Originally posted by IndyDback
I took my son out to watch Indianapolis (AAA - Brewers) play Columbus (AAA - Yankees) last Sunday, and it was played with the DH in effect, although Indy was the home team; today I watched Indy play Louisville (AAA - Reds), and the pitchers batted. The only reason I'm mentioning this is that I assumed that the DH would go away when AL/NL games were played in a NL farm team's park, but Sunday proved me wrong.
Oh, and I'm personally against the DH - let the pitchers bat!!
DWKB & I were tried to figure out the pattern of DH use in the minors because of weirdness like you described. It isn't home park "major league" rules, it's the
actual league rules.
Every "minor league" uses the DH, from AAA down to Rookie ball. When Columbus (AAA--Yankees) visits Indy (AAA--Brewers) they both turn in lineups. Both have the option of using a DH. Columbus wants to win the game & develop hitters for the Yankees; they will use the DH even if Indy points out that they are being rude guests. Indy then has their choice. They decide to use the DH.
When Louisville (AAA-Reds) visits the same choice applies. Both teams want to win the game. However, they both agree to "disarm" and set aside the DH option.
WARNING THREAD DETOUR/ IF NOT HI-JACK
I vaguely recall hearing a few years ago that one NL team "ordered" its minor league affiliates to have their pitchers hit. Now I understand. They were ordering its "slave" teams put the "owner" team's interest ahead of the team's interest
in winning the game. Basically they would be playing 9 vs. 10 baseball.
Suppose it was Cincinnati. It sounds like an "old school" Reds thing to do (Rob Dibble, no facial hair, Charlie Hustle, Thom Brenneman and those "not a good at bat right there", etc.). Cincinnati was "enslaving" Louisville,
right down the river. The Reds organization was telling the Louisville Bats "We don't care about you trying to win games. 'Our' pitchers learning to hit is more important than your puny little game." Why should Cinci have everything and Louisville nothing? Such arrogance shows why "minor league games" could be so much more than mere exhibitions, if they were "freed."
I'd be delighted to start a separate topic if interested.
Call it:
Are the minor leagues "enslaved"?