Skip to content

I’m no fan of the DH, but pitchers batting has got to go

Jan 2, 2013, 11:07 AM EDT

Justin Verlander

Anna Hiatt argues for the DH to expand to the NL.  We all know the parameters of this argument by now and have engaged in it many times, so allow me to offer up my opinion on the matter in a way that attempts to eschew the religious war vibe of this time-worn debate.

I am an NL partisan. I have been since I started following the Braves in the mid-1980s. I’m not a fanatic about it, and it matters far less now than it did back before interleague play, realignment and new ballpark construction blurred the distinctions between the leagues, but I still remain an NL guy. And part of that is, yes, I like pitchers batting.

I like pitchers hitting for the same reasons I like medium-rare steaks, pale-skinned brunettes, Batman, bourbon and a lot of regrettable 1980s synth pop: personal taste. These things just strike me the right way and make me feel just so. It’s not an objective thing. Many people are vegetarians, many gentlemen prefer blondes, like Superman, hate hard liquor and would rather die than be subjected to Human League’s “Don’t you want me.” They have their tastes and I have mine, and there is nothing more obnoxious than someone telling you that your subjective tastes are somehow, objectively, wrong, so I live and let live when this kind of stuff comes up and I hope they feel the same way.

With that in mind, it’s worth noting that, though I prefer pitchers batting, I don’t believe the National League’s rules in this regard are objectively better. Indeed, when I take my personal preferences out of the equation and look at the matter rationally, I cannot escape the logic of the DH in today’s game and the futility of pitchers batting.

The game is not played by all-around ballplayers anymore. Pitchers are just dreadful at hitting and, increasingly, are unable to even bunt particularly well. The strategy and gamesmanship my NL friends like to talk up is rather contrived when one thinks about it. Really, these machinations are more about the avoidance of pitchers batting than taking advantage of it. The whole dance in which managers spend so much energy to optimize minor matchups, often costing them their best pitchers and best hitters runs counter to the idea of my best nine playing your best nine and let’s see who wins.

And it’s not like this will get better. If anything, it will only get worse. In the absence of any expectation for pitchers to hit before reaching the NL combined with the absence of any financial pressures that might make adding a specialist to the roster problematic, there is nothing that will incentivize teams to make their pitchers better hitters. It makes no real sense to have pitchers batting now.  We certainly wouldn’t set it up that way if we were starting from scratch today.

I think baseball will, eventually, expand the DH to the National League. It probably won’t be because one side of the great DH debate concedes defeat and the change is made for the greater good of the sport itself. Actually, I figure it will come as a result of some collective bargaining thing, in which the players give up something to the owners in exchange for 15 more high-paying roster spots. But it will happen. Probably within the next decade on the outside.

And when it happens I will be a little sad. But ultimately I must conclude that pitchers hitting is a lot like player-managers, automats, ornate bank lobbies, milkmen, drive-ins and any other number of 19th/20th century things which tickled my fancy. They were cool. I kinda miss them. But they are an artifact of history and today there is no logical reason to have them, even if it seemed natural and logical to have them once upon a time.

170 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. Brian Donohue - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:10 PM

    But it must be done the right way, CC: make it into a massive media event. The NL can set a deadline for a decision and you in the media can give it a name: THE DH CLIFF. Oh wait, then Wolf Blitzer becomes a sports reporter, and baseball already has to deal with George Will. Never mind.

  2. Jackson - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:13 PM

    Rule 1.01 of Baseball states:

    “Baseball is a game between two teams of nine players each”

    When you factor in the DH, it becomes a ten man game and according to this rule, the AL does not play real baseball.

    But what do I know? These are just the rules.

    • historiophiliac - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

      Please, please, go tell Joe West he’s been officiating wrong on this all these years.

    • 18thstreet - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:13 PM

      And somehow, the earth continues spinning on its axis.

    • DJ MC - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:54 PM

      If you want to be that strict about things, it could also be argued that a pitcher doesn’t count as a “player”. The roles and experiences of pitchers are very different from those of other players, even to the point of them not being considered by many for certain types of award voting. Thus the NL is the league playing only eight-on-eight.

      That isn’t my actual belief, but I’m also less worried about “two teams of nine players each” when active rosters contain 25.

    • byjiminy - Jan 2, 2013 at 5:14 PM

      “Baseball is a game between two teams of nine players each”

      So I take it you’re against relief pitchers then?

    • unclemosesgreen - Jan 2, 2013 at 6:07 PM

      Rule 6.10 of Baseball states

      “Any League may elect to use Rule 6.10(b), which shall be called the Designated Hitter Rule.”

      But what do I know? I know you’re a fool and a troll, that’s what I know.

      • raysfan1 - Jan 2, 2013 at 11:42 PM

        Good first part, but had to thumbs down for the cheap shot at the end.

  3. sjhaack - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:29 PM

    Can we get this before Ryan Howard’s contract expires?

    Thanks in advance, baseball.

  4. madhatternalice - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:31 PM

    Anything that causes less wear and tear on pitchers is a good thing, in my book. There are so many teams that have trouble finding five healthy starting pitchers than anything we can do to limit injuries to pitchers, we should take. Pitcher is such a unique an specialized position in baseball that we really should be doing more to protect them from injury.

    Or contract, which would also solve the problem. However, contraction is less likely than another broken Kardashian engagement.

    • garlicfriesandbaseball - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:40 PM

      Well okay. Agreed. Pitchers have evolved over the last few years. They’re bigger, stronger, faster and throw harder. And they can evolve into decent batters also. You don’t change the game to fit the player, which is exactly what they did back in the 70’s. You change the player to fit the game. Eliminate the DH.

      And as far as doing more to protect the pitcher because he’s so “unique”, the most vulnerable position on the team is the catcher. How about allowing a “Designated Catcher” when a runner’s staring him down from 3rd base. That way the poor specialized catcher position can step aside while the DC gets blasted and then come back to the plate for the next hitter. Makes about as much sense as the DH.

      • madhatternalice - Mar 13, 2013 at 1:31 PM

        Except there are also more teams then there were. Batters have also evolved. I dunno…I don’t love the DH, but it’s a better alternative than having a pitcher in the box.

    • simonfoster231171 - Jan 2, 2013 at 6:51 PM

      I would have thought that having to pitch against the DH would have caused more wear and tear as they remove the one “easy out” in the line-up.

      • madhatternalice - Mar 13, 2013 at 1:32 PM

        Except that’s what a pitcher does, right? Pitch. I don’t want my pitchers taking time away from what they’re actually getting paid to do to take batting practice.

  5. sophiethegreatdane - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:32 PM

    Bravo Craig for your thoughts here. You’re the first person I’ve seen in this debate to state the obvious without the crazy rationalizations needed to support watching pitchers bat. I’m an AL fan, since the mid 70s when I was old enough to understand what baseball was. I’ve only known the AL with a designated hitter.

    What I realized after reading your post is that I’m not necessarily pro DH so much as I just can’t stand the futility of watching a pitcher hit. Bob Costas floated the idea that perhaps just let only 8 players bat, and cal it a day. I so see why it has not gained much traction? Is it because of the “symmetry” argument?

  6. kiwicricket - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:33 PM

    Having just watched the Womens Cricket World Cup, where non-professional 18yr old girls often displayed superior catching and throwing skills than several MLB OF’s….I can assure you that all it takes is practice for highly paid professional athletes to enhance their skill set.

    It would take some sort of physical exercise and a few hrs per week coaching, but why not try and maximize your players potential/value?

    • stex52 - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:42 PM

      Kiwi,

      I think the problem here might be at least partially free agency. A lot of pitchers can decide that if someone is going to mess with them, they will go talk to some AL teams, or at least another NL team that is afraid they will talk to AL teams.

      While we are at it, how come professional basketball players ever miss a free throw? College girls routinely throw up high 80s or more.

      Like you say, if they work on it they can do it. I think DH makes a lot of players lazy about their skills.

      • davidpom50 - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:08 PM

        I think the incentive for pitchers is to come to the NL, not vice-versa. Then, they get to face lineups of 8 MLB caliber hitters, not 9. Plus, you’ll occasionally hear about pitchers who want to play in the NL because they LIKE to hit – even if they’re not particularly good at it.

        Seems like there should be an opportunity for a guy like Micah Owings, who’s not a great pitcher, not a great hitter, but has the ability to be at or close to league average at both. I’m surprised teams aren’t willing to sign a guy to be a bullpen arm AND bench bat.

  7. lobozooma - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:42 PM

    I think the real reason the DH gets pushed through is that NL teams will have issues with contract terms of over 5 years. There is just too much risk for the NL teams without a DH spot to put an aging player. In the end, to compete on the name players, the NL needs the DH.

  8. leftywildcat - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM

    As pitchers go from one team to another more often nowadays with free agency, etc., many spend time in both leagues, not batting in the AL and then being unconditioned for batting when going to the NL; so if pitchers hit worse now than pitchers used to, it may have something to do with them not batting for a long while.

    And very little has been said about the loss of strategy. In a 2011 post season game between the Phillies and Cardinals, with 2 outs in the 6th the Cards had the option of pitching to the #8 hitter with a base open, or walking him to force a pinch hitter to the plate, taking Hamels out of the game. Having a DH doesn’t allow for that kind of strategy.

    I would eliminate the DH from both leagues for the 1st 9 innings — allowing it only at the start of a 10th, in order to keep some of these games from going 15 or 16 innings. And how about a rule change that if a pitcher at bat is hit by a pitch he gets 2 bases?

  9. toreup - Jan 2, 2013 at 12:50 PM

    in 2012, 14 AL teams scored 10, 088 runs for an average of 720.6, or 4.4 runs a game.

    in 2012, 16 NL teams scored 10, 278 runs, for an average of 642.4, or 4.0 a game.

    so if you were a fan of an arena league team, you would see about two extra runs a week. Yippee.

    And thats with teams like the yankees tipping the scales. So really it comes down to if you like baseball or the Yankees. I’ll take baseball.

    The NL will never have the DH.

  10. conjecture101 - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:05 PM

    I’d like to apologize for all of my previous comments. They were ignorant, misinformed and in many cases offensive. I made a fool of myself, and I ask for your forgiveness.

    • paperlions - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

      You should have just claimed they were taken out of context, that always works.

      • conjecture101 - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

        haha^ good point.

      • historiophiliac - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:46 PM

        sniff

      • paperlions - Jan 2, 2013 at 2:23 PM

        Cheer up girl….it’ll be okay.

      • historiophiliac - Jan 2, 2013 at 2:45 PM

        I’m getting better. Thinking about a rebound w/ Kemp. lol

  11. sdelmonte - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:26 PM

    There is no reason pitchers can’t be taught to bat. Period.

    They used to be taught to bat. Ask Don Drysdale. Ask Babe Ruth.

    • paperlions - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

      Yep, and most of them could hit just fine through HS…but after that, they are not encouraged to hit and likely are discouraged from spending any time on it. In MiLB, pitcher only hit in AA and AAA if both teams are NL affiliates….otherwise, DH.

      • sdelmonte - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:43 PM

        Meaning that we’d have to get rid of the DH at all levels. I am fine with that. But since I can’t see that happening…

        Yeah, we are doomed to the DH everywhere. Ow.

      • paperlions - Jan 2, 2013 at 2:21 PM

        Pretty much….it’s like the long defeat of the elves in middle earth, you keep fighting, even though you know you’ve already lost.

      • historiophiliac - Jan 2, 2013 at 2:46 PM

        Ok, hitting fine for HS is one thing. Hitting well enough to put a WS on the line for it is totally another…and boring.

      • stex52 - Jan 2, 2013 at 3:28 PM

        Baseball and Tolkien. Now I remember why I am on this site.

    • lessick - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:33 PM

      There is no incentive for a pitcher or his team to have pitchers learn to hit. A pitcher’s value is almost completely his pitching skills.

      Or to put it another way, if King Felix happened to be the worst hitter in the history of hitters, would he still have value to an NL team? Of course he would, and that team would trot him out to start once every five games.

    • albertmn - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:44 PM

      Actually, there is a reason. Only a select few people in the US are good enough to be major league hitters. Not even all of the hitters on MLB rosters are good hitters. Many teams carry 12 pitchers, to that would leave only 390 “hitters” on major league rosters. In a country of over 300 million people, less than 500 are capable major league hitters. If it was that easy for people to be “taught to bat” at a major league level, don’t you think more people would do it? Someone that could just teach anyone to be a major league hitter would be making more money than the players.

      I love how people like to pull out the very small handful of pitchers that can hit to try to prove their point. For every Babe Ruth you can name, I can name 50 pitchers that hit like Bert Blyleven (or more accurately didn’t hit like Blyleven).

  12. sparty0n - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:40 PM

    IF they do this, they should require all DH players to get equal amount in innings playing a position on the field – but it will never happen

    • albertmn - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:51 PM

      Is this tee ball, where everyone gets to play the same number of innings? Maybe we should stop keeping score, too. Maybe relief pitchers should all have to pitch as many innings as starters, too.

  13. bayarea510 - Jan 2, 2013 at 1:46 PM

    The SF Giants pitchers got more RBI’s in the Playoff’s then AROD….just say’n. Also if the National League adopted the DH we would never get to see another epic Santiago Casilla at bat and that would be a sad, sad day.

    • Kevin S. - Jan 2, 2013 at 2:41 PM

      Congratulations, they did better in a context-driven statistic with more plate appearances with a guy playing through a torn hip. Yeah, THAT means something.

  14. hisgirlgotburrelled - Jan 2, 2013 at 2:07 PM

    I am not a fan of the DH either, but I think the NL should just include a DH. There is an advantage for AL teams playing at home in interleague games. NL teams carry more relievers and less guys that can hit but can’t field.

    I don’t like adding the DH but pitchers hitting is not fun to watch and the AL isn’t getting rid of the DH.

  15. gclsus - Jan 2, 2013 at 2:11 PM

    As a BB fan since the early 60’s, having watched the changes for half a century, I try to envision a traditionalist from the early 1900’s viewing BB in the 60’s and 70’s. Read some of the narrative histories about BB to get a feel for that. Life is about specialization now and our sports reflect that. BB imitates life and has changed many times and will/should change in ways that preserve the game while reflecting the exploration of new ideas as well.

    I don’t like the DH to the degree that it creates a new position that is a batter only – a 10th position if you will. Neither do I like to watch a pitcher flail helplessly. I do like strategy and as a fan being able to follow along or question the use of in-game strategy, I believe BB has fallen behind Football in that regard because folks just don’t follow individual BB games as they did 50 years ago when we had the game of the week or radio. The in-game nuances are not observable by casual fans who want more entertainment.

    How about a simple adaptation of using a designated pinch hitter for the pitcher’s batting slot only. Do not allow the DPH to come to bat again, but neither does the pitcher have to come out of the game. The hitter is one and done, but the pitcher could also be allowed to bat in situations where the manager doesn’t want to lose a bench player for the rest of the game. The extra strategy would be what kind of hitter do you bring in, an OBP guy to start an inning off or a wall banger to drive the runners in. When do you save your bench? 2-outs and nobody on?

    In this way, we end the career DH and force GM’s and managers to decide if they want to sacrifice defense on a daily basis, but preserve increased strategic implementation of REAL hitters who are in-game specialists, but not on a whole season or career basis. Your aging slugger could play 75 games in the field and 80 as a DPH and still approach 400 plate appearances – not quite an everyday player, but still gets in everyday. The DPH could also be used for double switches to preserve that strategy, but if not, he is out of the game from that point forward

    By the way, I also would add at least one and possibly two new roster slots per team. Just enough to create more strategic players.

    Fire away!

  16. gostlcards5 - Jan 2, 2013 at 2:12 PM

    I cannot adequately express the depths to which I disagree with you, Craig. My suggestion would be to do it the other way around (no DH in the AL). As far as the argument about futility of pitchers’ hitting and bunting, practice more! These guys get paid boatloads of cash to play the game, so learn the fundamentals and play it.

    (For the record, yes, I do realize that most of my preference is also based on personal taste….and your article was well-written, even though I disagree with the main points)

  17. anxovies - Jan 2, 2013 at 2:17 PM

    Craig, As a Yankee fan for many years and somewhat of a baseball purist I used to regret the fact that my team was in a league that used the DH. Like you, I felt that something just wasn’t right when the pitcher did not bat. However, after I retired I started to watch a lot of Yankee and Cardinal (my second-favorite team) games on mlb.tv. After a while I realized that what you mentioned here about the way the pitcher’s spot in the order distorts the flow of the NL game is true, especially in close games. Instead of looking forward to seeing if a good fielding, weak hitting number 9 hitter can drive in a go-ahead run for your team, you get this sinking feeling that you are going to see a pinch hitter and lose your pitcher who has kept the score close. The fact that pitchers have lost the ability to bunt effectively has increased the likelihood of this happening. The AL game has more flow. On my Yankees Brett Gardner (when he is playing) is like a second lead-off man who can potentially hit and then steal a base and turn the batting order over (I just wish he could bunt). All and all I began to realize that I enjoyed the AL games more. Ineptitude is never fun to watch.

  18. tgthree - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:07 PM

    I’m an NL guy who likes to see pitchers hit, but that’s not why I disagree with this post. I disagree because I don’t think there is a “rational” right answer to this question. The “DH or no DH” question doesn’t have a rational right answer, in my opinion. It’s blonde vs. brunette, pie vs. cake (did I get the inside joke right?). It’s just a matter of personal preference. I’m a no-DH guy rather than a DH guy, I respect all you DH fans out there for your preference, but I just don’t buy that one is objectively better. To wit:

    “The game is not played by all-around ballplayers anymore. Pitchers are just dreadful at hitting and, increasingly, are unable to even bunt particularly well.”

    To me, so what? The players should learn to adapt their skills to the rules, rather than adapting the rules to the skills that the players happen to have. It would be like doing away with triples because players are sick of sprinting that far. Too bad. Power to you if you’re a pitcher and you take the time to learn to hit or bunt.

    “The strategy and gamesmanship my NL friends like to talk up is rather contrived when one thinks about it. Really, these machinations are more about the avoidance of pitchers batting than taking advantage of it.”

    What do you mean when you say “contrived”? Isn’t ALL of baseball strategy “contrived”? It’s typical baseball strategy to have a fast player play center field. There is no reason for this other than that there’s a rule which says that if you catch a ball before it hits the ground, the hitter is out. If you could pick it up on one bounce and still get the out, there wouldn’t be a need for center fielders to be so fast. Baseball is governed by a set of arbitrary rules, and ALL the strategy which proceeds from those rules is equally arbitrary. Further, there are many elements of strategy which are meant to avoid things as opposed to take advantage of them. Pitchers move from the windup to the stretch to avoid opposing stolen bases. Should we take away stealing so that pitchers can always pitch from the windup? Objectively, if we always want to see only the best possible pitching, wouldn’t we want to allow pitchers to avoid having to throw from the stretch?

    “The whole dance in which managers spend so much energy to optimize minor matchups, often costing them their best pitchers and best hitters runs counter to the idea of my best nine playing your best nine and let’s see who wins.”

    If you want to see “my best nine playing your best nine,” we can pull out MLB 2K12. One of my favorite things about baseball (again, personal preference) is that it’s RARELY my best nine against your best nine. Guys get hurt, guys need days off, my best pitcher(s) can’t pitch everyday. To me, it’s a game of my best 25-30 against your best 25-30, over the course of 162 games. The energy required to optimize every minor matchup makes depth important, and it makes strategy important. I love watching Albert Pujols hit against Roy Halladay, but damn it if I don’t also love watching Manny Burriss hit against Manny Acosta. You can say it’s objectively better to watch Pujols v. Halladay, but if that’s all we care about seeing, why not just let Pujols stand at the plate for nine innings with Doc on the mound, and let Billy Hamilton do all the baserunning?

    I think the crux of my argument is that it’s ultimately NOT objectively better to optimize the rules so that the quality of competition is always as high as it possibly can be at every moment of every game. I relish the good sacrifice bunts (few and far between though they may be) and the random pinch-hit heroes who may never get a hit again in their lives. I wouldn’t want to get rid of those, just as your personal preference might dictate that the DH is better. But at the end of the day, neither of us is objectively correct.

  19. garlicfriesandbaseball - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:31 PM

    “No Logical Reason to have them?” How about Official Rules of Major League Baseball, Rule 1.01. “Baseball is a game between two teams of nine players each ……….” Not nine players plus one and not ten players. Good grief.

    The American League comes along and doesn’t have any pitchers who can hit, so they add a player to their roster who can hit in place of the pitcher who can’t hit. And all of this with MLB’s blessing. I hope the National League never stoops to that level. The National League has won the last three World Series with pitchers who take their place at the plate and yes, some of them can even hit. Go figure.

    • bh192012 - Jan 2, 2013 at 5:11 PM

      Which is why there are no relief pitchers in the NL, and teams only have 9 man rosters.

      /sarcasm

    • garlicfriesandbaseball - Jan 2, 2013 at 7:48 PM

      Sarcasm? Relief pitchers and DH? Get a grip man ~

  20. bh0673 - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:43 PM

    The DH rule in the National League was close to being adapted. So for all the purists out there read the real story from MLB.COM

    http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080424&content_id=2579325&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

    It is not as well-known that the NL came close to accepting the measure at the same time. With 12 clubs in each league at the time, seven votes were required for passage. The NL vote was 6-4 with two abstentions, the Phillies and Pirates.

    Years later, Phillies executive Bill Giles said that his inability to reach then-owner Ruly Carpenter, a proponent of the DH, on the telephone resulted in Philadelphia’s abstention. Pittsburgh’s representatives were instructed by Pirates owner John Galbraith to vote with the Phillies. Carpenter was on a fishing trip.

    • byjiminy - Jan 2, 2013 at 5:25 PM

      thanks, didn’t know all this!

  21. garlicfriesandbaseball - Jan 2, 2013 at 4:53 PM

    Reblogged this on Garlicfriesandbaseball's Blog and commented:
    GFBB Note: I’ve posted several blogs about the designated hitter. I don’t think they belong in baseball. Pitchers should learn to bunt well and even accidentally hit the ball on occasion. But here’s another look at the subject, which is going to be around for a long, long time.

  22. bh192012 - Jan 2, 2013 at 5:07 PM

    For my 2 cents, I like having both. Variety is the spice of life. I like forcing teams to adapt when they play vs other leagues. I like that if I’m a fan of DH’s I can be an AL fan. I like that if I’m a fan of NL rules I can be an NL fan.

  23. cur68 - Jan 2, 2013 at 5:26 PM

    There’s a lot of informed opinion, equivalencies (some of them quite false), and opinion here. Ultimately I hope the DH rule doesn’t change nor is it spread to the NL. The NL shall have pitchers hit and AL shall have a DH. Good I say. It contributes to baseball’s eccentricities. There are many fine eccentricities in baseball which are unlike those found in any other sport. DH vs Pitchers hitting is but one.
    -They stop for a sing-a-long mid 7th inning.
    -They try to hit a round ball with a round bat, thus making the skill really, really hard.
    -A 2/3 fail ratio at hitting is considered Very Good.
    -Comestibles are de rigueur during play.
    -The Head Coach is called a Manager and dresses like a player along with all his coaching staff, just as though they intend to play, too.
    -If the ball goes into the crowd, a member of crowd gets to keep it.
    There are of course many more eccentricities to baseball, all of them lovely (except the one where they are compelled to give Joe West a job. Seriously, they must be compelled by some outside force. No other explanation for Joe West, MLB Umpire). These eccentricities serve a purpose. Often that purpose is to confuse random, sports starved, hockey fans in bars but it also means that you can be watching baseball for years and still be learning some of the rules. I think this is great. Why? Because baseball is a metaphor for life, that’s why.

    So keep the NL DH-free. And keep the AL Pitcher-Hitting-Free. And, once a week this season, we’ll get to see a team have a go at it the other way ’round this season, and that too will be entertaining. And confusing to hockey fans.

    57 days to 1st day of Spring Training.

    • raysfan1 - Jan 2, 2013 at 11:55 PM

      Ditto.

  24. oncewasable - Jan 2, 2013 at 6:00 PM

    I thought baseball was a game with 9 players on the field, not 10.

    • raysfan1 - Jan 2, 2013 at 11:57 PM

      Yep, 9 on the field, 9 in the batting lineup, in the AL not necessarily the same 9.

  25. opshuns - Jan 2, 2013 at 6:58 PM

    NO for DH…

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

A's, Tigers big winners at trade deadline
Top 10 MLB Player Searches