Opinion: MLB Should Not Introduce a Designated Hitter to the National League

In+the+off+season%2C+MLB+executives+decided+to+change+a+few+rules+of+the+game.+One+of+the+new+rules+they+introduced+was+the+implementation+of+a+designated+hitter+in+the+National+League%2C+which+would+be+in+place+on+Opening+Day+%28Thursday%2C+March+31%29.+Unfortunately%2C+this+could+negatively+change+the+name+of+the+baseball+game+forever

Media by Liza Cooper

In the off season, MLB executives decided to change a few rules of the game. One of the new rules they introduced was the implementation of a designated hitter in the National League, which would be in place on Opening Day (Thursday, March 31). Unfortunately, this could negatively change the name of the baseball game forever

Major League Baseball (MLB) commissioner Rob Manfred announced the implementation of a designated hitter in the National League on Thursday, Feb. 10. This upset many fans, including myself.

A designated hitter is essentially a player who bats for the pitcher. The American League has used designated hitters since 1973, adopting the rule because of declining batting averages in position players. With a few rare exceptions, pitchers are usually the worst hitters on a team which makes sense because their main job is to throw strikes, not hit them.

The American League thought that replacing the worst hitter in the lineup with a player whose main job was to hit would boost team productivity. 

In 1970, just three seasons before the addition of a designated hitter, American League offenses had a batting average of .250. In 1973, batters averaged .259.

While this is an improvement, it was not the significant one MLB executives had hoped for. But because the introduction of a designated hitter increased the American League’s previously dwindling fan base, they decided to keep the position.

Introducing a designated hitter to the National League is a huge misstep. If the MLB’s goal is to take part of the excitement out of games or shift the focus of National League baseball to power instead of skill, then sure, it’s the right thing to do.

At the same time the American League was petitioning for the introduction of a designated hitter, the National League was adhering to tradition. They argued that the first baseball teams in the world didn’t have designated hitters, so why should they? People have remained interested in baseball since its creation in 1846, so the National League did not see a need for change.

As someone who grew up surrounded by the St. Louis Cardinals, a National League team, I am a huge supporter of tradition. 

If a player plays defense, they need to do their part and play offense as well. Furthermore, pitchers can be essential in game-changing situations. Pitchers are the players that probably spend the most time on the art of bunting, which can be essential in advancing runners into scoring positions.

Watching a pitcher bat is exciting. You never know what they’re going to do. When a pitcher does something big, like hitting a home run, fans go crazy. Since we know a pitcher’s main job is not hitting, when they shock us with offensive feats, it makes watching the game even more special. 

Introducing a designated hitter to the National League is a huge misstep. If the MLB’s goal is to take part of the excitement out of games or shift the focus of National League baseball to power instead of skill, then sure, it’s the right thing to do. But one thing is for certain: when the designated hitter comes up to bat, I will not be rooting for them.