The DH in the RSL

[Buane]

In 2009 we held a poll to see if people favored the implementation of the Designated Hitter rule in the RSL. The poll ended 10 votes to 12 votes against. In 2010 we held another vote, and the poll ended 12 votes to 9 votes in favor.

The problem in the past has been supporters have had a very "whatever" attitude, while those against have been very vocally against. It never made sense to implement a new rule when there wasn't really that much passionate desire for one.


I've never been firmly against or in favor of the DH. My only strong opinion is that I do not want to see it in one conference and not the other. It would be an all-or-nothing implementation. So why am I putting up a new poll now? What's changed? Well, you guys know we're on OOTP13 now. And after the last few upgrades it seems pretty clear to me that we can't count on ever seeing any improvement in OOTP AI management when it comes to pinch-hitting, late-game replacements, and double switches. The DH is a potentially creative solution to those problems.

Still, it's not like I'm hugely in favor of it. Even if this poll ends up 16-4 in favor that's no guarantee we'd implement. I just thought I'd check on where everybody currently stands. From the first poll to the second we had some people change their minds, so you never know what a current straw poll will bring.

[McExpos]

[Tavarin]

I would be in favor of it, but not quite as much as I did when I had Julian Manuel and Jose Cano in the organization.

[Nah-Lin]

Usually I would be neutral, but the limitations of the AI push me to be strongly in favor. 4-5 times this year my defensive replacement in CF has come in to start the 8th inning, only to be replaced one batter later in a double switch. Not to mention Klaus Franken seeing time at C for some reason....

[McExpos]

I have voted both ways on this issue before. I believe that I originally voted in favor of the DH in the RSL during the 2009 poll, and later changed my mind and voted against the DH during the 2010 poll. I remain somewhat conflicted, so I guess the best way for me to make up my mind is to revisit my previous arguments and see what remains relevant. To the tape!

2010

I am also in favor of the DH in the RSL. As Tavarin has pointed out, defensive ratings tend to crater very quickly in OOTP, while offensive ratings take much longer to decline. So a player such as Ted Walker, who has more than proven his worth in the field over the career and is somehow still an above-average hitter, will not be forced into early retirement because he's not very good at standing at 1B and holding his glove in the air.

Still valid. Many hitters become useless in the field far quicker than they become useless at the plate. In fact, European leagues are littered with players who are above-average hitters but below-average defenders. It's a shame to see every great RSL player end his career in Europe - a DH would extend their careers and allow guys to keep playing for teams (perhaps even the same team?) when they start to age. I might be more likely to sign long-term contracts for OFs if I know that the DH is an option. Otherwise, I find myself suspicious of OFs who are awesome hitters but borderline defenders, because the moment their defensive talents take a hit, they become useless (and can't play 1B, because OOTP doesn't understand development). However, if I knew that a guy like Gary Summers could be put at DH once his defensive ratings slip, then he's more likely to say an Eagle.

Ohhhh, how cute, you guys think this is a democracy. :allears:

Just because that still makes me laugh.

2009

However, I've gotten used to this league not having a designated hitter. I know that Greg has worked really hard to make this league balanced, so there are very few superstars who are all-around good at the game. The appeal of certain guys is that you have to weigh their lack of defense against their prodigious hitting. I don't think the RSL was designed with the DH in mind, and I must respect the wishes of the creator.

Kind of still valid. Part of my reason for being against the DH initially was that I was involved in both the RSL and the CL/SCMLB, which did have DH implemented. So the RSL was a nice variety for me, a league that had no DH. However, I've since quit every league that isn't the precious, precious RSL, and that parity is no longer in play. I still agree with what I said about the few all-around talents, but I don't think that the DH necessarily diminishes those players. Guys like Worden are still going to be amazing because they can play the field and hit. A DH doesn't really change that at all.

Alex also made a point in here somewhere - I had it and then I lost it - about drafting. (EDIT - Found it.)

I'd say when it comes to drafting, the DH makes the GMs job way easier. Currently, owners have to make serious organizational decisions during the draft to decide whether they want a glove guy or a bat guy, since there are very rarely players with both skills. Some teams (Philadelphia, for instance) decide that they want bat guys, so they have no issues grabbing all the plus hitting corner outfielders without any fielding ability. Other teams (such as mine, Pittsburgh) are content to let those bats fall, so long as we get to grab the glove guys. Currently, those bats have less value on the trade market as the options they give a team are rather limited.

If you add the DH, however, then suddenly drafting is as easy as being able to tell who the best hitter is, since you know they're going to have some value to your future, whether it be in the trade market or as your DH. Some teams will remain stubborn and stick with drafting glove guys, but for the rest of the league, it makes drafting a marketable player with value to your fellow owners a lot easier, therefore making the GMs job easier.

A DH makes drafting guys like Mango (good offense, bad defense) way too viable, when without the DH, you have to make a conscious decision as to what you're going for. I think this is something that can give you a leg up on the competition, so to speak. Your preferences as a GM come into play and a guy like Mango may fall because you don't want to take the defensive hit, while a guy with mediocre offensive ratings but good defensive ratings will get drafted earlier.

So where does that leave me? I think the DH is probably a solid choice, and I doubt it would be the end of the league as we know it. I'm inclined to be slightly in favor, but I wouldn't be too upset either way. I'm sure I'll argue more in a minute.

[aceman034]

This has been the only thing that has made me go crazy about the rsl. I am strongly in favor of it because the ai makes ridiculous decisions no matter what your settings are. That in itself is reason enough to consider it. Another note, if my pitcher is going to get hurt id rather it be pitching, not running the bases.

[Buane]

Any times the AI gets involved with decisions regarding pitchers batting, bad things happen. And that is basically the best pro-DH argument I've ever heard - all other arguments are extremely subjective. If we can remove that decision from the AI's hands entirely, I think it would be a benefit.

The RSL has been on 4 different versions of OOTP and it doesn't appear that we are going to see a version that improves on that any time soon, which is basically why I've made this new thread now.

[jadacormier]

C'mon Buane, do it. Matt wrote all those words and stuff. I mean, I didn't read them all, and I doubt anyone else did. But there are so many words it must be a convincing argument.

[NormV]

I would like to see the DH implemented for two reasons:

1) As we do no actually play the games, we have to give the AI control of when to sub pitchers.
2) I would like to get more of my position players at bats.

[Becks6]

I'd like to change my vote to "In Favor"

[Madness2207]

I'd like to change my vote to "In Favor"

After seeing the arguments and thinking it over I echo this.

[Codone]

been wanting this forever in the RSL