Baseball 2021

[easysurfer]

Yes please, all of the above. Biggest issue I have with BB is that the games drag out way too long with pitchers/hitters farting around all the time. The folks saying keep it as it is are whistling past the graveyard IMO, because they're losing the younger audience that doesn't have the patience for it. Manfred has commented on it many times.

And we all know about the bad pitch calls that umpires make, because they're human. Take away the dumbness (e.g. Eric Gregg) and individual ump strike zones.

One way to speed up the game is shorten the amount of pitches. Two balls is a walk. One strike is a strikeout.

I say that in jest. But as you can tell, I'm not a fan of all the silly rules.

IMO, ii comparison Manfred makes Roger Goodell look like a great sports commissioner.

 

[GrayHare]

My sense is there is not enough pain yet (i.e. less income) for worthy changes to actually be implemented. Watch an MLB game dating from before 1970 and you'll be surprised by its fast pace. Batters rarely stepped out of the box, and pitchers rarely stepped off the rubber. Re Service time, the way to eliminate gaming the service time is to remove the service time regulation, or dramatically reduce it. This will have the effect of pay balancing more closely with skills: top young talent will be paid more, probably at the expense of aging stars. Re Luxury tax, the more the big market teams spend on stars, the more likely a full blown salary cap will be wanted by the many small market teams, the threat of which will convince the players to accept a luxury tax. Re Expanded playoffs, slippery slope at work. I don't, but apparently most fans like seeing their team have a shot at the title, even if that title is watered down by the entry of so many teams into short-series playoffs. Other rules. I don't want universal DH because I think the next step will be to have a designated hitter for the catcher as well. A pitch clock is the wrong solution because one is not needed if batters stay in the box, and pitchers on the rubber. Leave fallible human umpires in control of calls because MLB is not a video game.

 

[JoeWras]

My sense is there is not enough pain yet (i.e. less income) for worthy changes to actually be implemented. Watch an MLB game dating from before 1970 and you'll be surprised by its fast pace.

Yes! Absolutely. The game moved. And when it got interesting (men on base), it slowed, but still had action such as pick off plays.

I swear to you that Velcro was the undoing of MLB.

 

[Qs Laptop]

Joe Wras and GTFan--agree, agree.

Anything that will pick up the pace of the game I'm likely going to be for it.

Pitch clock? Absolutely. I too, have seen this in person at AAA game. It's wonderful.

The constantly fiddling with the velcro on the batting gloves absolutely ticks me off. Guys don't even swing and they have to readjust their gloves. Why? What got loosened?

DH? Yes, please. OK, a handful of pitchers might be .200 hitters. I don't care to see full time hitters that bat .200 take at bats, why would I want to watch 80-100 pitchers look foolish hoping for a lucky hit every 20 ABs? Also, the "strategy" of the NL managerial double switch is vastly overrated.

Robot umps? If it speeds up the game, yes. If they set the strike zone a bit larger, yes. A larger strike zone will prompt more batters to swing at borderline pitches, the result being more balls in play or maybe more strikeouts. The latest trend in baseball is for batters to sit and wait for a pitch they can unleash their uppercut swing attempting to hit a home run. Meanwhile pitchers are taught to nibble the edges and rely on catchers framing the pitch and fooling the umpire into calling a ball a strike. The result is a lot of walks and a reduced number of balls put into play. Increases the number of pitched balls, which increases the number of pitching changes, which slows down the pace of play.

The larger size bases? Yes. They should increase the frequency of stolen base attempts, which is one of the most exciting plays in baseball.

Reduce the defensive shifts by requiring two infielders on either side of second base, with one foot on infield dirt? Yes. This should increase the number of batted balls, which leads to more excitement for fans. I'd rather see batters adjust by trying to "hit 'em where's they ain't", but that's a minor league level instructional thing that will take years to achieve. Not being able to shift defensive players, coupled with the pitch clock, should speed up the game and it's tough to move players back and forth in 15 seconds.

 

[GrayHare]

Let's face it, home runs are actually kind of dull, the ball sails out, and one or more runners casually stroll around the bases. To make the game more interesting for younger fans, increase the amount of on-field action. This can be accomplished by substantially increasing the height of outfield fences. HRs will be reduced, but doubles and triples will increase as fielders scurry to corral balls bouncing off the wall. The result will be players on both teams running at full speed, more exciting close plays at 2nd and 3rd, and still plenty of runs scoring.

 

[MuirWannabe]

I’m assuming many of these posts are in jest. Sure hope so. Otherwise, thank goodness y’all aren’t in charge of baseball. If they are in jest, well done!

 

[GrayHare]

MuirWannabe, you may be surprised to find some form of all of the changes described in recent posts are being considered by MLB, and many/most have already been tested in a limited fashion, such as in the low minor leagues. Considertation, of course, does not mean they will be implemented. I suspect many of the ideas are simply trial balloons.

 

[MuirWannabe]

Baseball has always been traditional with rules changes occurring infrequently compared to other sports. I like that about it. Makes comparisons and legacy more meaningful in my opinion.

Get rid of the home run. Sure. Why not? It’s so boring. Might as well get rid of that annoying slam dunk in the NBA. And that silly Hail Mary or pick 6 in the NFL. Change is good.

 

[RunningBum]

New Hall of Famers: Buck O’Neil, Gil Hodges, Minnie Miñoso, Tony Oliva, Jim Kaat and Bud Fowler.
I can only go back to Oliva and Kaat. Sometime around 1967 our family had plans to move to Minneapolis (never happened) so we started following the Twins.

Oliva was one of my favorite players, a real 5 tool player. Knee injuries cut his career short and I didn't figure he'd make it in with less than 2000 hits. The .304 career average looks a little low for HOF but some of those years were pitcher dominated. I already had his baseball cards from 67-73, and bought the later cards a couple years ago, but passed on trying to get the oldest ones. Too bad, that would've been a good move, now I'm sure they'll jump in price.

Kaat, I just wasn't ever that excited about. A little odd because he had won 25 games in 1966. Only 2 other 20 win seasons. 283 career wins is pretty solid, though.

 

[JoeWras]

Baseball has always been traditional with rules changes occurring infrequently compared to other sports. I like that about it. Makes comparisons and legacy more meaningful in my opinion.

Get rid of the home run. Sure. Why not? It’s so boring. Might as well get rid of that annoying slam dunk in the NBA. And that silly Hail Mary or pick 6 in the NFL. Change is good.

Ha ha ha! This makes me LOL. I don't think our good friend GrayHare was looking to eliminate homers, just make make them a bit more difficult with a raised wall which will keep the ball in play. Although... They could put up see-through nets. Hmmm.

Now, that's not going to happen because it would require reconfiguring ballparks which would likely result in less seats.

Home runs are fun. The problem is strikeouts and walks are way up too. There is less ball-in-play action. So the fans get a dopamine hit occasionally, instead of a good steady buzz.

There are a lot of reasons for this, and it is complex. I don't know the solution, I just know the game has overall gotten less interesting.

The last really big change baseball made was 1968 with the lowering of the pitching mound. This was huge. What's next? Skinny bats? Even a deader ball? Who knows?

Here's an interesting article on homers and strike outs and the ongoing trend:
https://www.baseballamerica.com/sto...ow-averages-are-trending-throughout-baseball/

And a graph from the article explaining that the lower leagues are emulating the swing for the fences trend.

 

[GrayHare]

JoeWras, exactly. The whittling of the game down to Three True Outcomes is hurting it, IMO. Fenway has had a high outfield wall for ages, but you are right about such walls cutting down on room for spectators. OTOH, if most revenue now comes from TV, attendance is no longer as important. Frankly, instead of the now-too-common game with 0 triples and 6 HRs, I'd rather watch one with the on-field action provided by 4 triples and 2 HRs.

 

[ExFlyBoy5]

I think the rule changes mentioned are terrible. IMO, the commissioner tries to make baseball into football. Baseball was meant to be played without clocks.

I personally don't mind a long, drawn out strike.

They are already clocking many portions of play, so this would be an extension of that. But yet ANOTHER team to the playoffs? No. The NBA seems as though the teams play 10 regular season games and then 117 playoff games...so, no.

 

[aja8888]

I suspect any "time" removed from the GAME will be allotted to an increase in commercials. Especially now that a commercial can take 2/3 of the watching screen while the live game is in play.

 

[GTFan]

Baseball has always been traditional with rules changes occurring infrequently compared to other sports. I like that about it. Makes comparisons and legacy more meaningful in my opinion.

We're already way past meaningful comparisons with Barry Bonds and '98, among other things.

The problem with strict traditionalists is that there's fewer and fewer of you alive watching BB every year, because your potential replacements aren't.

 

[MuirWannabe]

We're already way past meaningful comparisons with Barry Bonds and '98, among other things.

The problem with strict traditionalists is that there's fewer and fewer of you alive watching BB every year, because your potential replacements aren't.

You may be right, but I hope to be around a while longer. There are still younger folks around who appreciate baseball as it is. Changing yourself to bring in people who don’t currently like your product can be dangerous. You lose yourself, your current supporters, and still may not grab any new ones. I hope baseball proceeds with caution. Some of these ideas are nuts imo.

 

[Qs Laptop]

We're already way past meaningful comparisons with Barry Bonds and '98, among other things.

The problem with strict traditionalists is that there's fewer and fewer of you alive watching BB every year, because your potential replacements aren't.

You may be right, but I hope to be around a while longer. There are still younger folks around who appreciate baseball as it is. Changing yourself to bring in people who don’t currently like your product can be dangerous. You lose yourself, your current supporters, and still may not grab any new ones. I hope baseball proceeds with caution. Some of these ideas are nuts imo.

I'm a diehard baseball fan, or maybe more accurately, I WAS a diehard baseball fan. I don't have time to watch a four hour game consisting mostly of strikeouts and walks, with eight pitching changes. The only games I watched to completion last year were the games I personally attended and the playoff games I watched and all World Series games.

Again, just about any rule change that speeds up the game, results in more balls put into play and injects excitement I'm likely going to support.

The sport is dying. Young people are not becoming fans because the games drag on and on and on and on...

 

[GrayHare]

Another possible rule change is the so-called 5-4-3 rule. The 4-3 numbers are the familiar pitches to a walk or strikeout. The 5 represents the number of fouls hit during an at bat that results in that batter being called out. It would put an end those interminable at bats during which a batter fouls off pitch after pitch until he gets one he likes. IMO such a foul count needs to be lower than 5 to make much difference in game duration. I suspect instead the Velcro rule (declining to permit delays from batting glove adjustment) would save more time.

 

[Qs Laptop]

Another possible rule change is the so-called 5-4-3 rule. The 4-3 numbers are the familiar pitches to a walk or strikeout. The 5 represents the number of fouls hit during an at bat that results in that batter being called out. It would put an end those interminable at bats during which a batter fouls off pitch after pitch until he gets one he likes. IMO such a foul count needs to be lower than 5 to make much difference in game duration. I suspect instead the Velcro rule (declining to permit delays from batting glove adjustment) would save more time.

I would oppose this because many times skilled batters deliberately foul off pitches, especially with a two-strike count. This is a skill that they practice because they don't dare let a borderline pitch go by with two strikes for fear it will be called strike three, nor do they want to take a healthy hack at it because they know they can't put it in play.

 

[easysurfer]

Another possible rule change is the so-called 5-4-3 rule. The 4-3 numbers are the familiar pitches to a walk or strikeout. The 5 represents the number of fouls hit during an at bat that results in that batter being called out. It would put an end those interminable at bats during which a batter fouls off pitch after pitch until he gets one he likes. IMO such a foul count needs to be lower than 5 to make much difference in game duration. I suspect instead the Velcro rule (declining to permit delays from batting glove adjustment) would save more time.

I would oppose this because many times skilled batters deliberately foul off pitches, especially with a two-strike count. This is a skill that they practice because they don't dare let a borderline pitch go by with two strikes for fear it will be called strike three, nor do they want to take a healthy hack at it because they know they can't put it in play.

What in boring and not necessary to one fan of the game may be considered part of the fun.

For me , I like the strategy of pitcher hitting. The substitution skills of the manager matter as do if you have a good hitting pitcher as a weapon. The DH takes the strategy out of the game.

I also like the extra innings of none of the runner on 2nd base nonsense. Like when teams earned the right to be on 2nd base instead of just having that given.

The foul balls mentioned is another example of "please commissioner, stop tampering with the purity or the game".

While we're on the topic or rules, the new catcher blocking the plate rule, I don't recall ever seeing it enforced. Seems often times catcher still block, but can't say when I saw runners ruled safe because of this rule. On the other hand, now as for runners sliding at 2nd base, the slightest infraction and runners are called for interference.

 

[JoeWras]

Another possible rule change is the so-called 5-4-3 rule. The 4-3 numbers are the familiar pitches to a walk or strikeout. The 5 represents the number of fouls hit during an at bat that results in that batter being called out.

Reminds me of a slow pitch softball league I played in. It would be a 1-3-2 league by your nomenclature.

3 balls is a walk.

2 strikes is an out. If you have 1 strike (obtained either by a call or foul), you get one foul ball. After that, any foul or strike puts you out.

 

[Qs Laptop]

What in boring and not necessary to one fan of the game may be considered part of the fun.

For me , I like the strategy of pitcher hitting. The substitution skills of the manager matter as do if you have a good hitting pitcher as a weapon. The DH takes the strategy out of the game.

There is no strategy when a pitcher hits. He's either trying like crazy to make an out via sacrifice bunt or else he's making a fool out of himself swinging and missing.

There are perhaps four or five pitchers that could be considered hitters, and they have lifetime batting averages around .200 or lower.

Zach Greinke has a .225 BA and a .598 OPS
Jacob deGrom has a .204 BA and a .488 OPS
Madison Bumgarner has a .172 BA and a .534 OPS
Clayton Kershaw has a .162 BA and a .390 OPS

Of course there is Shohei Ohtani, who, when he's not pitching he plays in the field (or DH's.) He's a freak, though.

A position player with the hitting stats of Zach Greinke is probably a backup utility infielder. Is that someone a baseball fan wants to see hitting?

Another thing about the no-DH league--they have more pitching changes because when there is a scoring chance in the 4th inning or later the manager will almost always pinch hit for the pitcher. Pitching changes = slowing of the pace of play.

 

[easysurfer]

There is no strategy when a pitcher hits. ...

I think you've missed my point. The strategy is before the pitcher hits. The chess match as to which manager can better use the pitcher's position. Like some managers hit the pitcher in the 8 spot while others in the 9 spot

Or with a hitting pitcher, when is the right time to pinch hit, or leave someone in the game who is still dealing?

Those type of strategies are lost with DH.

Even when a pitcher does it, some are better bunters than others. Strategy.

I think DH or no DH is pretty much a mute point as looks like baseball is heading towards universal DH.

My frustrating with many of the baseball rules is the rules make so managers can't manage. For example, that a relief pitcher must face 3 batters rule.

 

[Philliefan33]

There is no strategy when a pitcher hits. He's either trying like crazy to make an out via sacrifice bunt or else he's making a fool out of himself swinging and missing.

There are perhaps four or five pitchers that could be considered hitters, and they have lifetime batting averages around .200 or lower.

Zach Greinke has a .225 BA and a .598 OPS
Jacob deGrom has a .204 BA and a .488 OPS
Madison Bumgarner has a .172 BA and a .534 OPS
Clayton Kershaw has a .162 BA and a .390 OPS

Of course there is Shohei Ohtani, who, when he's not pitching he plays in the field (or DH's.) He's a freak, though.

A position player with the hitting stats of Zach Greinke is probably a backup utility infielder. Is that someone a baseball fan wants to see hitting?

Another thing about the no-DH league--they have more pitching changes because when there is a scoring chance in the 4th inning or later the manager will almost always pinch hit for the pitcher. Pitching changes = slowing of the pace of play.

Pinch hitting for the pitcher does not slow the game down. The next pitcher will already be warming up in the bullpen. It’s no different than pinch hitting for a position player.

 

[Qs Laptop]

Pinch hitting for the pitcher does not slow the game down. The next pitcher will already be warming up in the bullpen. It’s no different than pinch hitting for a position player.

Yes, you are correct.