Hugh2

I'll give you partial credit on the Brewers. But lets be real, they'd get out of that contract in a heartbeat if they could. And they did DH contreras a bit to rest him at catcher. But we will give you that one. 4 for 6.

Braves, didn't have one single guy reach more than 45% playing time as a DH. Pure rotation with Jurickson Profar, Drake Baldwin, Sean Murphy, and Ronald Acuna Jr all rotating the DH and plyaing the field. 4 for 5....moving down the line.

A's Rooker DH's the majority of the time so I'll give you guys that one. Lets move on to the Blue Jays George Springer DH'd 52% of the time While Santander took 40% of the DH at bats. Both those guys took the majority of at bats in RF and some in LF. WORLD SERIES caliber team literally rotating the DH. 3 for 4 here....moving down the line

.

Thats literally one team, the first one in the alphabet. Lets go to #2. The Astros Alvarez DH'd only 52% of the time with Paredes taking up 30% of the DH at bats but also playing games at 1B/2B/3B. And Altuve getting rest by DHing 11% of the games.

That's insanely misleading. How many of those "full time DH's" are actually only playing 50-60% of the time with teams rotating? You also have literally 50% of all of baseball that didn't have a DH 20 years ago.

Dude. 1 game? try 37 games. Did Mike Trouts games in the field come before or after his injury???

Don't make me do all 30 teams Notin. Fact of the matter is, most teams use the DH position to rest guys while also allowing to leverage their bench and play match ups. You're not doing that as much with a full time DH.

Dude. it's literally happening all over baseball, it's not a fantasy it's what teams are doing. And if the second sentence was true isn't there 8 other positions on the field to get them at bats at OTHER than DH? When the Angels sit Mike Trout and move Jorge Soler to DH they're giving Matt Lugo time in LEFT field. If they're not resting their players why not just put Matt Lugo at DH????? I think that kinda debunks your whole bolded point right there. And that's literally just one team.

And is that guy DHing full time? or does he rotate in with other guys? Like I'm going to go through every team when I have more time, I literally just did one, starting with the Angels alphabetically. Mike Trout is their full time DH, but 4 other players DH'd that year, including Jorge Soler who took 1/4 of all DH at bats despite being the left fielder 1/2 the time. I suspect some very interesting results as I go through every team. I suspect many many of them have 1-2 other players taking up 25-50% of the DH at bats second to the majority holder of DH at bats.

Allow me to ask a follow up question. What if Yoshida had no options but cost the league minimum?

So in other words.....you have to be a very good hitter to be a full time DH.

Whoa whoa whoa how is that burden of proof on me? you're the one who literally omitted the DH position in 2/3 of baseball

Here's a better way to frame my argument. And this could open up a much longer conversation but for the sake of simplicity "All things considered" do we think that the Boston Red Sox (if they could) would rid themselves of the Yoshida contract? as in, they would owe him nothing and would have to give up nothing to get rid of him? Do the Sox press that button, or would they elect to keep him and pay him?

My point was, in the absence of having a David Ortiz type player it's best to be able to use the DH position to rest people. Every roster is different. This doesn't mean there isn't a place for guys like Schwarber, that a lot of teams dont' have guys that spend significant time DHin'g etc etc. You could say the Sox have a DH in Yoshida. It's not like he's the shinning glimmering example of a DH. He clogs up the roster in so many ways, and would you want him playing 20-80 games in the field a year like some of the guys on your list?

You literally posted players who DH'd 60-80 games. So literally half your list.

Exactly. Saying teams like to rotate the DH position isn't analogous with DH's don't exist anymore. Of course they do, one doesn't disprove the other I suppose was my point.

Well that's just the thing, I don't see them adding two infielders and I don't see them starting Hamilton, Romy, Romero, or Sogard. So I think the plan is going to be Mayer at (put infield position here). Now he very well may not stay healthy and you end up with Romy playing the field anyways.

But even then, that's a small list of guys who were position players up until recently. I mean just look at free agency, how often are teams going out and giving away multiple and massive DH contracts vs. teams just move a guy off position there. Most DH's are made, not paid for. That's telling.

Well, if Mayer is the fall back at 2b-3b? who is the other 2B-3B if Story is at SS? I suppose my point is if Mayer is your plan B, then the Sox need to aquire two infielders. Unless of course we think David Hamilton is ready to be the every day 2Bman.

I don't think an outfielder maybe named Duran or other gets traded until Kyle Tucker signs, maybe even Bellinger too. You'd expect the losers of those bidding wars to ramp up their efforts to attain someone like Duran.

I don't disagree with this reality at all. I just think it's more of a factor of guys who can still really hit who age themselves out of the field (not that young DH's don't exist). I think every single team in baseball would rather have that player play adaquate to better defense in the field than DH. Think of it this way, DH's are typically made and not signed. Obviously there are exceptions E.G. Schwarber.

Bat speed is a big thing for me too. I do wonder, given his age, if they can improve his bat speed. It can certainly be done if he's open to it.

You really had to stretch to make that list, and that's barely 1/3 of all teams. I mean Ivan Herrera? Someone with 203 career games but less than 1/2 those at DH. A lot of those guys were signed to be position players and they DH because they have aged but are under contract, but they can still hit. Of those guys, Hunter Goodman still caught 104 games last year Suzuki still played 48 games in the outfield last year. Sure when a guy falls off and can still hit big I don't think you complain when their name is David Ortiz or Brent Rooker, but I'm sure the New York Yankees would have loved to relieve themeselves of the Giancarlo Stanton contract a few years ago. Many of those guys still played a lot of time in the field, because the team was still rotating the DH position and they were the worse defenders. It's not like teams are going out and signing guys to exclusively be a DH, well at least not often. Guys like Kyle Schwarber exist....but he's the exception. Obviously if you have a guy who can mash you just put him there and don't complain, but these guys playing 50-100 games you call a "DH", do you really think David Ortiz would be playing 50-100 games in the field if he were playing today??? David Ortiz played the field less than most of those guys and he DIDN'T play during a time when you could DH in national league stadiums. I suppose I didn't cover Ohtani, who also happens to arguably be the best pitcher. If he wasn't pitching he'd be fielding, I've heard reports that he profiled as a plus defender in right field. Is that true? IDK, but he is a freak athlete who is DHing because he's also pitching. That's literally a situation unlike any other we've ever seen in baseball. Of course, if you have a guy who can hit for average and put up 30/100 in the middle of your lineup but has no position you make him your full time DH, that model is still always going to work for some guys. But without doubt it is not what is desired by most teams.

I'm fine with all this, except I'd trade Duran for a 3B/2B of equal value, because we literally have two holes in our infield and none in the outfield. Rotating the DH is what the trend is, and it's why having someone like Yoshida burns a spot in the roster. It would be one thing to carry Yoshida, but the thing is you have no room now if someone like Casas or Campbell hits their way back without making other tough Roster decisions. Something gives, now or by the deadline, and if it hasn't.......then something horribly went wrong.