May 16, 2008
The DH Difference
I was just looking at runs per game in interleague games with and without the designated hitter, and found this amazing number:
History of Interleague Play
| Runs per Game | Pitcher Batting | DH Batting |
|---|
| American League | 4.67 | 5.17 |
| National League | 4.73 | 4.72 |
So the designated hitter is worth 1/2 run to the American League, but the NL teams do better with a pitcher! That's how poor a bench the NL has carried over the first eleven years of interleague play.
Posted by David Pinto at
08:11 PM
|
Offense
|
TrackBack (0)
I'm not so sure that this is a commentary on poor NL benches. When an NL team needs to play a DH, it's typically their 9th best hitter, whereas when an AL team need to *sit* their DH, it's often their 3rd or 4th best hitter. Furthermore, the AL team is replacing that hitter with someone who otherwise never bats (the pitcher). So I'm not surprised that using the DH favors AL teams more. I am surprised by how large the difference is. Half a run a game seems like a lot.
When I was young, NL teams carried someone on their bench who could hit. The Mets had Rusty Staub. The Reds carried Dan Driessen. Mostly these were older players who weren't good in the field anymore, pretty much the definition of an AL DH.
True. Those types of players obviously gravitate toward the AL today. I can't think of a modern day equivalent of Driessen or Staub.
Larry Biittner, Jay Johnstone and Manny Mota are a few more that come to mind. I was young at the same time as you :)
