What if you were Monarch of Baseball?

[BillScottCanRake]

I have a few suggestions, most of which will likely cause some eye rolling or chuckling.  Outside of the changes to how minor leaguers are treated and paid, and maybe the free food thingie, I think the others would be strictly "trying before buying", because they probably sound better to me on paper than they will actually work in the real world.

 

Scheduling changes

• 144 game season
• At least 1 off day per week
• At least 1 week per month with 2 off days
• Limit Day Games after Night Games to once per month

Comments:  I would like to see fewer games played by generally healthier and more rested players.  I would also like to see fewer load management days from the teams best players.  I believe 144 games is enough for the season to be test of endurance, but I am hopeful better player can play more games with more built it off days.

I know some people won't like that because it messes with counting stats, but if a shorter season improves the quality of the on field product, I am for it.

 

Financial Changes

• NBA model of salary cap with allows players to get more money from their current team than other teams in free agency
• Revenue sharing to facilitate the above
• Standardized player performance bonuses paid from an MLB pool instead of per team
• Players on 40-man roster paid at least ML minimum salary, even those not on the ML roster
• Mandatory team-provided:
  • Housing for all minor league players.
    • Housing must meet some universal minimum standards (i.e. x number of square feet per player, 1 bathroom per x players, etc.  No squeezing 5 guys into an 800 square feet apartment with one bathroom)
  • Food stipends so players can have three healthy meals per day

Comments:  These changes all are designed to help ensure each teams front office is most responsible for building a team and having games decided on the field and remove market size from the equation to at least some degree.  Having a "Bird Rule" will plus the other changes may allow teams to retain more of their stars at lower risk than they can now.

I'd also like to see way more be done to help Minor League players be the best they can be.  The rate at which players succeed or fail won't change, but I think giving the wages and working conditions which allow them to succeed and fail on merit instead of survival of the fittest is good for the game.

 

On Field Changes

• Rescind the 3 batter rule for pitchers
• Unlimited shifting
• Pitch/Play Clock

Comments:  I would like to see teams have more freedom to play the game as they like.  If teams want to play 5 infielders, or have 6 players to the right of second base, go for it.  I would rather see players and teams adapt to trends within the rules than change the rules because teams and players are stubborn and not wanting to adapt.

 

Roster Changes

• Cap number of pitchers on the MLB roster to 10
  • Any pitcher who has been added to the MLB roster must remain on the roster for at least 10 days
    • Injured pitchers can be removed from the MLB roster at any time but can't return for 30 days
  • Pitchers removed from the MLB roster after serving 10+ days cannot return to the MLB roster for 20 days
    • No exceptions for replacing injured players
  • Any player who averaged 3 PA per 9 innings pitched the previous season with a minimum of 50 innings pitched won't count against the 10-pitcher limit
• DH is available to every team in every game

Comments:  Even though I am in favor of teams having more flexibility in adopting their own style of play, I do believe the growth of pitching staffs and their corresponding specialization has lead to a less pleasing game. 

As such, I'd like to see the number of pitchers a team can carry reduced.  Pitchers will have to adapt so they can pitcher deeper into games, and managers will have to manage their staffs differently.  Fewer pitching changes hopefully will result in more action and fewer in-inning breaks.  If a manager wants to use a lefty-specialist for one hitter only, that's perfectly acceptable, but they'll have to do so with a limited number of pitchers available to them.

As a concession, if teams are willing to sacrifice some offense and have their pitchers hit sufficiently often, they can "gain" extra pitchers by having them hit instead of using a DH.  This goes back to encouraging teams to find ways to play the game differently within the rules.

 

In Game Experience

• 50% off all non-alcoholic concessions after the 7th inning; 75% off all non-alcoholic concessions in extra innings.  Free food for all for any game that goes 15 innings.

Comments:  Yes, I am hungry.

Side note:  I tried to post this last night and had some technical issue.  To my surprise the draft of my post was retained.  I love that feature of the site!

[Joseph Zarr]

On 4/13/2022 at 5:31 PM, SomewhereInTime said:

Definitely a warning moat instead of warning track

Oh man, this one got coffee on my keyboard. Well played.

[SomewhereInTime]

Just now, Julio Muchacho said:

Oh man, this one got coffee on my keyboard. Well played.

 

[Joseph Zarr]

2 minutes ago, SomewhereInTime said:

 

I absolutely remember that commercial. Back when commercials could make you laugh.

It also brought me into random Monty Python as, in my mind, the Warning Track would now be a castle wall. The bullpen gents running through the portcullis. A true 'Renaissance', as it were.?

[Joseph Zarr]

Just to offer this to the pitch clock advocates:

I recommend listening to Manager Rick Sweet (Nashville Sounds affiliate), who is an awesome interview and just an awesome baseball man in general, to get a listen-in on a career baseball guy discussing the pitch clock. I want to echo his sentiments: I don't like it. And, Rick really doesn't like it.

(go to the 4:19 mark for the direct discussion): Link to Discussion Here

I tend to stand on the other side of the fence, actually, when it comes to changing the game and perhaps that's because I'm a Luddite or just a hillbilly ?. I enjoy the chess-component. I enjoy giving the pitchers and batters a chance to get their minds right and their feel right. I, for one, want them to feel comfortable before they attempt to perform the toughest aspect in all of professional sports. 

Just my two cents. And, I realize in a fast-paced and further automated world, this is a very Low-A opinion. I'm OK with that.

[Brock Beauchamp]

8 minutes ago, Julio Muchacho said:

Just to offer this to the pitch clock advocates:

I recommend listening to Manager Rick Sweet (Nashville Sounds affiliate), who is an awesome interview and just an awesome baseball man in general, to get a listen-in on a career baseball guy discussing the pitch clock. I want to echo his sentiments: I don't like it. And, Rick really doesn't like it.

(go to the 4:19 mark for the direct discussion): Link to Discussion Here

I tend to stand on the other side of the fence, actually, when it comes to changing the game and perhaps that's because I'm a Luddite or just a hillbilly ?. I enjoy the chess-component. I enjoy giving the pitchers and batters a chance to get their minds right and their feel right. I, for one, want them to feel comfortable before they attempt to perform the toughest aspect in all of professional sports. 

Just my two cents. And, I realize in a fast-paced and further automated world, this is a very Low-A opinion. I'm OK with that.

The thing is, that "chess component" is relatively new to the game and has only existed for the past 20 or so years. And frankly, it doesn't serve a legitimate purpose while making the baseball experience worse for spectators on top of resulting in increased pitch velocity, which also needs to be curtailed for the good of the sport.

I wasn't as vigorously in favor of the pitch clock until the pandemic started and there was no baseball. I ended up going back and watching a bunch of older games to kill the time and that brand of baseball was so much more entertaining than the product today. And a big reason for it was because a pitch was thrown, the batter stayed in the box, and the pitcher was back into the windup within 15 seconds. Nobody dozed off between pitches because the game was moving so slowly.

[Thurston Fluff]

Thinking way out of the box I would make the game more an audio vs visual oriented entertainment source. I always thought baseball was better as a radio sport than a tv one. I'd also get rid of blackout rules so people could actually follow the game no matter where they are. Right now I can listen to a radio station on an app but not the games. That's just stupid IMHO. Not being tied down to a tv would mean broader audiences. Not to mention longer games would be more a feature than a bug.

I'd also look at changing the way broadcasts are done. Instead of the traditional play by play/analyst roles I'd have a little more fun with it. Do a little comedy, have a broadcaster who can do comedic impersonation or play characters to spice up the down time part of the game. Maybe do some contests where the caller predicts what's going to happen for an at bat and have prizes for the correct outcome or add call ins where the announcers talk to a fan during the broadcast like sports talk radio does. More sound drops and some fun graphics for those watching online or the phone.

Basically I'd change the way the game is delivered to the fans.

[Joseph Zarr]

24 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The thing is, that "chess component" is relatively new to the game and has only existed for the past 20 or so years. And frankly, it doesn't serve a legitimate purpose while making the baseball experience worse for spectators on top of resulting in increased pitch velocity, which also needs to be curtailed for the good of the sport.

I wasn't as vigorously in favor of the pitch clock until the pandemic started and there was no baseball. I ended up going back and watching a bunch of older games to kill the time and that brand of baseball was so much more entertaining than the product today. And a big reason for it was because a pitch was thrown, the batter stayed in the box, and the pitcher was back into the windup within 15 seconds. Nobody dozed off between pitches because the game was moving so slowly.

I think, for clarity's sake, it's important to note: he is in favor of the pitch clock they had and have been using. He is simply not into this limitations on step-offs and 14 second mandate. This is what I was speaking to. And, I think it's what you are speaking to?

[BillScottCanRake]

21 minutes ago, Julio Muchacho said:

Just to offer this to the pitch clock advocates:

I recommend listening to Manager Rick Sweet (Nashville Sounds affiliate), who is an awesome interview and just an awesome baseball man in general, to get a listen-in on a career baseball guy discussing the pitch clock. I want to echo his sentiments: I don't like it. And, Rick really doesn't like it.

(go to the 4:19 mark for the direct discussion): Link to Discussion Here

I tend to stand on the other side of the fence, actually, when it comes to changing the game and perhaps that's because I'm a Luddite or just a hillbilly ?. I enjoy the chess-component. I enjoy giving the pitchers and batters a chance to get their minds right and their feel right. I, for one, want them to feel comfortable before they attempt to perform the toughest aspect in all of professional sports. 

Just my two cents. And, I realize in a fast-paced and further automated world, this is a very Low-A opinion. I'm OK with that.

That is a good counter-argument to the pitch clock.

With regard to pitch clocks or a clock in general, I am largely ok with the game being clockless.  I prefer when pitchers pitch fast, but I am not usually too bothered when they don't.  And typically I'm not bothered by throws to bases to keep runners close; that is a valid tactic for trying to prevent runs.  Maybe by the 7th throw over, I will admit getting a bit antsy, but it is still better than standing around.  What I would like to see eliminated is probably the outlier case where you have stretches of minutes+ between pitches, or a 5-pitch at bat that lasts 7 minutes.

So I am not an advocate of a 10 second pitch clock or something which might be quite so extreme.  I'd just like to have a better mechanism for avoiding those outlier cases that maybe don't come up every single game.

[NBBrewFan]

The pitch clock wouldn't be necessary if the umps didn't give batters timeout after every pitch. They have the discretion to say no, play ball, but they ALWAYS give them time.  I actually can't go to games anymore as I can't sit for that length of time with so much inaction.  I watch the game at home and am doing other things at the same time so that I am not bored. 

[wntrtxn21]

1. NFL style revenue sharing.  Salary cap and salary floor. They floor being 80% of the cap.  Teams that exceed the cap or go under the floor are given a loss for every game played from the time they exceeded (or went under) the cap until they returned to compliance.  For draft purposes, each loss during that time would be counted as a win. 

2. 20 second pitch clock. A pitcher must deliver the ball withing 20 seconds of receiving it from the catcher or a BALL is called for the batter (Umpires' disgression for unusual circumstances). Stepping off the rubber does not reset the clock. If a pitcher calls "time" it would count as a visit from the catcher.  Making a pickoff move DOES reset the clock, but the ball has to be thrown to the base. Along with this goes a strictly enforced batter in the box rule. 

3. Automated ball and strike calls. 

4. All 4 infielders must have both feet on the dirt or on the infield grass at the time of the pitch. Teams can still shift to a short fielder, but it must be with an outfielder, thereby leaving an OF area uncovered. Very big RISK/REWARD move. 

5. Points system for determining the standings.  A WIN is worth 2 points. A LOSS is zero.  No game will go more than 10 innings. If the game is still tied after 10 innings, each team is awarded 1 point. 

6. Realign the leagues geographically. With the DH now in both leagues, it just makes sense. 

7. Any  safe/out - fair/foul - catch/no catch - out of the baseline - interferance  can be reviewed (subject to mgr's challenge rules). Review will last no more than 1 minute from the time the ump puts on the head phones. After that, the play stands as called. The ump in New York reviewing the play will be named. 

8. Larger first base bag to help avoid injuries. 

9. All minor league players must be given free housing.

10. At the end of the season, each team must designate 5 players from their 40-man roster for a compensation pool.  Any team losing a FA who signed for more than an AAV of $12M (dollar amount could go up) would be able to select, as compensation, one of the players from the pool of the team who signed the FA. Any player with a multi-year contract must be "protected" and would not be available for the pool. Any player who entered free agency that year CANNOT be put in the pool. The team losing the FA does not have to select a player from the pool. No further compensation would be offered. 

[MadScientist]

1) Full and equal (TV, gate and possibly others if teams find loopholes) revenue sharing.

2) Only the first 3 years of a contract can be guaranteed

3) Hard salary cap

4) Salary minimum - if teams go below, 90% of the unspent money is taken and put into the pool for pre-arby players.

5) No draft lottery (that's not the focus of tanking, so don't bother with it)

6) Qualifying Offer signing penalty
     First signing - no loss of picks
     Second - lose first round  (if already gone, use third signing penalty)
     Third - Also lose second round and following year's first round
     Fourth - Also lose third, following second, and year after's first
     Fifth - Not allowed

7) 30 seconds between the ball in the catcher's hands and the next pitch within an at bat,  10 second batter time out allowance (max 2x per at bat)

8 ) Two infielders on each side of second, all must have at least one foot on the dirt.

[Brock Beauchamp]

8 minutes ago, MadScientist said:

2) Only the first 3 years of a contract can be guaranteed

I see this and similar things being bandied about but the only fair way to do this is to pay players more early in their careers. In trade for this, you have to be prepared to pay 2022 Corbin Burnes $20m. Baseball already has an American recruitment problem and ideas like this make it much worse.

8 minutes ago, MadScientist said:

6) Qualifying Offer signing penalty
     First signing - no loss of picks
     Second - lose first round  (if already gone, use third signing penalty)
     Third - Also lose second round and following year's first round
     Fourth - Also lose third, following second, and year after's first
     Fifth - Not allowed

If you're advocating for revenue equality and a hard cap, why on earth should there be penalties for signing free agents?

[Brock Beauchamp]

3 hours ago, BillScottCanRake said:

I prefer when pitchers pitch fast, but I am not usually too bothered when they don't.

Baseball fans need to remember they're kind of the problem. The baseball audience has an average age about 15 years older than the NBA and they're far far more white (like lily white in comparison to other major sports).

The sport is headed toward decline and I'd argue it's already in decline, we just haven't seen the financials catch up to reality. Baseball can't continue with an audience of old white guys because that's literally the demographic that's most in decline in America.

Baseball needs to be different and the pitch clock is perhaps the most easily-changed step in being different.

[MadScientist]

24 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Baseball fans need to remember they're kind of the problem. The baseball audience has an average age about 15 years older than the NBA and they're far far more white (like lily white in comparison to other major sports).

The sport is headed toward decline and I'd argue it's already in decline, we just haven't seen the financials catch up to reality. Baseball can't continue with an audience of old white guys because that's literally the demographic that's most in decline in America.

Baseball needs to be different and the pitch clock is perhaps the most easily-changed step in being different.

While I understand the time / action factor fr attracting a younger crowd, I think a big issue is that kids aren't able to play baseball like they used to.  While there are leagues from t-ball on up, the problem is that they are leagues.  Parents have to pay for them and invest the time to get kids to practice/games.  When I was in grade school, we could just grab a bat from school (or even bring one) and play during recess.   That's just not something that happens anymore, likely for safety / liability reasons.  Basketball, football and soccer just require a ball.

[bigred]

On 4/13/2022 at 6:31 PM, HarryDoyle said:

Is it weird the title of the thread reminded me immediately of the cowardly lion singing If I Was King Of The Forest?

??

[nate82]

36 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Baseball fans need to remember they're kind of the problem. The baseball audience has an average age about 15 years older than the NBA and they're far far more white (like lily white in comparison to other major sports).

The sport is headed toward decline and I'd argue it's already in decline, we just haven't seen the financials catch up to reality. Baseball can't continue with an audience of old white guys because that's literally the demographic that's most in decline in America.

Baseball needs to be different and the pitch clock is perhaps the most easily-changed step in being different.

Hispanics and white males are the majority of the fan base for MLB.  African Americans have been in decline since the 90's or late 80's in terms of fandom for MLB.  The weirdest part is that MLB had some of the greatest African American athletes in the 90's not named Michael Jordan or Bo Jackson with Griffey, Henderson and Thomas.  After Bo Jackson and Michael Jordan the biggest poster sales were Griffey and Thomas.  Back in the 90's jersey sales were not all that available I don't even think MLB marketed or even sold jersey's in the 90's.  

The popularity in culture especially in African American culture during the 90's and into the 2000's were jersey's along with shoes.  MLB tried to cut into the action with the shoes but by that time Jordan was just dominating everything.  MLB missed out on the jersey sales in the 90's that made the NBA popular.  Also baseball in the 90's by the youth was thought of as a non athletic game.  Though during that time you had some of the most athletic players in Bonds, Griffey and Henderson that the sport had seen in a long time.  

MLB did a poor job in the 90's of promoting their players and by the time the sport turned the corner and started promoting Griffey it was far to late.  Jordan and basketball took over MLB in the 90's and then with the FOX deal for the NFL went through that started to put the nail in the coffin for MLB in terms of ruling in popularity.  MLB has gotten better at promoting their star players but is still far behind the NBA and NFL and is just ahead of the NHL which also has a problem promoting its stars.  

The next biggest problem is the don't stare at home runs crowd and don't celebrate at all unless it is for the team I cheer for otherwise it is against the game of baseball.  These unwritten rules need to be abandoned if the league wants to grow with the youth.  Younger people love Ohtani, Harper, Trout, Tatis and Vlad because they bring an excitement to the game.  They will flip their bat when they hit a home run and celebrate.  The Cardinals way of baseball needs to die and die fast if MLB wants to expand and keep on being a relevant sport.

[Brock Beauchamp]

23 minutes ago, MadScientist said:

While I understand the time / action factor fr attracting a younger crowd, I think a big issue is that kids aren't able to play baseball like they used to.  While there are leagues from t-ball on up, the problem is that they are leagues.  Parents have to pay for them and invest the time to get kids to practice/games.  When I was in grade school, we could just grab a bat from school (or even bring one) and play during recess.   That's just not something that happens anymore, likely for safety / liability reasons.  Basketball, football and soccer just require a ball.

Oh sure, that's an issue. But MLB has been operating the RBI program for literally decades. It's obviously not working and there are larger, much more significant issues in play here... a big one being the ability to go to college for 1-3 years and be paid $20m a year immediately afterward, which is what both the NBA and NFL offer. Plus, the games are *exciting*. Kids play what they want to emulate on television and for the past couple of decades, that isn't baseball.

[BillScottCanRake]

One more rule.  Every time the Cards beat Milwaukee, they lose 5 draft picks.  If they score 10 or more runs against them in a single game, they lose them all for the year.

[mtsportsfan]

On 4/14/2022 at 8:38 PM, Brock Beauchamp said:

Oh, this is a terrible idea. It allows teams to force players to either retire or accept a lesser (often minimum) contract on a whim if they're underperforming.

What happens if you sign a 32 year old player to a four year deal and he just sucks in the second year? Waive him and basically force him to retire or, if he actually wants to continue baseball and can effectively play the sport even in a diminished capacity, he loses a boatload of money.

That's such a boon for teams and such a bad thing for mid-tier players who often only earn "real" professional sports money when/if they reach free agency and sign a large deal. Basically, you're allowing teams to exploit those early highly productive seasons at the minimum while also giving teams an out to not pay those same players after signing a co

First off the guaranteed contracts in baseball stink. If you sign a 4year contract and by year 2 your play has fallen off so badly that the team doesn't want you anymore and you cut him , the team still should pay until he is signed by another team. Why is that so bad?  If the player wants to keep playing , then sign with another team , why should he be paid twice. If the player is done playing then he gets the original contract in its entirety. Tell me why that is so bad?

[DuWayne Steurer]

Ok, let's take a crack at this 

--  154 game schedule

--  get two more teams in here somewhere and go to four, eight team divisions and get back to the balanced schedule.  And a lot less interleague play. 

--  Jerichoholicninja touched on this earlier in the thread, but it was something I'd have thought of as well.  Much harsher penalties for throwing at guys/retaliatory beanballs.  20 - 30 games.  40 - 50 games for intentionally (intent to be decided by commish/panel) throwing at a guy's head.

--   7 - 10 game suspensions for "bench clearing brawls".   It's just embarrassing to see 50 guys come slowly filing out on to the field, standing around pretending to want to fight.  Watching the relievers run in from the bullpen (next to each other!) is actually funny.  Stay in the dugout.  Or get suspended.  

Aside from those things.... I wouldn't do a whole lot.  I don't like a lot of the bigger rule changes that are taking shape in the game now.  Baseball has always been an evolving sport, even while there's people that think it's not.  Baseball can (and should) be a game that changes and evolves, and can continue to do so without big sweeping rule changes.  The problem is we have a commissioner on the throne right now who by all appearances, doesn't appear to actually enjoy baseball.  His solution to minor problems is changing rules to suit and fit triangle shaped pegs into round holes Understandably, some percentage of the players, fans, and anyone involved with the game aren't going to be happy.  

[Jim French Stepstool]

On 4/15/2022 at 6:51 AM, Tbadder said:

 

6. running is the key excitement in nearly every sport, anything that discourages running (BBs, HRs, Ks) must be minimized. The triple is a more thrilling play than the dinger.

 

 

 

On this vein, I would move the mound back (someone said 5 ft; I think that's way too much. Maybe 2-3 ft). That throws a bone to the hitters. To even it out I'd de-juice the ball (you say it has been de-juiced? Fine; de-juice it a little more). Fewer K's, and fewer walks as pitchers can be more aggressive since they don't have to worry about every mistake being hit 455 ft.

I think these moves would result in something closer to the game I grew up loving. I'd also can the stuff Manfred has thrust on us (ghost runner, 3 batter minimum, etc).

This might also have the added effect of eliminating much of the shifting. You'll be a lot more receptive to hitting 'em where they ain't if you're no longer prostrating yourself before the launch-angle god. If 25 or 30 home runs were considered a lot, imo the other aspects of the game gain prominence.