MLB proposes raising strike zone, automatic intentional walks

[Ennder]

The intentional walk change is a no brainer imo.

 

The strike zone is a good thing as it will force pitchers away from sliders which are only effect when they are really low. Slider is an arm killing pitch and part of why the 1 IP RP is so difficult to deal with.

 

I like the extra inning rule too but not in the 10th inning. Add that starting in say the 12th or 13th and you have a good idea. Those really long extra inning games are just bullpen killers. They wear out a bullpen for a week+ sometimes. It is also a safety issue adding an extra hour+ to the game. I would also personally endorse the game just ending in a tie if it is still tied after 12 innings. You played an extra 1/3 of a game at that point just call it over.

[adambr2]

The intentional walk change is a no brainer imo.

 

The strike zone is a good thing as it will force pitchers away from sliders which are only effect when they are really low. Slider is an arm killing pitch and part of why the 1 IP RP is so difficult to deal with.

 

I like the extra inning rule too but not in the 10th inning. Add that starting in say the 12th or 13th and you have a good idea. Those really long extra inning games are just bullpen killers. They wear out a bullpen for a week+ sometimes. It is also a safety issue adding an extra hour+ to the game. I would also personally endorse the game just ending in a tie if it is still tied after 12 innings. You played an extra 1/3 of a game at that point just call it over.

 

Out of 162 games last yeae, the Brewers played 13 extra inning games. Of those 13, 2 of them went past the 12th. Not one went past the 13th.

 

Is this really that urgent of a problem that requires dramatic changes?

[trwi7]

Is this really that urgent of a problem that requires dramatic changes?

 

It's not urgent but I do like Ennder's idea of having the runner start on 2nd after the 12th. Those 15-18 or more inning games really are bullpen killers. And sure they don't happen very often but when they do, teams are left scrambling to fill in for tired players who can't pitch because they just had 50 pitches yesterday in a 19 inning game. Or they pitched for the 3rd or 4th day in a row because there was no one else left to pitch.

 

The way around that would be 26 or 27 on a roster with only 25 active for the game but they decided not to do that. I'd prefer they just add 1 or 2 more roster spots so you can rest players throughout the season as needed without having to do a call up and then send down and then wait 10 days to recall a player but they don't seem that interested in doing that right now.

[Ennder]

The intentional walk change is a no brainer imo.

 

The strike zone is a good thing as it will force pitchers away from sliders which are only effect when they are really low. Slider is an arm killing pitch and part of why the 1 IP RP is so difficult to deal with.

 

I like the extra inning rule too but not in the 10th inning. Add that starting in say the 12th or 13th and you have a good idea. Those really long extra inning games are just bullpen killers. They wear out a bullpen for a week+ sometimes. It is also a safety issue adding an extra hour+ to the game. I would also personally endorse the game just ending in a tie if it is still tied after 12 innings. You played an extra 1/3 of a game at that point just call it over.

 

Out of 162 games last yeae, the Brewers played 13 extra inning games. Of those 13, 2 of them went past the 12th. Not one went past the 13th.

 

Is this really that urgent of a problem that requires dramatic changes?

 

On the flip side is this such a drastic change that it really modifies the game if it only happens rarely? Really long extra inning games are a huge issue when they do happen, curtailing them and nothing else is not a problem here. If you have a solution that doesn't impact 98% of games but impacts 2% of games that are really large issues then yeah that is a good thing.

[adambr2]

The intentional walk change is a no brainer imo.

 

The strike zone is a good thing as it will force pitchers away from sliders which are only effect when they are really low. Slider is an arm killing pitch and part of why the 1 IP RP is so difficult to deal with.

 

I like the extra inning rule too but not in the 10th inning. Add that starting in say the 12th or 13th and you have a good idea. Those really long extra inning games are just bullpen killers. They wear out a bullpen for a week+ sometimes. It is also a safety issue adding an extra hour+ to the game. I would also personally endorse the game just ending in a tie if it is still tied after 12 innings. You played an extra 1/3 of a game at that point just call it over.

 

Out of 162 games last yeae, the Brewers played 13 extra inning games. Of those 13, 2 of them went past the 12th. Not one went past the 13th.

 

Is this really that urgent of a problem that requires dramatic changes?

 

On the flip side is this such a drastic change that it really modifies the game if it only happens rarely? Really long extra inning games are a huge issue when they do happen, curtailing them and nothing else is not a problem here. If you have a solution that doesn't impact 98% of games but impacts 2% of games that are really large issues then yeah that is a good thing.

 

I'm all about the modernization of the game, but for me this is so rare that it's not worth playing late innings differently than the rest of the game. I'd rather just go with the tie after 12 that you had suggested.

 

Do you really want to see a pennant race decided on the last day of the season in the 13th inning on a groundout to 2nd followed by a routine fly to left?

 

There are other ways to speed up the game. The IBB thing is fine, enforce the time limits between pitches, etc. Either way, IMO too much is made of the pace of play problem in basball. Baseball is a unique game and anyone who appreciates it appreciates it for what it is, anyone who doesn't isn't going to suddenly like it with a few minor tweaks.

 

Baseball isn't going to gain or lose any fans by the games getting 3 minutes longer or shorter.

[Ennder]

Do you really want to see a pennant race decided on the last day of the season in the 13th inning on a groundout to 2nd followed by a routine fly to left?

 

I would rather it end that way than because one team ran out of players to use. The game is built for 9 innings, when you get to 14+ innings you aren't really playing the game the way it was meant to be played anyway. Playing an extra 1/3 of a game is enough, after that you are getting into unsafe/poor play.

[adambr2]

Do you really want to see a pennant race decided on the last day of the season in the 13th inning on a groundout to 2nd followed by a routine fly to left?

 

I would rather it end that way than because one team ran out of players to use. The game is built for 9 innings, when you get to 14+ innings you aren't really playing the game the way it was meant to be played anyway. Playing an extra 1/3 of a game is enough, after that you are getting into unsafe/poor play.

 

Well, in September this generally isn't a problem with expanded rosters.

If you run out of players in September in extras I would say that's more on the team for not calling up enough reinforcements.

 

I get your point, I just don't agree with it. I would rather enjoy this as one of the very rare occurrences in baseball and deal with the consequences of that rather than change extra inning rules.

 

I enjoy that strategic part of the game on the very rare times it happens. Do you use a specialist for one AB in a key situation and burn through a pitcher that quickly, or try to eek a couple innings out of him? Do you use tomorrow's starter in the 17th, or see if a position player can pitch a clean inning? Every manager has contingencies for these situations. Heck, some will even stick a pitcher in the outfield for one AB so they can go back to him. And I do think the NL adopting the DH rule would help -- at least you don't have to decide in extras whether to let your relief pitcher bat in a key situation when you're running low on pitchers.

 

Yeah, it's hard on the team when it happens, but it's so rare. Really no different than a 4 or 5 overtime game in basketball which is hard on them.

[JohnBriggs12]

Do you really want to see a pennant race decided on the last day of the season in the 13th inning on a groundout to 2nd followed by a routine fly to left?

 

I would rather it end that way than because one team ran out of players to use. The game is built for 9 innings, when you get to 14+ innings you aren't really playing the game the way it was meant to be played anyway. Playing an extra 1/3 of a game is enough, after that you are getting into unsafe/poor play.

 

Seriously? All that rule would do would be to make managers more likely to burn through their entire bullpen and their bench in 9 innings, which will prolong most games, not shorten them. Instead of being out of players in the 15th or 16th inning, they'll be out of them in the 11th.

 

Using your example, on the last day of the season, teams should never run out of players. Most have 32-33 available. "Unsafe/poor play"? Since when should endurance not be part of a sport? The Falcons defense being fatigued caused them to lose the Super Bowl. That's the nature of sports my friend. Guess what, hitters get tired as games drag on and mediocre pitchers that managers save for extra innings often times can mow down tired batters. That's always been part of the game.

 

Even if this was a problem, though I don't think it is, there's a lot more reasonable ways to address it than to fundamentally change the game. Make the DH universal, and then the manager won't use his entire bench to PH. As an aside, if the NL had the DH, the Brewers would still have Khris Davis in the middle of their order. Or you could go with a 27 man roster, and designate 2 guys as only eligible if the game goes extra innings.

[jerichoholicninja]

If we're putting baserunners on to start extra innings why not let batters hit off of a tee if they strike out like in little league? I know that's a ridiculous leap but to me it's a joke that putting runners on is being considered in MLB in any way.

[bacon06]

Why don't we just scrap baserunners altogether and use ghosties?

[FVBrewerFan]

How would you even score that? Does base runner get a PA? Is it a BB? Fielder's choice? When the runner scores the winning run, does he do so without an ab? Does the losing pitcher get charged an earned run who was magically put on 2b? Yea, I really hate this idea.

[paul253]

To me it's just stupid coming up with these obscure proposals then there are, in my opinion, two changes that can speed up the game five times as much as these proposals.

 

1) A relief pitcher has to face a minimum of two hitters. How many times do we see pitching change after pitching change after pitching change when these managers are trying to play the odds the best. The manager makes a change.....it takes 2-3 minutes for the pitcher to get to the mound.......then he takes another 3-4 minutes warming up.....then he pitches to one batter......then the manager comes out and huddles up and makes another change.....and a new pitcher takes 2-3 getting to the mound......then another 3-4 minutes warming up......then faces his batter......then the manager comes out and on and on. I wouldn't say it's frequent but late in some of these games you have one full inning that'll take 45 minutes to complete.

 

2) The batter has to stay in the batters box between pitches and the pitcher does not have to wait until the hitter is ready before he pitches. None of this take a pitch then step out then look at the third base coach then take a practice swing then fix your socks then fix your batting gloves then take another practice swing. We are taking 20-30 seconds between each pitch with some of these guys.

 

I think just enforcing these two rules could easily shave 15-20 minutes off a game. Unlike the 45 seconds not making a pitching throw intentional walks would save

[Ennder]

Keep in mind I also don't think they should play extra innings in the regular season in any sport. You had a full game to decide things, score it a tie and move on. Regular season is 162 games, a few ties aren't the end of the world. But if we have to do extra innings I want a system in place that makes sure it doesn't damage the teams too much. If the leagues are really about player safety like they keep saying then it seems like a simple change that would help the player safety by not making them play when gassed. (especially in football).

 

I also don't think fundamentally changing the game is a good excuse for not doing something. Things evolve over time. Football wasn't made to be played in pads. Baseball wasn't supposed to have a wall to stop the ball so if you got a grounder past an OF it was usually a home run. The fielders didn't used to use gloves. The entire sport of baseball used to be about the batter vs the fielder with the pitcher being a background piece etc. These games are already completely different than when they were designed. So not wanting to change the game is not a valid argument against anything.

[homer]

You want to speed up the game just limit the number of pitching changes you can make in an inning.

[FVBrewerFan]

Keep in mind I also don't think they should play extra innings in the regular season in any sport. You had a full game to decide things, score it a tie and move on. Regular season is 162 games, a few ties aren't the end of the world. But if we have to do extra innings I want a system in place that makes sure it doesn't damage the teams too much. If the leagues are really about player safety like they keep saying then it seems like a simple change that would help the player safety by not making them play when gassed. (especially in football).

 

I also don't think fundamentally changing the game is a good excuse for not doing something. Things evolve over time. Football wasn't made to be played in pads. Baseball wasn't supposed to have a wall to stop the ball so if you got a grounder past an OF it was usually a home run. The fielders didn't used to use gloves. The entire sport of baseball used to be about the batter vs the fielder with the pitcher being a background piece etc. These games are already completely different than when they were designed. So not wanting to change the game is not a valid argument against anything.

 

It is a valid argument. There are baseball fans (admittedly declining number) who don't want any rule changes. Yea, baseball added gloves 100 years ago. That wasn't a rule change, it was taking advantage of new equipment. Just like today, adding replay is fine (even though I'm against it.) Multiple angles, extreme slo-mo, etc. weren't available in the past, or any video at all for that matter. Change the divisions, playoff structure, etc. Fine. The league has expanded and changes needed to be made. Shorten the season, it wasn't always 162 games.

 

None of those things bother me. But when we start talking about putting a runner at 2nd out of thin air, I strongly object. For all the reasons I mentioned in previous posts. Ending a game in a tie?? If the end result they're looking for is more fan interest, how will fans feel about attending a game for 3 hours, or even watching it on TV and having it end in a tie? Heck there were near riots for ending an All Star game in a tie.

 

I don't like rule changes, but I am open to them if they make sense and don't hurt the integrity of the game. I realize I'm probably all alone, but none of the suggestions I have read in this thread meet those requirements. Other than the home plate ump take more control of trying to speed the game along, that's fine.

 

But dictating how a manger uses the bullpen, creating a BB when no pitches are thrown, using a ghost runner at 2nd, ending games in a tie...these are all concepts I can't get behind.

[jerichoholicninja]

2) The batter has to stay in the batters box between pitches and the pitcher does not have to wait until the hitter is ready before he pitches. None of this take a pitch then step out then look at the third base coach then take a practice swing then fix your socks then fix your batting gloves then take another practice swing. We are taking 20-30 seconds between each pitch with some of these guys.

 

This is already the rule however there is no procedure for umpires to enforce it. I believe all that happens is the player receives a warning letter and eventually a small meaningless fine if it continues. Looking for signs is one thing and should be allowed but all the adjusting and swinging and drawing in the dirt crap is pointless. Take the sign and get back in the box. I like the idea of the pitcher being able to pitch whenever he's ready regardless of whether or not the batter is though.

[logan82]

Honestly sounds like the umpires that are refusing or directed not to enforce the rules already in place are the issue.

[MVP2110]

With all the talk in the last few weeks on this. I really think both sides have some issues. If it is true the players are refusing to work with Manfred on this issue then it's hard to blame him for wanting to act alone. But that is obviously not the ideal way to make change in the sport. But change does need to be made, I have plenty of friends who refuse to watch baseball because it's too "boring". The article just put out by Verducci brings some great stats about how often a ball is put in play on average. I think more than actual game time they need to focus on a way to get more action in the game.

[jerichoholicninja]

I totally agree about putting more action in the game. I've spent my whole life around baseball as a player and coach. I love it more than anything but the last few years it's really hit me how boring the MLB game is to watch in person and live. I was super stoked for Brewer games to be back on TV this week. I watched the first few innings of Sunday's game before I lost interest and if it wasn't that I was watching my 9 month old today I would have turned it off early and done something else too.

[FVBrewerFan]

Couldn't disagree more. Baseball never has been and never will be a non-stop action sport. Yes, NBA is rising in popularity. MMA. MLB can't compete for those looking for that type of action. Shorten the game 15 minutes won't make a bit of difference for action junkies.

 

Baseball is about strategy, numbers, moments. Either people appreciate and love that or they don't.

[danzig6767]

Couldn't disagree more. Baseball never has been and never will be a non-stop action sport. Yes, NBA is rising in popularity. MMA. MLB can't compete for those looking for that type of action. Shorten the game 15 minutes won't make a bit of difference for action junkies.

 

Baseball is about strategy, numbers, moments. Either people appreciate and love that or they don't.

Yea there are some small things baseball can do to lessen some of the dead time, but in the grand scheme of things, shaving off say 7-15 minutes on the average MLB game isn't going to turn a non-baseball fan into a baseball fan.

 

I like all sports from football, baseball, hockey, basketball, and MMA. Each has their own strategy and flow, which i appreciate, but baseball does have a youth problem which i don't think small rules tweaks can address. Getting more kids to play little league baseball could do more for that than how intentional walks are handed out or the number of relief pitchers used per inning.

[danzig6767]

I totally agree about putting more action in the game. I've spent my whole life around baseball as a player and coach. I love it more than anything but the last few years it's really hit me how boring the MLB game is to watch in person and live. I was super stoked for Brewer games to be back on TV this week. I watched the first few innings of Sunday's game before I lost interest and if it wasn't that I was watching my 9 month old today I would have turned it off early and done something else too.

Analytics has done wonders for understanding the game better and for what stats to value more than others.

 

That said, just from a viewing perspective, i think it has hurt the game some. More advanced stats has pushed hitters to walk more and care less about striking out. It's also pushed teams to value strikeout pitchers more, whether as starters or relievers. Stealing bases devalued. While that all makes sound baseball sense, the end result is less at bats with the ball put in play and less action on the bases.

 

There is also the bullpen factor. As quality starting pitching became both so expensive and hard to get, teams smartly over the last 8-10 years or so have put increased importance on building really good and deep bullpens. They convert mediocre or failed starters with a power arm into deadly one inning specialists where they only need a good fastball and a quality second pitch.

 

Just look at the stats of so many of these guys in bullpens today. Tons of relievers with a better WHIP, K/BB ratio, HR ratio, etc than all starters except for the upper tier ones. Lefty specialists. So managers today are much quicker to remove a starter in some trouble and use their bevy of solid to really good relievers.

 

In the past offenses would try to work counts to get starters out of the game and into weaker bullpens. Today it's often worse for an offense to see a non-elite starter exit the game because waiting in that bullpen are multiple low ERA/WHIP/K to BB hard throwing one inning specialists who in most cases will be harder to score off of than the starter leaving the game.

 

This does remove some of the drama for comebacks after say the 6th/7th inning, but it is what it is. Teams prioritizing bullpens more is here to stay. Not enough quality starting pitching to go around, so building deep bullpens can cover for that within reason and especially in the playoffs where a good pen is pretty much essential.

[MVP2110]

I agree shaving 10-15 minutes won't do much in the grand scheme of things. But if they could find more ways to get action where the ball is put in the play. One of Verduccis's stats was last season it took an average of 3 1/2 minutes between balls put in play. And that was even worse in the playoffs. In game 2 of the world series it was something like 5 1/2 minutes. In that game there were more visits to the mound than actual hits (14 visits to 13 hits). Those are things they need to work on. I think the change I'm the biggest fan of is the strike zone. Go back to the way it was with the top of the knee and then actually call the high strike. That should in theory cause more balls to be put in play

[jerichoholicninja]

Length of game is not an issue for me, it's the flow. All the batter idiosyncrasies crap between pitches, the constant mound visits by players and coaches, and the multiple pitching changes in an inning detract from my enjoyment of watching a game. Working the count to get a good pitch to hit is one thing but I think most batters are up there just taking pitches to take pitches. And when they do swing they swing for the fences at pitches that pitchers are throwing at 110% effort which means a total lack of control for a lot of pitchers. To me baseball now is like watching a football game when every play the offense tries a deep pass and the defense does a house blitz. It's entertaining every now and then but for the most part it's a mess where nothing really happens.

[danzig6767]

Length of game is not an issue for me, it's the flow. All the batter idiosyncrasies crap between pitches, the constant mound visits by players and coaches, and the multiple pitching changes in an inning detract from my enjoyment of watching a game.

That's why i DVR pretty much all Brewers games and start watching say a 7PM game about an hour later. That way i can fast forward through most to all commercials, especially late in games with all of the pitching changes. It makes the game so much more enjoyable to watch by not having to sit through the endless and commercials, pitching changes, mound visits, replay challenges, etc. I mostly just watch the game and that's it because i usually catch up right around the 8th-9th innings.

 

When here and there i watch a game live with a friend and and not on the DVR where i have to sit through all of the commercials and various stoppages in play, man it seems so much more tedious and at times find myself reaching for the remote to fast forward, but then remember i can't and i get annoyed.