GoBucs21, on 28 March 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:
How is it any different than other specialists? Relievers who almost never hit anymore. Relievers who almost exclusively pitch to hitters on their side of the plate. Relievers who never pitch more than one inning (not counting the post season). Relievers who only pitch the next to last inning. Relievers who pitch only the last inning. The DH is only different because it's codified in the rule book. Specialized relievers are no different than the DH.
I think relievers are kinda stupid too - but they've been present for so long that I doubt I could begin to argue my case without sounding crazy.
Let me just say it like this: I bet most people would agree that the most interesting inning of a pitcher's complete game is the last one. I think that it's interesting because of the narrative that lead to it. "The pitcher performed well enough to win the game, but did he save enough stamina to complete the job?" "Can he get through the heart of the order one more time?"
The decades-long trend toward more bullpen usage has given rise to fragmented and uninteresting storylines like "will this LOOGY win his one single e-z mode match-up?" - and not only that but it takes all the drama out of the start. Like - who really gives a shit about Quality Starts?
My opposition to the DH comes from a similar place. If I were asked to name the best hitters from the last 20 years you can probably guess which name I'd forget. I don't even think about guys like that. They feel more like punters to me. They're really good at doing that one particular thing 4-6 times a game. That's great but I don't think it's interesting at all.