Zambrano's 27 K's were in 73 AB, which isn't Andujar's territory. Try looking at K/AB rather than K/BB. Even good-hitting pitchers usually don't draw walks.

Andujar did. He had a career 315/30 ratio, compared to Z's 151/5. But looking at K/AB, Andujar was .52, slightly over 1 K/2AB. Z is .37, slightly over 1K/3AB.

But Z is considered one of the best hitting pitchers going. And his OPS+ is 25% worse than Neifi Perez.

If the weak-hitting SS never -- ever -- got a hit, he wouldn't be on the team. But if Derek Lowe never ever gets a hit, he's still on the team.

I think a big part of that is that an individual pitcher hits so infrequently (relative to any other hitter) that it simply isn't worth worrying about.

If that weak-hitting SS was great defensively, and could also handle a couple of other positions with similar skill, I think some team would find a place for him as a supersub. Certainly if he hit as well as a good-hitting pitcher.

Rey Ordonez insisted on starting which is why he isn't playing anymore, but he wouldn't just be a good late-inning SS, but a great one. Yes, he's a better hitter than a pitcher, but nobody would have cared if he ever got a hit in his 50-something PAs if he was a late-inning defensive replacement.

I really don't like watching pitchers try to hit, nor do I like the idea of a full-time DH.

My idea is to say that a player can only DH as many innings/games as he fields. That way every player is required to play at least half the time in the field. This would require more strategy and less full-time hitters, like Hafner and Ortiz.

Wouldn't it be simpler just to go with an 8-man lineup.

As others have noted, the DH has almost nothing to do with when starters are taken out of the game these days. The pitcher gets pulled when he's tired or when the clock strikes the 7th inning.

In this day and age, the double-switch should almost never be used. The only reason to use it is if you intend to use the reliever you're bringin in now for the start of the next inning as well (and he's due up in the next half-inning). This almost never happens nowadays and most of the time it does it's in blowouts when you're using your mop-up guy. The double-switch these days is overused and usually counter-productive (unless it also coincides with a defensive replacement or putting in a regular who didn't start in for his replacement).

Walt beat me to it...Since some people hate players who just bat and don't have to field, while others dislike watching pitchers try to hit or getting pulled in double-switches, just get rid of both and have 8-men lineups.

If the weak-hitting SS never -- ever -- got a hit, he wouldn't be on the team. But if Derek Lowe never ever gets a hit, he's still on the team.

I think a big part of that is that an individual pitcher hits so infrequently (relative to any other hitter) that it simply isn't worth worrying about.

If that weak-hitting SS was great defensively, and could also handle a couple of other positions with similar skill, I think some team would find a place for him as a supersub. Certainly if he hit as well as a good-hitting pitcher.

It's possible. John Vukovich was the worst non-pitcher hitter (career OPS+ of 20) in the last 50 years to have a career of at least 200 games. Is 20 considered a good hitting pitcher? Carlos Zambrano is considered one of the best and he's at 46. Vukovich's teammate Steve Carlton was considered a good hitter, and he's at 33. But I would guess the average pitcher is around 0, maybe less.

Since some people hate players who just bat and don't have to field, while others dislike watching pitchers try to hit or getting pulled in double-switches, just get rid of both and have 8-men lineups.

And increase every regular's PAs by 11% ... say ta-ta to historical continuity regarding individual offensive counting stats.

It's possible. John Vukovich

I thought of Vukovich as well, but even as late as 1980 (when I seem to remember that Vukovich stayed on the Phillies' roster all year long just to play the occasional inning at third base), the Phillies carried ten pitchers most of the way before September 1st, maybe eleven in the dog days. It was easier to carry a fielding specialist then. With 12-man pitching staffs, particularly in a DH league, every position player's got to be able to hit.

An interesting bit of inside baseball, one of the factors behind the Red Sox signing Ortiz was his ability to play a passable first base. As he's aged, gained weight and stopped playing there with any regularity, that no longer is the case but the only reason he didn't play there more in 2003 was that the Red Sox generally had pretty good defenders available to play there in Hillenbrand and Millar.

I was the one who said that watching Micah Owings hit was the best thing in baseball.

I can see a general debate about the pros and cons concerning the DH. What I cannot abide is the idea that watching the pitcher hit is boring. If you think this you suck, hate baseball, and all things joyful. Watching a pitcher bunt is boring. Watching a pitcher hit is the best part of the game. Without pitchers hitting not only would we not have Micah Owings but we would not have had this.

I grew up watching AL baseball and I like it fine. However it's simply not true that it's all a matter of opinion and we just like what we are used to. Pitchers hitting is in keeping with the rational order of the cosmos. If you don't agree you have no soul.

I like the 9 guys vs. 9 guys concept. 9 1/2 guys vs. 9 1/2 guys is lame.

109 - Possibly the greatest at-bat and score I have ever seen, seriously. I wish I had been there live.

what gaelan said. pitchers batting should be part of the game.

I think a big part of that is that an individual pitcher hits so infrequently (relative to any other hitter) that it simply isn't worth worrying about.

Right; but that's why we're not watching major league baseball when the pitcher hits.

If that weak-hitting SS was great defensively, and could also handle a couple of other positions with similar skill, I think some team would find a place for him as a supersub. Certainly if he hit as well as a good-hitting pitcher.

If he -- literally -- couldn't hit at all? I doubt it, though maybe you're right. But at best he'd be a late-inning defensive replacement who would have to be pinch hit for if his plate appearance became important. (Well, even if his team is ahead in a close game his plate appearance is kind of still important, but if his team fell behind that would particularly be the case.) So I'm still not sure he's worth the roster spot.

Rey Ordonez insisted on starting which is why he isn't playing anymore, but he wouldn't just be a good late-inning SS, but a great one. Yes, he's a better hitter than a pitcher, but nobody would have cared if he ever got a hit in his 50-something PAs if he was a late-inning defensive replacement.

Well, I think you're probably overrating St. Rey's defense, but of course that's beside the point. To respond to your point, as I asked above, would he really be worth the roster spot? Would Ozzie be worth the roster spot if you could only bat him 50 or so times a year? Remember, if he's coming in as a late-inning defensive replacement, the game is likely to be close, in which case I don't really think you can afford to punt his PAs.

You raise a good question. Still, the fact that we've never actually seen such a supersub who hits like a pitcher (have we?) seems telling to me, if true.

EDIT: I see people mentioned John Vukovich. I'd never heard of him before but yes, he seems like a good example. Though even he hit to a .151 EqA, which is better than the .115 or so we see from the average pitcher :-) But I grant the point.

Why is it that those of you who dislike specialization so much are satisfied with having only one player in the lineup who has to pitch and hit? Why not push for requiring each player to pitch against his opposite number in the batting order?

Why is it that those of you who dislike specialization so much are satisfied with having only one player in the lineup who has to pitch and hit? Why not push for requiring each player to pitch against his opposite number in the batting order?

Because that would be extremely retarded.

I thought you said that it was fun to watch people who were incompetent.

I think every player from every position should pitch to home plate simultaneously. The batter has the option to hit any ball he choses. The catcher does not have to pitch, but he does have to catch at least one ball or it's a wild pitch. If he catches more than three balls it's an automatic strike. This would turn the catcher into the most athletic player on the ball field. No batter's box, obviously, but still a strike zone. The umpire would be contained in a small but impervious tube made out of that fancy material that the Japanese use to make things invisible. He would also be a cyborg. The strike zone would of course be expanded. The DH would be parachuted into the game at random times to challenge the worst throwing fielder to a fight (home crowd decision for 'who's worst').

Hit batsmen would be worth 16 balls. A walk is worth 32 balls. A strike out is worth 8 strikes. I think modern technology can handle it.

Make it happen, Bud.

I thought you said that it was fun to watch people who were incompetent.

Mmm-hmm.