MLB looking at runner on 2nd in extra innings rule(to be implemented in lower minors)

[burlingtonbandit]

Honestly, I understand where you're coming from, but f*** that too.

 

I absolutely love looking forward every day to the Blue Jays playing, or some other team in the off chance that there's a day off. The fact that baseball is always on is the one best parts of the sport.

 

If it went to 150 or 154 games it wouldn't be so bad. I too love having the option of watching the blue jays every night but most of the games they would take out would fall on Mondays or Thursdays so the revenue lost wouldn't be much. Plus players wouldn't need as many days off and the best benefit of it would be that it increases variance because the season is shorter. More teams would be closer in the standings and the races would be closer.

[TheHurl]

Never-ending baseball games are one of my favourite things in the world. This would make me very sad.

 

You also have to remember that long baseball games are not an issue with "baseball fans"...it's a huge issue in bringing new fans to the game though. Again I fully support this rule change...no issues at all with it.

[TheHurl]

This will never happen, too much potential advertising would be lost

 

Also I don't get manfried's end game here. Why do this? He's talked about trying to up the youth interest in the game but does he really think cutting time here and there will do that? IMO there are other things he can do that don't touch the game's essence that can have more of an effect than what he's doing

 

Yes...polls for new fans to the game are overwhelming that baseball is too long. Will cutting the game work...maybe not but if they let games continue to get longer they would. TV does not make additional revenue in Extra Innings games. It's hugely discounted ad time (don't know about playoffs). And it's nothing but lost revenue in the park (paying staff extra hours, with zero extra returned).

 

The games essence is such ********...especially coming from fans that are calling for a DH. No game has changed more than baseball over time.

 

Japan has ties after 12 innings, including in the playoffs (with the exception of game 8).

 

I honestly think this is about one of the most minor changes and wouldn't hurt anyone's enjoyment of the game, even the most diehard fans.

[Stangstag]

Honestly, I understand where you're coming from, but f*** that too.

 

I absolutely love looking forward every day to the Blue Jays playing, or some other team in the off chance that there's a day off. The fact that baseball is always on is the one best parts of the sport.

 

Oh dude, I agree. I love that fact that baseball is on EVERY day, and its one of the main reasons I fell in love with the sport. I definitely don't want the season to be shortened.

 

Just sayin, the sport will never be as popular as the others because of the daily time commitment. Manfred should understand this. Shortening/quickening games will do nothing to attract new fans.

[John_Havok]

You also have to remember that long baseball games are not an issue with "baseball fans"...it's a huge issue in bringing new fans to the game though. Again I fully support this rule change...no issues at all with it.

 

You and me both Hurl. I love it.

 

Leave the playoffs alone, but in the regular season... no problem at all.

[intentional wok]

Oh dude, I agree. I love that fact that baseball is on EVERY day, and its one of the main reasons I fell in love with the sport. I definitely don't want the season to be shortened.

 

Just sayin, the sport will never be as popular as the others because of the daily time commitment. Manfred should understand this. Shortening/quickening games will do nothing to attract new fans.

 

What are you basing that on though? A more palatable product usually does increase a fanbase. Manfred probably has some decent research to back up his overall campaign of speeding up ball games.

 

But while Manfred is probably right, I also can't get on board with something that changes so many fundamental rules about the game. We're going to be breaking what already works and then, eventually, we'll probably start seeing new proposals to offset some of the stuff some of the new rules broke (something like 'no bunting in extra innings' -- sort of like how blocked and returned PATs only count for two points rather than a TD because of how much easier it is). It may be good marketing but I think it damages baseball, which IMO is nearly a perfect game and the purest of all the four major NA sports + soccer.

[John_Havok]

sort of like how blocked and returned PATs only count for two points rather than a TD because of how much easier it is

 

That's not the reason it's only worth 2 points. Blocking a PAT and returning it the length of the field is only worth 2 points tothe defense because the most points the offense could have scored on that play is .. 2 points.

[intentional wok]

That's not the reason it's only worth 2 points. Blocking a PAT and returning it the length of the field is only worth 2 points tothe defense because the most points the offense could have scored on that play is .. 2 points.

 

I stand corrected.

 

Still, I think the MLB proposed rules changes will just result in more convoluted layers of rules to make up for everything that it messes up.

[TheHurl]

What are you basing that on though? A more palatable product usually does increase a fanbase. Manfred probably has some decent research to back up his overall campaign of speeding up ball games.

 

But while Manfred is probably right, I also can't get on board with something that changes so many fundamental rules about the game. We're going to be breaking what already works and then, eventually, we'll probably start seeing new proposals to offset some of the stuff some of the new rules broke (something like 'no bunting in extra innings' -- sort of like how blocked and returned PATs only count for two points rather than a TD because of how much easier it is). It may be good marketing but I think it damages baseball, which IMO is nearly a perfect game and the purest of all the four major NA sports + soccer.

 

Average viewer age of baseball in the states is 55. That's what is freaking the hell out of MLB. New American's who aren't young have embraced the game...but deep down advertisers don't give a s*** about old people. Plus they need young viewers before us old f***s go and die.

 

What's important about Manfred is that he's not just saying "revenue's up huge...we're good" He's bringing discussions to the table (just today discussing how they have to change their view on gambling).

[TheHurl]

What are you basing that on though? A more palatable product usually does increase a fanbase. Manfred probably has some decent research to back up his overall campaign of speeding up ball games.

 

But while Manfred is probably right, I also can't get on board with something that changes so many fundamental rules about the game. We're going to be breaking what already works and then, eventually, we'll probably start seeing new proposals to offset some of the stuff some of the new rules broke (something like 'no bunting in extra innings' -- sort of like how blocked and returned PATs only count for two points rather than a TD because of how much easier it is). It may be good marketing but I think it damages baseball, which IMO is nearly a perfect game and the purest of all the four major NA sports + soccer.

 

This isn't that convoluted .. it is giving a team a free double to start the inning. There might not be a more exciting play in baseball than a tag out at home...this will surely provide some of those. I really don't see how people think it's going to do anything to the game itself...other than shorten them. The good news is that we live on the east coast...when our extra inning game ends a little earlier than it should, we can watch west coast games.

[TheHurl]

You and me both Hurl. I love it.

 

Leave the playoffs alone, but in the regular season... no problem at all.

 

you and I are obviously not knowledgeable fans.

[Stangstag]

What are you basing that on though? A more palatable product usually does increase a fanbase. Manfred probably has some decent research to back up his overall campaign of speeding up ball games.

 

I want to believe, but I'm quite skeptical. Why didn't Selig ever talk about stuff like this?

 

And anyways, in this case I would say a more "palatable product" would center around decreasing the number of games which in turn would make every game significantly more important.

 

It's quite obvious that the number of games is the issue here.

 

Football games are just as "slow" as baseball games, and they get pretty brutal when there is like 3 minutes remaining in a close game, which ends up being extended to 30 minutes because of all the timeouts. The average length of an NFL game is actually longer than the average length of an MLB game.

[intentional wok]

This isn't that convoluted .. it is giving a team a free double to start the inning. There might not be a more exciting play in baseball than a tag out at home...this will surely provide some of those. I really don't see how people think it's going to do anything to the game itself...other than shorten them. The good news is that we live on the east coast...when our extra inning game ends a little earlier than it should, we can watch west coast games.

 

I'm not saying this rule is convoluted. I'm saying that's where it will get. There will probably be more rules to follow this one to offset starting an inning with a RISP. Something like 'no bunting'.

 

I mean we're looking at a scenario in which making a throwing error on the first batter of an inning will cost you the game.

 

Pretty good chance we start seeing good teams get screwed over too. Doubt we see any 100-game winners when extra innings wins become even more of a coin flip. Meat of the order coming up? You're doomed. Can't even get out of the jam with a double play either. This might even increase IBBs too. Groundballers will be boned. Hope you have some guys in the pen with a 27/9 K-rate. Mound visits and pitcher changes probably go up too since strict matchups will probably be the best way to escape the immediate disadvantage.

Edited February 9, 2017 by intentional wok

[burlingtonbandit]

Don't think the union would like it. Having a guy start on 2nd base would cause BB numbers to go up for relief pitchers making their numbers worse.

[TheHurl]

I'm not saying this rule is convoluted. I'm saying that's where it will get. There will probably be more rules to follow this one to offset starting an inning with a RISP. Something like 'no bunting'.

 

I mean we're looking at a scenario in which making a throwing error on the first batter of an inning will cost you the game.

 

Pretty good chance we start seeing good teams get screwed over too. Doubt we see any 100-game winners when extra innings wins become even more of a coin flip. Meat of the order coming up? You're doomed. Can't even get out of the jam with a double play either. This might even increase IBBs too. Groundballers will be boned. Hope you have some guys in the pen with a 27/9 K-rate. Mound visits and pitcher changes probably go up too since strict matchups will probably be the best way to escape the immediate disadvantage.

 

This isn't the NFL...both teams are at the same disadvantage. I think people are seriously overthinking this. I'd say that the worst part of this rule will be the announcers talking about the strategies of it. Most teams will be trying for 2 or more runs. and really we are talking about less than 8% of the games most seasons. This isn't game changing for anything really except for the Baseball fan who traditionally can't handle change.

 

Pretty good chance we start seeing good teams get screwed over too. Doubt we see any 100-game winners when extra innings wins become even more of a coin flip.

 

It's not like good teams are dominant in extra innings now. Wasn't the best team like 4 games over .500 in extras and I think the worst was the Jays are 5 games under.

[Stangstag]

This isn't the NFL...both teams are at the same disadvantage. I think people are seriously overthinking this. I'd say that the worst part of this rule will be the announcers talking about the strategies of it. Most teams will be trying for 2 or more runs. and really we are talking about less than 8% of the games most seasons. This isn't game changing for anything really except for the Baseball fan who traditionally can't handle change.

 

Yeah i'll agree with you and say I don't hate this idea, but I do hate some of the other ideas Manfred has expressed (like auto-walks and reliever limits)

[Governator]

I don't see a problem testing anything in the minors. Also makes me wonder what the TV viewership dropoff is in the 16th inning vs 9th. Might be <10℅ still watching though I doubt a Seinfeld rerun would get more viewers after midnight on Fox, just a thought.

[fatcowxlive]

Average viewer age of baseball in the states is 55. That's what is freaking the hell out of MLB. New American's who aren't young have embraced the game...but deep down advertisers don't give a s*** about old people. Plus they need young viewers before us old f***s go and die.

 

What's important about Manfred is that he's not just saying "revenue's up huge...we're good" He's bringing discussions to the table (just today discussing how they have to change their view on gambling).

 

But the problem is how often do you get 13+ extra inning games? Not really that often. Do you know what a big problem with the MLB is and why a lot of young people aren't playing it? You might think what I'm saying is going to be dumb, but currently there is only one half-decent baseball game on the market and it's exclusive to the PS4; MLB The Show. Video games plays a BIG impact in youth attraction, the FIFA franchise is one of the main reasons why there are more americans and canadian youth are playing soccer, knowing the rules, and watching the MLS, why else do you think the MLS spends so much money advertising the game and holding tournaments and stuff?

 

Cutting time from baseball is great and all but that's all about retaining a viewer for the future, how about trying to get them to watch in the first place? That's just my opinion, I think there are other avenues not being discussed that should be discussed before altering the game

 

You and me both Hurl. I love it.

 

Leave the playoffs alone, but in the regular season... no problem at all.

 

I HATE this thinking. I never understood why people like having certain rules different for the playoffs? If a change is good and isn't effecting the integrity of the game then it should be implemented season and post-season

[Laika]

I HATE this thinking. I never understood why people like having certain rules different for the playoffs? If a change is good and isn't effecting the integrity of the game then it should be implemented season and post-season

 

The playoffs are already a different sport with all the off days. Yay 2.5 man rotations

[fatcowxlive]

The playoffs are already a different sport with all the off days. Yay 2.5 man rotations

 

True but that's not really a rule change, that's just the team prioritizing, I'm willing to bet that if the ALDS was 5 straight days we'd still see starters on 2 days short rest going especially with how much the BP gets used in the post season

 

I just started watching hockey seriously this year and I find it super odd that they go to a shootout in the regular season after OT but in the playoffs they keep going continuously until a goal is scored. This makes it seem regular season games aren't important as playoff games, but we've seen in baseball teams losing out on a spot by 1 or 2 games so regular season games are indeed all important.

 

Maybe I'm just being bitter and not accepting the rule changes, but I just think if there is an idea significant enough to cause a change in the rule books then it should be also enforced in the playoffs. That's like having infield fly for regular season and not the post-season or replays only for post-season and not regular season

[intentional wok]

Oh dude, I agree. I love that fact that baseball is on EVERY day, and its one of the main reasons I fell in love with the sport. I definitely don't want the season to be shortened.

 

Just sayin, the sport will never be as popular as the others because of the daily time commitment. Manfred should understand this. Shortening/quickening games will do nothing to attract new fans.

 

 

I'd support slashing some games off the schedule. I think it would be good for competition if guys got 10 or more off-days per season. Maybe 144-game seasons. That's three more days off per month for recovery. MLB can just work its schedule so that there are very few blank slate days.

[Brownie19]

Softball (fast pitch).

 

That explains why there's a sac bunt almost every time. Where do you play?

[Bobthe4th]

True but that's not really a rule change, that's just the team prioritizing, I'm willing to bet that if the ALDS was 5 straight days we'd still see starters on 2 days short rest going especially with how much the BP gets used in the post season

 

I just started watching hockey seriously this year and I find it super odd that they go to a shootout in the regular season after OT but in the playoffs they keep going continuously until a goal is scored. This makes it seem regular season games aren't important as playoff games, but we've seen in baseball teams losing out on a spot by 1 or 2 games so regular season games are indeed all important.

 

Maybe I'm just being bitter and not accepting the rule changes, but I just think if there is an idea significant enough to cause a change in the rule books then it should be also enforced in the playoffs. That's like having infield fly for regular season and not the post-season or replays only for post-season and not regular season

 

Regular season games aren't as important because, in isolation, one regular season game is virtually irrelevant as you've got 161 chances to offset a defeat. Obviously in the playoffs you've got either 0, 4, or 6 other games depending on which stage you're at.

 

The separate point is that if the change is a good idea, then there shouldn't be any controversy the first time a game is decided by the change. And if that's the case why not use it in all games no matter their importance.

[fatcowxlive]

Regular season games aren't as important because, in isolation, one regular season game is virtually irrelevant as you've got 161 chances to offset a defeat. Obviously in the playoffs you've got either 0, 4, or 6 other games depending on which stage you're at.

 

The separate point is that if the change is a good idea, then there shouldn't be any controversy the first time a game is decided by the change. And if that's the case why not use it in all games no matter their importance.

 

Yeah that was the conclusion i was trying to come to; if the change is good enough to warrant a change then it should be used all the time. If you're going to eliminate it from a game you deem is more "important" then it's not a good rule to begin with.

[Brownie19]

What % of games played extend into or beyond the 12th inning? I can't for the life of me see what the issue with an extra inning or two during a tied game would be....too much excitement and drama?

[Jimcanuck]

Yeah that was the conclusion i was trying to come to; if the change is good enough to warrant a change then it should be used all the time. If you're going to eliminate it from a game you deem is more "important" then it's not a good rule to begin with.

 

It's about the brand and how to max profit. If different rules for reg and playoffs achieve this, that's what we will see.

 

It's also why we will likely never see robo-umps, going that route will turn off many fans.

[Brownie19]

It's about the brand and how to max profit. If different rules for reg and playoffs achieve this, that's what we will see.

 

It's also why we will likely never see robo-umps, going that route will turn off many fans.

 

More than Joe West does?

[Jimcanuck]

More than Joe West does?

 

There's always the exception.

[BTS]

This feels a lot like the shootout in the NHL: nonsensical idea that actual hockey fans hate, but that the league incorporated in an ill-advised attempt to increase their appeal to a broader audience and attract new fans.

 

Nobody is being turned off of baseball because of the odd marathon game.

[Brownie19]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-pick-up-the-pace/

 

Interesting article. Some interesting comments to such as a "millennial" suggesting his generation don't own TV's and thus blackouts for live streaming are killing interest amongst younger fans.