Batter Up! Law Professor Analyzes Baseball’s Designated Hitter Rule

Photo Submitted

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. – Just in time for the World Series, a University of Arkansas law professor weighs in on a classic American debate: Should baseball get rid of the designated hitter rule? In “Baseball’s Moral Hazard: Law, Economics, and the Designated Hitter Rule,” published this month in the Boston University Law Review, University of Arkansas law professor Dustin Buehler and University of Washington professor Steve Calandrillo apply a law-and-economics approach to one of baseball’s greatest controversies.

The designated hitter rule allows teams to designate a player to hit for the pitcher. It is used in the American League but not the National League. Comparing statistics, the rule increases the number of hit batsmen the American League experiences on average between 44 and 50 more hit batsmen per season than the National League.

Buehler and Calandrillo analyze whether this increase in hit batsmen is evidence of “moral hazard,” an economic theory that recognizes that a person insured against risk is more likely to engage in dangerous behavior.

“Many players insist that the designated hitter rule has turned American League pitchers into ‘head-hunters,’” said Buehler. “Because pitchers do not bat, they allegedly are not deterred by the full cost of making risky, inside pitches – namely, retribution during their next at bat. In other words, these pitchers can hit batters without suffering the consequences.”

The authors review earlier empirical research by John Charles Bradbury and Doug Drinen that found that moral hazard explains about half the difference in the number of hit batsmen between the leagues. The remaining difference likely reflects the fact that there are simply more batters worth hitting in an American League lineup. A designated hitter is usually a good hitter, while pitchers are usually weaker hitters. In the National League, hitting the pitcher when he is at bat puts the weakest hitter on base, sacrificing a likely out. In contrast, hitting an American League designated hitter prevents a slugger from getting an extra-base hit.

Interestingly, in recent years the number of hit batsmen has dramatically increased in both leagues, and the disparity in hit batsmen between the leagues has narrowed. Buehler and Calandrillo conclude that this is a result of both leagues’ adoption of the “double-warning rule” in 1994. Under that rule, the umpire warns both teams if he believes a pitcher has hit a batter intentionally. If another retaliatory hit occurs by either team, the offending pitcher and his manager are immediately ejected from the game.

“The double-warning rule ironically creates a powerful moral hazard effect that overshadows the effect of the designated hitter rule,” Buehler said. “Pitchers in both leagues now know they have ‘one free hit’ before both sides are warned.”

The article analyzes other costs and benefits of the designated hitter rule, including increased offense and attendance, prolonged careers, alteration of managerial strategy and the risk of injury. Buehler and Calandrillo conclude the rule’s benefits likely outweigh its costs in the American League, but also caution those who want to adopt the rule in the National League.

“American League fans enjoy different aspects of the game than National League fans,” said Buehler. “Ultimately, as long as fans in each league are satisfied with the game under the existing rules, let’s play ball, enjoy the game and pass the Cracker Jacks.”