OF Line in MLB Parks? Other crazy rules....

[Sports_Freak]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

I don’t like any rule changes that upset the basic integrity of the game. Not all rules changes do this, but some do.

The Golden At Bat would upset the basic integrity of the game, if a team can just bat any guy out of order any time during the game. I think that’s a bad rule change.

One recent rule change, the pitch timer, actually supports the integrity of the game since it enforces the already-existing time limit between pitches.

Some recent rule changes, such as slightly larger bases and the three-batter-minimum rule, I think affect the integrity of the game some, but not enough to matter so much. Others, such as the elimination of throwing pitches during intentional walks, I think do upset the integrity of the game since, in this example, there are well known instances of batters reaching out and putting pitches intended to be balls into play.

I didn’t and still don’t like the infield shift rule. I think that undermines the integrity of managerial fiat during the game, since the solution to it could have been teams figuring out how to staff their rosters to hit around shifts and keep defenses honest by hitting more the other way. I think that could have and should have been the solution. Instead, Baseball chose to continue to encourage hitters to pull every single at bat because Chicks Dig The Long Ball, and The Long Ball generates beaucoup revenue. The business trumped the integrity in that instance. (Business usually Trumps integrity, doesn’t it?)

Which brings us to this proposed rule. I definitely believe Jayson Stark’s (who else?) hair is on fire about the whole doubles things. Doubles are +15% more prevalent than they were in the 40s through 70s, and about the same rate as in the 80s and into the 90s. So they had already been at an historic high in the past 30 years.

If reduced doubles is a problem at all, the problem is not that hitters suck now and need special help. The problem is that fair territory in the newer ballparks is way smaller than it used to be. That’s also why there are way fewer triples, and why there will never be another .400 hitter. The alters configuration of the parks have led to these changes in outcomes.

But, also, Jayson Stark (again, who else?) is engaging in not a little intellectual dishonesty by pointing out how a 2016 line drive over a 35-year-old Granderson’s head was a double while a similar 2025 line drive was caught by a 23-year-old Angel Martinez, and oh my god, isn’t that awful? As if that should be the object lesson we need to accept to make this change.

Basically, in historic terms, there is no doubles problem, and triples have been shrinking ever since they decided to bring outfield fences closer than 500 feet, so that part is definitely never going to change back to what it was during the dead ball.

If Baseball were to put an actual line in the outfield that restricts where outfielders can play, I think I would be offended to see it.  I believe the bigger problem they have to solve is not where outfielders should and should not position themselves, but how batters can put more balls in play in the first place, instead of striking out so damn much. Fix that, and the doubles “problem” will fix itself.

A couple of opinions; pitch clock...has there been studies done to see if there's been an increase of pitcher injuries? It seems like pushing thru arm fatigue could be bad for the health. And also...the shift. I think the shift rules are bad, they take the easy way out. Teach young hitters to use the whole field when hitting, going the other way is a surefire way to stop teams from using a shift. Its a strategy teams use that makes it harder for hitters. So hitters need to adapt.

[Motor City Sonics]

Just replace players with androids and expert gamers can control them.   Manfred is a joke.   This is the guy that will cost us to lose the 2027 season. 

[Motor City Sonics]

6 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

A couple of opinions; pitch clock...has there been studies done to see if there's been an increase of pitcher injuries? It seems like pushing thru arm fatigue could be bad for the health. And also...the shift. I think the shift rules are bad, they take the easy way out. Teach young hitters to use the whole field when hitting, going the other way is a surefire way to stop teams from using a shift. Its a strategy teams use that makes it harder for hitters. So hitters need to adapt.

The human arm wasn't meant to throw a ball over 95 mph constantly and those arms are breaking down.   I don't know if 20 seconds or 40 seconds between pitches makes more of a difference on that.   Bodies aren't meant to do that.   

But the days of nodding no, stepping off the rubber, then nodding no, stepping off the rubber, then taking the long deep breath before finally settling in for a pitch - those days had to end.  

People will talk about how guys in the past could throw 250 or more innings year after year.   Yeah, because the typical fastball was 84-88 mph back then.   

Edited Thursday at 04:00 PM by Motor City Sonics

[chasfh]

6 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

A couple of opinions; pitch clock...has there been studies done to see if there's been an increase of pitcher injuries? It seems like pushing thru arm fatigue could be bad for the health. And also...the shift. I think the shift rules are bad, they take the easy way out. Teach young hitters to use the whole field when hitting, going the other way is a surefire way to stop teams from using a shift. Its a strategy teams use that makes it harder for hitters. So hitters need to adapt.

Hitters don't have to adapt any more. They have to go for The Big Fly, always.

[Sports_Freak]

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

The extra inning baserunner rule is horrible and nobody can change my mind on that!.  It upsets the integrity of the game more than anything else they have done.  To me, it just completely changes the basic flow of the game. It even wrecks the beautiful statistical balance of the game where every event is accounted for.   I understand the argument about preserving pitching staffs, but I'd rather see a game end in a tie than watch an inning starting with a runner on base.  They should at least try having a couple of real innings before they start the undeserved baserunner thing.  Maybe start that in the 12th or 13th inning. 

As far as the other changes that have been made, I can live with them.  They don't hurt much and some have helped.  In particular, the pitch clock makes it a better game without compromising integrity as it's enforcing rules already in place.  

I wasn't aware that there was a "doubles problem".  What's the problem? Are there too many or too few?  The problem is too many strikeouts, too many home runs and basically not enough balls in play.  If anything, there  there is singles problem  

I couldn't agree more. The ghost extra inning runner is a horrible change. Preserving a pitching staff? Teams already carry 13 pitchers....how many do they need? Its managers overuse thats the problem. All of these BP arms that come in for just one inning is a waste, make managers actually....manage. And how about this idea....have games end after 9 innings in a tie game? That would make season ending tiebreakers much more interesting. It sounds stupid but it's just as bad as having a ghost runner.

[Sports_Freak]

3 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

The human arm wasn't meant to throw a ball over 95 mph constantly and those arms are breaking down.   I don't know if 20 seconds or 40 seconds between pitches makes more of a difference on that.   Bodies aren't meant to do that.   

But the days of nodding no, stepping off the rubber, then nodding no, stepping off the rubber, then taking the long deep breath before finally settling in for a pitch - those days had to end.  

People will talk about how guys in the past could throw 250 or more innings year after year.   Yeah, because the typical fastball was 84-88 mph back then.   

It wasn't just pitchers who took too long to throw a pitch. You also had hitters who had to step outta the box to adjust their equipment after every pitch. Remember Mike Hargrove? They called him the human rain delay. I mean, what kinda person, who knows 40k people are at the game and many more are watching on TV, can't avoid the urge to grab his crotch and adjust the goods? I always thought that was weird.

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

I couldn't agree more. The ghost extra inning runner is a horrible change. Preserving a pitching staff? Teams already carry 13 pitchers....how many do they need? Its managers overuse thats the problem. All of these BP arms that come in for just one inning is a waste, make managers actually....manage. And how about this idea....have games end after 9 innings in a tie game? That would make season ending tiebreakers much more interesting. It sounds stupid but it's just as bad as having a ghost runner.

I think the bigger problem is the clear incentive to maximum velo and spin to obtain swing and miss. Nearly every pitcher chases it understanding that the probability of injury is very high, but they believe the gamble that they can stay healthy long enough to make enough in career earnings to create generational wealth for themselves and their family is worth it. That's why they do it even knowing that they might fail—but in their minds, they believe they can be the exception.

[Sports_Freak]

36 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I think the bigger problem is the clear incentive to maximum velo and spin to obtain swing and miss. Nearly every pitcher chases it understanding that the probability of injury is very high, but they believe the gamble that they can stay healthy long enough to make enough in career earnings to create generational wealth for themselves and their family is worth it. That's why they do it even knowing that they might fail—but in their minds, they believe they can be the exception.

Young guys with arm problems will regret it later in life if they don't last long enough to make the big bucks  I have/had a small rotator cuff tear several months ago and couldn't even lift my arm. The pain and weakness was intense. Its finally starting to heal and I cant even imagine a complete tear. Of course, I'm 65 years old, those kids seem to heal pretty quickly. The pitch clock really makes me wonder if arm fatigue causes more injuries. It seems like max effort may lead to more serious injuries.

[gehringer_2]

5 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

A couple of opinions; pitch clock...has there been studies done to see if there's been an increase of pitcher injuries?

I think the long term epidemiology on this goes the other way in that while the games got longer and longer, pitcher health never improved a whit.  There is something to be said for the overall temporal aspect. Getting your work in and getting off the field and in to a recover state before you spend extended time clock in a depleted state could work the other way.

Edited Thursday at 08:55 PM by gehringer_2

[gehringer_2]

4 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

It wasn't just pitchers who took too long to throw a pitch. You also had hitters who had to step outta the box to adjust their equipment after every pitch. Remember Mike Hargrove? They called him the human rain delay. I mean, what kinda person, who knows 40k people are at the game and many more are watching on TV, can't avoid the urge to grab his crotch and adjust the goods? I always thought that was weird.

It was always the hitters more than the pitchers. There were maybe a handful of pitchers that worked slow, there were hundreds of hitters stepping out after every pitch. The other growing delay problem was that you couldn't use simple signs from catcher to pitcher any more and the incidences of mulitple sign sets and mound trips to adjust signs was also getting out of hand - pitch.com has been a really good thing for game flow.

Edited Thursday at 08:59 PM by gehringer_2

[gehringer_2]

5 hours ago, chasfh said:

Hitters don't have to adapt any more. They have to go for The Big Fly, always.

I think I'm starting to come off this belief a little bit (i.e. that the big swing is a matter of choice). I'm thinking the increase in average velo doesn't leave hitters any choice but to swing hard - you can't get the bat there soon enough any other way.

Edited Thursday at 09:05 PM by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

4 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

I think I'm starting to come off this belief a little bit (i.e. that the big swing is a matter of choice). I'm thinking the increase in average velo doesn't leave hitters any choice but to swing hard - you can't get the bat there soon enough any other way.

I don’t know, maybe? I would think a batter can “meet the ball” almost as effectively on a 95 as on an 85, and Newton says the ball would come off the bat harder which should increase the chances of a hit. I would also think a batter could be more successful connecting with a pitch swinging from his heels if it’s coming in straight at 85 than at 95 since he has marginally more time to size up where the pitch is going to end up.

OTOH, the decision to swing hard on 95 might be a function of, I have no time to figure out where it’s actually going anyway, so I might as well swing hard as I can and hope for the best. So I guess talking it through, I could see it going both ways.