchers are closer to Trevor Bauer who'd rather strike out than run the bases and risk injury.

I was originally going to say high school but I decided to give them the benefit of the doubt. 

[pmoehrin]

13 hours ago, McCarthy said:

AL teams can develop DH's in their farm systems too.

 

I don't know how you could. Nobody in the minors should be at a loss for cage time, but even if there was a way to groom DH's, why would you? Its the easiest position to plug-in. Anyone needing a DH just needs to go out and sign (insert veteran slugger here) to a 1-2 year deal. No matter what the rest of my team looks like, I know my DH is going be at least an average Major League hitter.

 

NL farm systems might be more inclined to give pitchers cage time than AL teams, but that's the only difference between how the two leagues operate their farm systems.

[OnWis97]

8 minutes ago, pmoehrin said:

 

I don't know how you could. Nobody in the minors should be at a loss for cage time, but even if there was a way to groom DH's, why would you? Its the easiest position to plug-in. Anyone needing a DH just needs to go out and sign (insert veteran slugger here) to a 1-2 year deal. No matter what the rest of my team looks like, I know my DH is going be at least an average Major League hitter.

 

NL farm systems might be more inclined to give pitchers cage time than AL teams, but that's the only difference between how the two leagues operate their farm systems.

I'll preface this by saying I don't follow MLB development or farm systems very much.  But I could see how maybe an AL team might be more apt to take a flyer on a "fat guy."  It doesn't truly give them extra players or anything.  But maybe that's how the Twins ended up with Miguel Sano (not that I'm happy about it)...I think they outbid the Pirates (not certain).  Maybe Pittsburgh was scared off by the weight and the Twins said "well, there's always DH."

 

Again, I'm anti-DH...but I totally get the idea that the leagues (which, face it, are essentially conferences in most ways) should have the same rules.

[Sport]

20 minutes ago, pmoehrin said:

 

I don't know how you could. Nobody in the minors should be at a loss for cage time, but even if there was a way to groom DH's, why would you? Its the easiest position to plug-in. Anyone needing a DH just needs to go out and sign (insert veteran slugger here) to a 1-2 year deal. No matter what the rest of my team looks like, I know my DH is going be at least an average Major League hitter.

 

NL farm systems might be more inclined to give pitchers cage time than AL teams, but that's the only difference between how the two leagues operate their farm systems.

 

8 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

I'll preface this by saying I don't follow MLB development or farm systems very much.  But I could see how maybe an AL team might be more apt to take a flyer on a "fat guy."  It doesn't truly give them extra players or anything.  But maybe that's how the Twins ended up with Miguel Sano (not that I'm happy about it)...I think they outbid the Pirates (not certain).  Maybe Pittsburgh was scared off by the weight and the Twins said "well, there's always DH."

 

Again, I'm anti-DH...but I totally get the idea that the leagues (which, face it, are essentially conferences in most ways) should have the same rules.

 

This is what I mean. An AL team can afford to take on a project with a guy who only has the good bat. NL teams don't have that same option. One of the many reasons I think the rules need to be standardized. 

[(probably)notabandwagonfan]

2 hours ago, monkeypower said:

The DH is better than having the pitcher bat. For every Bartolo home run and Dae-Sung Koo plate appearances,

 

 

There are three or four or more Santiago Casilla plate appearances.

 

 

Bartolo and Koo are almost the exceptions that prove the rule. The reason they are so celebrated is because pitchers rarely do what they did.

 

Plus double switching isn't a hard concept.

Someone was watching Jon Bois

[pmoehrin]

13 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

I'll preface this by saying I don't follow MLB development or farm systems very much.  But I could see how maybe an AL team might be more apt to take a flyer on a "fat guy."  It doesn't truly give them extra players or anything.  But maybe that's how the Twins ended up with Miguel Sano (not that I'm happy about it)...I think they outbid the Pirates (not certain).  Maybe Pittsburgh was scared off by the weight and the Twins said "well, there's always DH."

 

The Twins did not sign Miguel Sanó in 2009 at the age of 17 under the premise that he's going to be their full-time DH by 2015. Nobody has that kind of foresight. You sign/draft whoever you think is good at the time, and you figure about how they'll fit into the parent club later. Worrying about a prospect's potential role on the big-league club is putting the carriage before the horse.

 

Sanó may have also come up as a DH, but he hasn't stayed one. He's only been a DH in 11 games over the past two seasons, and with the Twins extending Nelson Cruz, I doubt his career total will go up much this year.

[OnWis97]

9 minutes ago, pmoehrin said:

 

The Twins did not sign Miguel Sanó in 2009 at the age of 17 under the premise that he's going to be their full-time DH by 2015. Nobody has that kind of foresight. You sign/draft whoever you think is good at the time, and you figure about how they'll fit into the parent club later. Worrying about a prospect's potential role on the big-league club is putting the carriage before the horse.

 

Sanó may have also come up as a DH, but he hasn't stayed one. He's only been a DH in 11 games over the past two seasons, and with the Twins extending Nelson Cruz, I doubt his career total will go up much this year.

Sano was actually never a DH when healthy. He was the first "fat-when-signed" guy I thought of, and not a particularly great example.  Certainly, I am aware that he's been used defensively most of his career (and he's actually not too bad at 3B...now moving to 1B).  But he's always been chunky.  I'm not saying that his weight is why he ended up in the AL.  I'm saying that it's a plausible scenario to happen to some players who could be suspected of being defensively deficient for one reason or another.  

 

By the way, while I think the two leagues should  have identical rules, I hope they continue as they are for as long as possible.  I love NL ball.