@Jon - What does it matter what the pitcher does at the plate? He isn't throwing to himself. Or do you mean the opposing teams pitcher who would have to go 0-3, not 3-3 (that would be three hits).

And if you ean the pitcher doing the pitching, well, he may not even get three official at bats as he could be intentionally walked.

That's a stupid criteria from an uniformed idiot, if you ask me.

"And if you ean the pitcher doing the pitching, well, he may not even get three official at bats as he could be intentionally walked."

I doubt many teams would intentionally walk the pitcher. Maybe if the team in question is the Astros and you're walking a major league pitcher to get to a AA leadoff hitter.

love this guy and love the Reds -- awesome, Homer!

"@Jon - What does it matter what the pitcher does at the plate? He isn't throwing to himself. Or do you mean the opposing teams pitcher who would have to go 0-3, not 3-3 (that would be three hits).

And if you ean the pitcher doing the pitching, well, he may not even get three official at bats as he could be intentionally walked."

Let me clarivy then. The pitcher needs to bat 1.000.


It's clearly an advantage for a pitcher to not have to bat as he gets more time to rest between innings. A NL pitcher throwing a no-no while also batting and running the bases in the game is clearly superior to an AL pitcher that throws a no-no while sitting on the bench between innings and never having to bat or run.

*clarify

The perfect game is *pitched* perfectly and has shit to do with his batting. OTherwise, if the opposing team fielded and pitched like shit, he could have to go 8 for 8. He may get a ton of at bats if the rest of the team keeps sailing the ball over the outfield wall.

As far as rest between innings... Odds are even a hitting pitcher is gonna get to rest at least 4 or 5 innings over the course of the game. It is rare that a batter bats in back to back innings, much less batting ninth in the lineup.

And a NL pitcher (like Homer) still gets out and rarely gets on base so the "running the bases" excuse is utter bullshit. The NL batter could just as easily stand up there and let all the balls go past him and take his strikeout exerting no more significant effort than if he had sat on the bench while the DH hit for him.

If an NL pitcher gets to rest at least 4 or 5 innings over the course of a game, that means he also has to bat and run the bases the other 4 or 5 innings in that game to go the complete distance.

And even if he goes 0-5 he's still doing more work and expending more energy than an AL pitcher on the bench between innings.

"that means he also has to bat and run the bases the other 4 or 5 innings in that game to go the complete distance. "

No, it means he has to come to the plate is all. He could stand there and lean ont he bat and pitchers so rarely get on that there is *no base running*.

Now I do agree that even going 0 for 0 (all walks) means he expends more energy. But saying that the pitcher has to bat 1000 us stupid. It should just be that he has to bat when his turn comes around, period. And that is easy enough to implement as a rule in that the pitcher is normally late in the line up so has one or two innings under his belt. If he is feeling good and feels like he has a chance, he chould bat instead of the DH. Once his streak is gone, he could return to using the DH in the AL.

I could accept that argument. A batter is lauded in going 4-4 or 5-5 in games regardless of what he does in the field.

I think that would be an interesting rule change, to allow the pitcher to bat if he wants to.

So by that argument, the closest we've come to a perfect game by Jon's definition is Catfish Hunter's perfect game while batting 0.750 with 4 RBI's and a double (and two singles) in four at bats?

He just revised it to only require the pitcher to step up to the plate when it is his turn.

Got it. It also isn't a rule change to allow the pitcher to bat if he wants to...a team can willingly forfeit their DH, and it has occasionally happened if the starting pitcher is a guy who can actually hit (like the aforementioned Catfish Hunter). Well, I guess that's not if HE wants to, but if the manager wants him to.

Flip side of Jon65's stupid argument...I think its harder to throw a no-no in the AL, considering you don't get three easy outs every game. Having to face a pitcher hardly counts as a real batter.

2WL makes a good argument. You have at least three tough at bats (DHs are normally great hitters) to compensate for the extra rest.

I finally got a chance to read the box score. Homer Bailey went 1 for 3 with 1 strikeout at the plate.

And there are a handful of pitchers that can hit. It's not always an easy out. It usually is, but not always.

The hittingest pitcher <<<< the worst DH.

I think my bias is due to my dislike of the DH. It's just a way to keep old players too old to field in the game and making money. Pitchers should be forced to bat just like real ballplayers have to.

It was actually implemented to make the game more exciting since there was a greater possibility of hits and runs, and also to speed the game up. It exists in the NCAA and US high school sports, neither of which hold onto old players. Well, maybe your high school held onto one.

This is the most stupid DH debate I think I've ever seen. Seriously, intentional walks on the pitcher? Goddamn...