Would i, as a manager of my team, rather hit a good hitter over a poor one with no other variables? Sure. So would the other manager. Who would you rather face as a pitcher, a or b? And why is that different for pitchers than cf? Or c?
Let's have offense and defense. Defense can be the rangiest guys on the planet regardless of their ability to hit, and the offense is 9 gorillas that do nothing but bash the ball.
Cool. The other manager has the exact same right as you would, too also hit B. So we agree there. I’m glad you’d rather hit Lucas Duda over Mike Foltyhoweveritsspelled. And if I’m a pitcher, and have to face B, that means the other team has to face my B, which is also fair. And the DH is also optional, so should it ever be passed in the NL, feel free to let you’re manager know you’d rather the pitcher bat, because like baseball and strategy and stuff.
Seems extreme. I was simply suggesting that its time for the NL to play the game the way virtually every other league, from high school to the minors (and half the majors) plays the game.
I'm sorry but .186 for an entire season isn't a fluke. He was awful. Hit well last year but that is last year.
There's some reasoning to that. But the dh was added to add offense to the game, and that's it. I don't think more offense is necessarily more better. I like managers bunting and deciding whether to pull pitchers in the top 6 in a 1-0 game and double switching, and I like pitchers standing in and taking their cuts like everyone else. Maybe the nl is the one that has it right, with the same 9guys playing offense and defense.
It was 89 games. Rougned Odor is a career .250 hitter who had really bad batted-ball luck in 2017 and hit like .204, then went right back to .253. Sanchez was much more unlucky over a much shorter stretch of games. He’ll be fine, and very likely back above .250 next year.
Batting average on the balls you actually hit is usually around .300, depending on what type of hitter you are. Sanchez’s was .197, which is unheard of. He’s slow and hits fly balls, but a lot of it was unluckily hitting it right at people.
Look, if you really think there is any intelligence to the above analysis, nobody is going to be able to help you. And mixing something up so badly can't be saved by calling me dumb. I'm not. You might be, and judging only from your confusion of thinking asking players to hit and field is more specialization than just asking them to field, you probably are. But I'm not sure why you are so grumpy about it. Are you a dh or something?
I guess, but the difference between hitting a line drive between short and third and hitting one right at the shortstop is mostly luck. Most hitters don't have inch-perfect control over where the ball goes. A .197 BABIP isn't sustainable at all
Yep, preferring to place a .100 hitter in the lineup as opposed to the .290 hitter is dumb. The whole world of baseball is dumb except for the NL-- the lone sect of sports that intentionally fields the worst offensive players. So much so, only twice since the inception of the DH in the AL has the NL had a higher on-base plus slugging percentage. Why? Cuz muh tradishion.
I don’t think anybody is arguing this. Do you have to be a [penis]? It’s been clearly stated that the strategy and decisions that having the pitcher in the lineup brings about is what we like about it. Increasing offense is the lowest common denominator of making a sport more interesting.
