From today's Rockies/Pirates game.
You must be registered for see images attach
I thought pitchers hitting prevented this from happening. The concept of retaliation and all.
Not a single COL player HBP in this game. SP knocked out of the game.
Again, rational points to universal DH.
I still like the game in the NL because it becomes a strategy thing when the pitcher is up there. To me, being a former pitcher, I would try and get as much batting practice as possible if I knew I was going to hit. Being a starter in the NL, one should take pride in hitting. You can be the difference in the game on the both sides
Yeah, we have discussed this ad nauseum on here. I think it's a limited view of strategy to think the Pitcher hitting adds anything and I don't want to pay good money to see a guy fail 9/10 times at the plate and run the bases with a puffy jacket on.
If he had been hit in the series starting tomorrow, you'd wonder about intentionality, but there was no reason for the pitcher to be hit with the bases loaded early in the game.
But it did make me wonder if the DH is a good idea because he really didn't seem to react very quickly and I think a hitter probably would have been able to get out of the way.
I'm just hoping there wasn't bone or eye damage. That was really dangerous.![]()
Yea, just looking at that photo, sure seems like there will be some type of bone or eye damage. Never like to see that type of stuff happen
HA! That's pretty funny. Hence the reason why I don't get how pitchers don't take hitting more seriously. Like Grienke for example. That guy can swing it and you can tell he wants to get a hit every time he is up to the plate
I thought pitchers hitting prevented this from happening. The concept of retaliation and all.
Not a single COL player HBP in this game. SP knocked out of the game.
Again, rational points to universal DH.
doubt there was intent as it was on a 0-2 count with the bases loaded.
also - whether it be the pitcher or a DH, the position you play is irrelevant when you get HBP in the face. this adds nothing to the "DH to the NL" argument.
latest reports are the orbital bone is damaged, along with damage to the eye as well. hope he's going to be ok
Well, the SP is more valuable than any particular position player in a given game simply based upon the replacement value.
The "unwritten rule" effect of an NL SP doesn't really exist anyways.
Do you believe Vogelsong was intentionally hit? If so, why??![]()
No, but I also don't believe that having the SP bat deters intentional hits. It's more made up bull by people who need to rationalize having a crapping hitting pitcher hit to keep the game a certain way.
I don't think pitchers hitting deters HBP, teams virtually never throw at the opposing pitcher anyway, when they want to make a point they usually hit a guy in the heart of the order.
Personally, I do think the NL game has more strategy, as managers have more to juggle when it comes to pinch hitting, double switches ect. But yeah, the "they don't retaliate" argument is bupkis. And as long as they don't go for the head, I wish teams would retaliate more in general, and that the league would let them. When I was a kid the ol dust-up was a highlight of many a baseball season. It ferments rivalries, the crowd goes absolutely bonkers, probably builds a lot of team chemistry too. I wish the league office handled them like they used to. A few games for the guy who charged the mound, and 5 games for the pitcher who was hitting people (pitchers always get longer suspensions because they don't play everyday), and maybe a smattering of short suspensions for guys who really went at it.
I also don't see how this incident relates to the question of retaliation anyway. This seemed 100% accidental, an ugly HBP and it just happened to be a pitcher who got nailed.
Good synopsis. Even though I think there is no place for the DH in baseball, I do understand the argument that at pitcher is less likely to get out of the way of a bad pitch and it could result in more injuries. I like having pitchers on our team who can actually handle the bat. It does give us advantage and it is part of the game as it was meant to be played. JMHO
The game was also meant to be played worth the pitcher going 9 IP and throwing underhand. If we are going to argue tradition, then let's at least be consistent.
That is a straw man argument, and examples that are not truthful anyway. Pitchers more often than not threw 9 innings but there was no rule that required them to.
And there is a world of difference between allowing for substitutions and having 2 guys who literally don't partake in 50% of the game by design.
Pretty sure the original rules required underhand pitching and It took 9 balls to create a walk.
So what? It is a straw man argument. You're acting as though a "traditionalist" should be just as appalled about a rule change from 140 years ago when the game is in its infancy as a potential rule change today.
It is an absolutely absurd argument.
What a discriminatory post. Wow!To me, it shows how empty an argument it is. The DH has been in MLB for over 40 years. It's only old farts who are so against it because of their nostalgia of their youth and so called 1950s/60s golden era. It's also selective "tradition".
It's the same concept as "there is no good music anymore". I'm sorry, I will not get off your lawn old man.
What a discriminatory post. Wow!
For the record, I have never liked the DH concept, but feel it is more important for consistency to have the NL adopt it.
And, oh yeah, check my age.![]()