Yesterday former GM and current ESPN.com contributor Jim Bowden wrote the article “Time for the NL to adopt the DH”. In the piece he discusses that he is pro National League rules but with the new baseball schedule for 2013 the most import decision is to make the league rules uniform.
“Having two sets of rules unfairly puts teams at a real disadvantage depending on whether their game is at home or on the road. To alleviate this, baseball must synchronize both leagues with one rule”
In his view the easiest path forward is to add the DH to all National League teams as opposed to taking the position away. There are 3 main points why taking away the DH is too difficult; current GM’s will not agree via a majority vote, the players association will not agree to remove a high paying position and pitchers having to hit increases their injury chances.
________________________________________________________________________
Personally I agree with his premise. Removing the DH is significantly more difficult than adding it to the NL and the rules need to be synchronized with the new schedule in 2013 which has an inter-league match-up every day. I feel I am more of a baseball purist and since I am a fan of a National League team, I tend to gravitate to the National League style of play. I love double switches, I love when there are runners on with two outs and the pitcher is up (more-so when it’s the other team), but the reality is the DH is not going away. There is always the argument of increasing the roster size to 26 while removing the DH so jobs are gained and not lost. Why the MLBPA will never agree to this is a bench player’s salary is closer to league minimum while a good DH can fetch over 8 million dollars.
So what the hell does this have to do with the Mets? I’ll tell you why… Who is going to be the Mets DH next year if the rule change occurs? When I think of a DH, I think of those typical power hitters that wouldn’t make it through the first round of “Dancing with the Stars”. Guys like Cecil Fielder, Adam Dunn, David Ortiz, Edgar Martinez and Harold Baines. There are 2 players that most Mets fans agree need to get off the field as soon as possible, Lucas Duda and Daniel Murphy. Duda definitely fits the mold of a masher and is closer to a player like the DH’s listed above, but if I had to choose an option from within the organization, my choice would be Murphy. I understand Duda’s miss-play from last night is still fresh in everyone’s heads, but a move into left field is probably more sustainable than keeping Murphy on the field at any position. Murphy will never be a good fielder. He wasn’t in college, he wasn’t in the minors and he is not in the big leagues. What he is, is a very valuable contact hitter. He is also very methodical in his approach. He is constantly trying to make adjustments and improve. Being a quality DH is more than just being able to hit the ball, it is about being able to sit on the bench and stay mentally focused for your next at bat. To me Murphy would thrive in that position. Take away the stress that he has trying to work on defense and let him focus on the one task that he is good at, and maybe just maybe he will hit that home run.
The other aspect to take into consideration is who fill in the position void for 2013 and that will take a palm reader at this stage of the game. Den Dekker is doing his best to make the club next year while Jason Bay is doing his best to stay at home. So to me Duda in LF, Den Dekker in CF and Nieuwenhuis in RF could be the way forward with Torres on the bench. Will Reese Havens finally rise up and let Murphy off the hook? The free agent market is pretty grim as well. Share your thoughts on what you would like to see.
To read Jim Bowden’s article (you need ESPN Insider access) go to: http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/the-gms-office/
Scary Pat Burrell image from Tauntr.com
34 comments
NJstuckinTX
6/26/2012-11:26am at 11:26 am (UTC -4)
The role of the DH has been shifting in these last few years, where it’s more of a rotating “day off” slot for position players. I think the way of the Ortiz types are fizzling away. Granted, it’s probably the route Fielder will end up in his older years.
And I prefer having the DH/Non DH combo, but that is just me.
It’s been so long since they have had a power hitting bat off the bench (assuming you don’t count Hairston), that I can’t see them getting a traditional DH type (nor do they have one in the system), so they’ll need to rotate someone who can split time on the field. I guess this means Murph, but he is, for sure, not a traditional DH type. Preferably, Duda should be that guy, with Hairston/den Dekker/Kirk/another rotating in the OF.
Stickguy
6/26/2012-11:32am at 11:32 am (UTC -4)
I don’t think Murphy will be around next year. Just my (more ample by the day) gut feeling.
Oh, and I don’t see any chance of Bay still being on the team. I won’t even consider it.
Stickguy
6/26/2012-11:31am at 11:31 am (UTC -4)
He stole this from me. I made that point in the dugout a few times recently. He must be a mole there.
so yes, the premise is valid. Of course, I would like to see the DH go away (I always hated it), but I am a realist and recognize that it likely will happen (adding for all games).
though after watching years of Met managers botch NL managing (PHs, etc.), maybe we should embrace the DH?
My roster thoughts:
I think Havens will be the 2B next year. I now think he will be up by August. 2012. I am done with Murphy.
2013 OF? I see Den Dekker in CF, Kirk/RH platoon guy in RF, and LF Duda/another RH bat. And likely those 2 RH bats aren’t on the team, though one could be Hairston.
But, with a DH, I think Lucas will be the primary guy. Murphy just does nto hit enough to get the job, though I agree he seems to have the mindset to hit without playing the field.
the team, however, is still going to need more power. And while Havens should help, they need more.
so IMO duda DH and a strong guy or platoon in LF (that has a plus glove) will be better than Duda in LF and Murphy DH.
the other option? Bring in a DH type (Like Thome)
SaltyGary
6/26/2012-11:37am at 11:37 am (UTC -4)
LOL did I? I haven’t really been in the dugout since I’ve been traveling for work. Should of wrote it yourself Mr. I have author rights and never use them…
Stickguy
6/26/2012-12:28pm at 12:28 pm (UTC -4)
no, I meant Bowden, not you!
Paul
6/26/2012-11:37am at 11:37 am (UTC -4)
I’m opposed to the DH, but I recognize that the American League teams and the players’ union are unlikely to give it up.
I don’t see a need to require uniform rules between the two leagues. We don’t know for sure how the schedule will look in 2013, but it seems like teams will probably play around 20 interleague games. The AL teams can deal with their pitchers hitting ten times a year – it wouldn’t be much more than they’ve played without a DH since interleague started.
Even if you were to bring the DH rule into the National League, I don’t see a need for a dedicated DH. Most of the American League teams are moving away from the aging and/or defensively-challenged slugger concept to use the spot to give players a partial day off to keep them fresh.
Finally, I don’t think we’ll ever see a regular outfield of Nieuwenhuis, Den Dekker and Duda – at least one of those players will have to be traded to bring some righty-lefty balance to the team.
SaltyGary
6/26/2012-12:07pm at 12:07 pm (UTC -4)
Based on the new alignment there will always have to be a inter-league series.
Besides unifying the rules for player consistently, don’t you think it’s a good idea to do it for the fans so there is less confusion? We are all hard core baseball fans, so we don’t require the clarity. Look at it from a new fan perspective and trying to understand why every other of the inter-league only series a AL pitcher will hit. It’s also going to be a pain in the ass for the players (not that I really care about them).
From a traditional statistical standpoint it would even the playing field especially for pitchers.
I am with you on not having to have just one guy slotted for DH and use a platoon situation.
Stickguy
6/26/2012-12:30pm at 12:30 pm (UTC -4)
screw the players!
and I agree, it can be used to rotate guys. But, if you have someone like say Duda that takes to it, you might still see a FT gig.
I know the Phils would have loved to have had it this year for Thome.
wanny
6/26/2012-11:39am at 11:39 am (UTC -4)
i don’t want the DH. But if the Mets must have one and I had to select from the current roster, I’d probably pick Murphy, as well. The reason being that he makes more of a negative impact defensively than Duda (last night notwithstanding) and that there is really no one really deserving right now to take over for Duda in RF.
Quintanilla, Turner and Valdespin can all play 2B and provide reasonably production on both sides of the ball.
In the OF, I see no need to get more at bats for Torres or Bay. And I am not sure Den Dekker will be ready to be given full reign over a starting spot next season (though he could be a good candidate for a platoon with Hairston while Kirk plays every day).
wanny
6/26/2012-11:59am at 11:59 am (UTC -4)
though given how the team is being run nowadays it wouldn’t shock me to see pascucci, rottino, satin and lutz at DH at various points.
wanny
6/26/2012-12:02pm at 12:02 pm (UTC -4)
i think havens may eventually become a player. but right now he is batting .204 in AA. I wouldn’t make any plans around him for next season or ever.
Stickguy
6/26/2012-12:34pm at 12:34 pm (UTC -4)
I look at him a little differently. To me, he was a hot prospect that a couple years ago was tearing up AA and most likely would have been called up, but who had an incredibly poorly timed injury that pretty much cost him his chance the last couple years.
and now, he is just starting to look like he is getting his game back together. So I just don’t see him as a typical dude hitting .204!
Of course, he needs to stay hot and raking for the next 4-6 weeks or what not, but if he does, his standing changes dramatically.
wanny
6/26/2012-4:51pm at 4:51 pm (UTC -4)
when did he tear up AA? in 18 2010 games? or in 50 something good but not great 2011 games?
srt
6/26/2012-12:07pm at 12:07 pm (UTC -4)
I’m opposed to the DH and don’t see why the NL has to adopt it. I never understood why it was allowed to have only one league adopt it to begin with, but that’s water under the bridge.
If they do go to the DH next year and had to pick one from this team as currently constructed, I would consider Duda first. As Stick pointed out, not sure Murph will be here next hear but if he is, he’ll have to be putting up better numbers than he currently is to be considered a DH, IMO.
In order to go with Duda, we’d need to make sure we have a replacement LF. Right now, have no idea what that OF will look like next year. I’m hoping Bay will be gone, not sure if Torres will be here either.
Here’s hoping this conversation is moot and the NL won’t be forced into a DH.
SaltyGary
6/26/2012-12:14pm at 12:14 pm (UTC -4)
FYI Torres still has one more year of ARB availability.
srt
6/26/2012-12:25pm at 12:25 pm (UTC -4)
Interesting. I didn’t know that.
I’m starting the think our OF next year might be on huge platoon.
Stickguy
6/26/2012-12:36pm at 12:36 pm (UTC -4)
I agree that at least 2 positions are likely to be platoons. Unless they surprise me and go out and get a big-name every day OF.
with the current crop of contenders, I could see something along the lines of Duda everyday, and Kirk/Dekker/Hairston/Bay mixing and matching CF and 1 corner.
and the RH bats in there could easily change.
Prismo
6/26/2012-3:23pm at 3:23 pm (UTC -4)
I agree 4d, Duda is by far the best option at DH.
His defense is hurting us in RF, but his bat and power are necessariy in the lineup. He’s the closest guy we have to a “prototypical” DH. And of course, depending on who we’re facing, he can play in the outfield if need-be.
Murphy would be a wreck at DH just like he is at 2B right now. When you have the chance to put any player in your lineup, regardless of his defense, regardless of whether or not you already have someone on your team better than him at his best position….you don’t pick the guy with the .659 OPS (even if it improves to let’s say .725, same case).
Mr North Jersey
6/26/2012-1:17pm at 1:17 pm (UTC -4)
Don’t NL Teams even in the minors use the DH or is it only to a certain level?
srt
6/26/2012-1:43pm at 1:43 pm (UTC -4)
OT:
Here’s a prime example of a ‘classy’ Yankee fan.
http://gif.mocksession.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/YANKEEDOUCHE3.gif
His Mama must be so proud.
Think if I was that kid’s father I’d jerk that ball right out of his hands.
SaltyGary
6/26/2012-2:07pm at 2:07 pm (UTC -4)
LOL Hopefully they were brothers, if not I would either of gotten the ball back or cause enough of a issue that we all get kicked out.
srt
6/26/2012-2:51pm at 2:51 pm (UTC -4)
Brothers…never thought of that.
Just the way he turned away from the kid to show what I assumed where his friends, didn’t look like that younger kid was a relative.
Prismo
6/26/2012-3:34pm at 3:34 pm (UTC -4)
You know what’s pitiful, I just realize how we’ve been totally groomed by Sandy and the FO to only look within the organization for answers at positions.
Think about it, everyone’s asking who would be the DH – our only answers? Murphy and Duda. But who would play 2B if Murphy is DH? Uhh Valdespin or Havens. But who will play 1st if Ike stinks this whole year and we need a new 1B next season? Duda perhaps.
How many teams in MLB have their fans that scared to even suggest a free agent acquisition as a starter? Even the Rays with their low budget signed several starting position players in the offseason. Why are we so afraid!
Stickguy
6/26/2012-3:44pm at 3:44 pm (UTC -4)
good point. I officially nominate you for membership in the core.
actually, I was very surprised to see so little activity last off season. I expected some more wheeling and dealing to try and better balance the team. And all I got was a lower level trade (that so far has been a debacle) and a couple relatively budget pen signings (one of which I was OK with, the other I did not like at the time).
but, that was it. They had an off season + 2011 to evaluate the system, so what the hell? try and convert some pieces into other ones that are needed more.
even now, they have too damned many prospects, since they are going to have a mess on the 40 man after the season with guys having to be protected. Need to convert them somehow (volume for 1 ML guy, or into younger guys that don’t need to be protected).
so sure, why not go out and find something you need and trade for it? Doesn’t even have to cost money!
I really hope they are just laying in the weeds, waiting to start a flurry of bold moves, but I fear that they really are on the do nothing plan, waiting for all the current prospects to develop, with no outside help.
SaltyGary
6/26/2012-4:00pm at 4:00 pm (UTC -4)
It’s a great point we are conditioned in a way. The only reason why I don’t like bringing that stuff up is so I don’t sound like a loon proposing a BS trade on WFAN.
Prismo the Core salutes you.
NJstuckinTX
6/26/2012-4:23pm at 4:23 pm (UTC -4)
After you condition, you rinse and repeat.
Pris, I hear what you are saying, but this team is not in the free wheeling signing FA mode. If you could say I’ll trade 2 of these and a couple of those for 1 upgrade, I’m all for that. I’ve been saying they need to get some of the upper 40 man guys cleared out (Familia included. Again, just me).
I mean, we aren’t talking crazy talk like going after Car-go here. but then again, that crazy talk netted Santana. Maybe it does take something that Crazy.
Stick
6/26/2012-4:28pm at 4:28 pm (UTC -4)
we seem to be on the same wavelength. being active does not mean only signing big name expensive FAs each year (we also get conditioned to that!).
trades are a great way to build the team and system, and again, trades are not always your best prospects for an old guy.
I loved when the twins and rays (that right?) did upton for garza (that too?). a classic my excess for your need swap.
so, there are those types of deals. Getting a young vet under control (Latos). CarGo might be expensive, but again, if it is for a LT building block, you strike when the iron is hot (or when something attractive falls into your hands).
I have no desire in any more Bay type signings, but fire up some trades I am all for/
Prismo
6/26/2012-4:36pm at 4:36 pm (UTC -4)
Or something like the Nats getting Gio Gonzales who is under team control for several years, and fairly young:
12:$3.25M, 13:$6.25M, 14:$8.5M, 15:$11M, 16:$12M, 17:$12M club option
The Yankees did it with Granderson, etc.
NJstuckinTX
6/26/2012-4:37pm at 4:37 pm (UTC -4)
And again, not saying he’s for trade or if this would do the deal, but if you flipped Harvey, Familia, Havens and Murph, maybe they say ok on that deal. I mean, I know I can’t say for certain what would be worth wild, but that would be something worth doing in my book. The only one to be untouchable is Wheeler.
With Santana, Dickey, Niese, Gee, Young, Mejia and some of the other youngins, that isn’t a bad rotation. And if needed, it’s cheaper to invest in a #5 starter if needed.
Prismo
6/26/2012-4:32pm at 4:32 pm (UTC -4)
I understand what you’re saying, but I disagree, sort of.
I think it’s unreasonable to expect one farm system to product major-league ready players at almost every position with a two-or-so year span. That’s why no teams have entirely home-grown starting rosters; it just isn’t realistic.
The Rays have a lower budget than the Mets, but they managed to sign several viable players one 1-year deals that cannot handicap the team long-term under any circumstance.
Luke Scott: 1 yr/6MM
Keppinger: 1yr/1.5MM
Carlos Pena: 1yr/7.25MM
These are the type of players the Mets should look into – yeah, none of them are fantastic. But instead of forcing guys who aren’t ready or simply can’t play the positions onto the team, these guys fill those holes. And hey, if they don’t work out, drop them, because their contracts end in the Fall anyway!
And yes, a trade would be just as good, maybe even better. As you all have mentioned we actually have close to TOO many prosects (not all-star quality prospects, but guys you don’t want to lose for nothing).
And hey, maybe the internal options ARE usually the answer. And that’s fine too…but we should consider all options. I’m just not happy with my realization that we’ve been “conditioned” not to do so.
NJstuckinTX
6/26/2012-4:41pm at 4:41 pm (UTC -4)
Well, the Hairston signing would be on par with what you are saying.
NJstuckinTX
6/26/2012-4:51pm at 4:51 pm (UTC -4)
And who knows, maybe now this team will be in a better position to do that going forward. To be able to have the luxury of spending 5 million on a fill in stater is a very nice thing to be able to do and these past 2 years this team hasn’t been able to do. We know the story, so no sense re-hashing it, but we’ve seen a roster slapped together out of flotsam and jetsom in order to get to a point where signing a Pena or a Scott could be something that is a possibility. I mean, if they could have grabbed Barajas as a backup, that would have been exponentially better than Little Nicky.
Paul Festa
6/26/2012-3:46pm at 3:46 pm (UTC -4)
Here’s my anti-DH post from last year. The players’ union would probably never allow the removal of the DH, but one can dream.
http://realdirtymets.com/2011/09/15/designate-the-dh-for-assignment/
SaltyGary
6/26/2012-3:57pm at 3:57 pm (UTC -4)
Thanks for posting this and AMEN BROTHA. I completely despise the DH.
Beside a strategy perspective what about it’s affects on a guy like AROD. He is trying to come close to mile-stones that guys like Aaron and Mays put up. Would those guys put up stronger numbers if they weren’t on the field that last few seasons of their career. There are so many reasons why I think it’s wrong but I really don’t see it going away.