The DH rule

[naiwf]

Edgar Martinez was a great hitter. He's similar to a guy like Mariano Rivera who is the best closer in the history of baseball, but was a failure as a starter. Should we not count his stats because he was relegated to pitching in the bullpen and then extended his career by getting 3 or 4 outs at a time instead of giving his team 5+ innings at a shot? That's essentially what you're trying to do with Martinez.

[sahyder1]

But Edgar Martinez was a good enough bat, that had there been no DH, he would have played the field. It's not like Edgar Martinez would have been stocking shelves at Walmart were in not for the Designated Hitter rule. The guy hit over .320 seven times in his career, including one year where he hit .352 or .356 (can't remember off the top of my head).

As for being a DH inflating stats, I can't argue. Hell, were it not for the DH spot, Paul Molitor wouldn't even been in Cooperstown, because over a third of his hits were as a DH. But that's exactly why I'm for it. It gives guys that aren't as swift in the field as they once were to still be productive for their franchise. And isn't that what it's all about?

Fair enough if that's your argument I just think it is a dumb one for reasons already mentioned. You're either good enough to play or you're not. I really don't think he'd be an everyday player if it were not for the DH. He hit 30 Homeruns in a season just once and batted in "power positions". He was a .312 career hitter...it's not like he was Boggs or Gwynn. He got called up at what....age 27? Played what, 2-3 seasons at 3B?

Edgar Martinez was a great hitter. He's similar to a guy like Mariano Rivera who is the best closer in the history of baseball, but was a failure as a starter. Should we not count his stats because he was relegated to pitching in the bullpen and then extended his career by getting 3 or 4 outs at a time instead of giving his team 5+ innings at a shot? That's essentially what you're trying to do with Martinez.

Totally different argument. If you want to argue the overuse of specialized relievers that is a different argument in my opinion. Mariano developed his cutter after he moved to the bullpen. Your argument would be valid if Edgar Martinez had become a gold glove 3B later in his career. Plus you make it sound like Rivera had some ridiculous extended run as a SP.

Martinez was a good hitter. I just don't think he would have been an everyday player if not for the DH.

Edited April 8, 2011 by sahyder1

[naiwf]

But Edgar Martinez was a good enough bat, that had there been no DH, he would have played the field. It's not like Edgar Martinez would have been stocking shelves at Walmart were in not for the Designated Hitter rule. The guy hit over .320 seven times in his career, including one year where he hit .352 or .356 (can't remember off the top of my head).

As for being a DH inflating stats, I can't argue. Hell, were it not for the DH spot, Paul Molitor wouldn't even been in Cooperstown, because over a third of his hits were as a DH. But that's exactly why I'm for it. It gives guys that aren't as swift in the field as they once were to still be productive for their franchise. And isn't that what it's all about?

Fair enough if that's your argument I just think it is a dumb one for reasons already mentioned. You're either good enough to play or you're not. I really don't think he'd be an everyday player if it were not for the DH. He hit 30 Homeruns in a season just once and batted in "power positions". He was a .312 career hitter...it's not like he was Boggs or Gwynn. He got called up at what....age 27? Played what, 2-3 seasons at 3B?

He got called up at 24, wasn't a regular until he was 27 and still managed to win 2 batting titles, have 2247 hits (158th all time), score 1219 runs (159th), drive in 1261(116th), walk 1283 times (43rd), and produce 514 2B (43rd) and 309 HR. His .312 batting average is 95th all time, he's 22nd all time in OBP and 35th in OPS. He's 81st in XBH and 78th in times on base. In some ways he's one of the 100 best all around hitters in the history of baseball, at worst he's in the top 150. Think about that.

Rivera wasn't good enough to start. Martinez wasn't good enough to field. Both should STILL be in the Hall of Fame because they were among the elite at their strengths for quite some time. What's your point?

[KJE]

I have no problem with the designated hitter position. I think it is a tougher position than you think, too. NOt being in the game except for a few at bats could be tough.

[bill_da_bill]

I really don't have a strong opinion on the DH one way or the other. But I do think Edgar Martinez was a good enough hitter that he would have been an everyday player even if it weren't for the DH spot, the Mariners just didn't have to do that. Not really his fault for that.

[Ananas]

I did say Edgar Martinez was a great player, and I'm not sure how anyone who isn't just hell bent on winning an argument could disagree. Are/were Manny Ramirez, Derek Jeter, Hanley Ramirez, Jeff Kent and Carlos Delgado not great players? Because while they did/do "play" positions, they were all certifiably mediocre to sub-par defensively. Like Meac said, if Edgar Martinez had been in the NL his bat would have played somewhere in the field, he just wouldn't have been good at it. You can crow about "protection" all you want (and I specially love the "if you don't believe in it you don't know baseball" line), google "Bill James" "lineup protection". Look at what Will Carroll wrote about the subject. Or Doug Drinen. Then try to explain how those obsessive baseball fans who cover the sport professionally and are obsessed with finding the most accurate statistical metrics for measuring performance and strategy don't know anything about baseball. In fact, give me any kind of credible study that concludes there's any serious impact at all that goes beyond your own anecdotal examples. Edgar Martinez was a spectacular hitter, one of the greatest of all time. He has the 34th highest career OPS in the history of baseball (39th in adjusted OPS, before you write that off as just a product of the era), and the 22nd highest on base percentage. Any GM that would have seen him as an "extra guy on the bench time" is worthy of not only being fired, but taken out back and horsewhipped.

Edited April 9, 2011 by GoodGodWhatABeatnik

[HailtotheYo]

Wow, you know .... I had started writing out a nice reply to Sayhder's posts and all ... but holy shit is it not worth it.

Instead I'll do something else and just generalize on Martinez and points in the thread.

Is the DH in baseball ? Yes. So arguing someone's merit or placement in the game based on it is pretty damn dumb. The closer point was already brought up so I won't rehash it. My only addition to it, is to ask this: If you give merit/respect/don't have a problem with someone that only performs 1/9th of the game, how can you not give it to someone that does 1/2 ?

Bringing up the point about the lineup he hit in actually only points out how good of a hitter he was. He hit behind/protected Griffey ... that alone is a full stop. More so it allowed the Mariners to move around A-Rod when he came up, protect guys like David Segui, and allow Buhner to just sit back and try to knock the cover off the ball without to much pressure to actually "hit." Oh, and he helped Olerud have a nice 3yr upswing during his winding down.

Edgar Martinez is the perfect argument for the DH, not against it. He did actually play 592 of his 2055 games in the field (29%). Molitor played over half of his games at DH, Thomas only played 42% of his games in the field.

If it weren't for the DH we might have lost Martinez early. It's possible, but it isn't like the guy moved to DH because he couldn't field. He moved because his hamstring was trash after BC Place couldn't lay down their turf right and left a seam unzipped. Kind of hard to play first or third with no hamstring. So he moved to the DH role out of necessity. Kind of like Eckersley and Rivera moved to closer out of necessity.