Is the DH Dying?
A few years ago, the NFL saw a shift in how running backs were used. Rather than sticking with the single starter model, many teams shifted towards job shares, preferring to let two guys split the playing time in order to keep both more fresh and healthy than either could be by themselves. It became more efficient, in some cases, to have multiple players at the position than a single player getting all of the playing time.
We may be seeing something similar in baseball with the designated hitter. If there’s been one theme to the last two free agent periods we’ve seen, it has been a lack of interest in guys who cannot play the field, or who play it poorly. Teams have significantly pulled back from aging offense-only types, finding value in other types of players at the expense of some legitimately good hitters.
But it doesn’t appear to be just a renewed focus on the value of defense. Several teams are all but abandoning the idea of having a full-time designated hitter to begin with. The White Sox yesterday admitted that they wouldn’t be bringing Jim Thome back, because they just didn’t have the at-bats for him. Instead, their DH position will be filled with a rotation of guys that cannot hit as well as Thome. Yet, they see value in having the flexibility to use the spot for various players.
The Tigers, Mariners, and even the Yankees appear to pursuing similar strategies. Detroit has declined to bring in an additional power hitter, preferring to use their DH to give Carlos Guillen, Magglio Ordonez, and Miguel Cabrera time away from their gloves while keeping their bats in the line-up.
The Mariners are going into the season with LF and DH being a job share between various players, depending on where Milton Bradley is healthy enough to play on any given day. And while the Yankees were willing to spend $6 million to bring in Nick Johnson, he’s the kind of guy who simply can’t play every day, which will allow the Yankees to use the DH spot to rest Jorge Posada and any other veteran who needs it.
Teams are choosing to increase their flexibility, even if it comes at the expense of some production. Increasingly, teams want the option to use the DH spot as a pseudo off day for their regulars, or as a fall back plan if their banged-up position player is unable to acceptably field his position. With the move towards 12 man pitching staffs, limited bench sizes put a premium on roster flexibility, and teams are reacting by devaluing players who can’t play the field.
Given that there are only 14 designated hitter jobs in baseball to begin with, this is bad news for aging players. If even half of those teams move towards a rotating-DH plan, you’d be left with only a half dozen or so full time, offense only players. To get one of those jobs, you’d have to be a monster of a hitter, a David Ortiz in his prime kind of guy. And once you decline even a little bit, your chances of getting another job go out the window.
It will be interesting to see how teams react to this emerging DH usage.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
Interesting post. Since MLB is looking at making changes in the game, how about tweaking the DH spot like this: allow for the DH in both leagues but not for the pitcher. Think about it – teams can play a defensive wizard without sacrificing offensive production. Players like Thome can continue their careers because all teams can use one. And this will help give players in the post steroid era a chance to play long enough to remove some of those stained records. Better offense and better defense – at the same time. Good for the fans, which is good for the game.
Intriguing idea….but isn’t this a step closer to a football style roster, where positions are specialized? Part of my love for baseball stems from the fact that, other than the DH, players play both sides of the ball. Players are desired if they excel at both. The diversity of a player is embraced, rather than just having good offense OR defense.
So you would rather a pitcher hit than a Nick Punto? Not sure I agree with what you are suggesting. Even Ozzie Smith was a better hitter than 95% of pitchers.
Because ozzie smith was the worst hitter ever?
while a .262/.337/.328 slash line isn’t overwhelming, he was a more than functional hitter particularly with his glove and base running.
now if you had said rey ordonez?
I think you missed my point, Ryan.
To differentiate myself, I will have to remember to use ‘ryan b.’ I am the same ‘ryan’ (all lowercase) that posted above….
“Better offense and better defense – at the same time.”
True, but there could be even better offense and defense if we increased the roster sizes to accommodate 8 defensive specialists to play the field and have 8 (or 9) different players to hit. The best hitters and the best fielders, separately…this would create ‘better’ offense and defense, but I doubt there is anyone here that would advocate going this direction. Create DH or fielding-only players cheapens the game in my view.
I’ll meet you half way and suggest that all teams be allowed to substitute a DH for their pitcher…but that DH has to also be a pitcher.
Still have all your two-way players. Still face “a” pitcher, but you face the team’s best hitting pitcher.
There are some guys I’d love to see get 300 at bats!
How about this: Totally specialize the defensive and offensive functions of a team. The lineup can consist of 9 DHs. You can field 8 outstanding fielders plus a pitcher and none of them have to hit. You’d obviously have to expand the roster a bit, but you could have all the Adam Everetts you want all over the field, and a lineup full of Jim Thomes and Jermaine Dyes. Wouldn’t that be fun?!