Around Baseball 2023

[Stangstag]

I agree with Grant, this rule is dumb. I also fail to see how this is viewed as some kind of sure bet to shorten games. Road team scores a run, home team returns the favour with a bunt and sac fly to tie it and we are back to square one next inning. I can't wait for the 17 inning 15-15 game which you know is eventually going to happen. I'll admit I did enjoy the rule when I had some total over bets that were DOA that hit thanks to this stupidity.

 

You want shorter games? Stop allowing teams to roster 20+ AAAA relievers throughout the year who can all throw 95+ and average a K an inning on 20 pitches of max effort. Force teams to go the Rich Gossage route and actually pay good relievers to eat up innings or fail to do so and guarantee no long extra inning games or extra inning wins.

 

I admit the weakness to my argument is total lack of data. I honestly have no idea if there were more really long extra inning games in 2019 versus 1979.

 

Have you watched any baseball the past couple years??

[Spanky__99]

I agree with Grant, this rule is dumb. I also fail to see how this is viewed as some kind of sure bet to shorten games. Road team scores a run, home team returns the favour with a bunt and sac fly to tie it and we are back to square one next inning. I can't wait for the 17 inning 15-15 game which you know is eventually going to happen. I'll admit I did enjoy the rule when I had some total over bets that were DOA that hit thanks to this stupidity.

 

You want shorter games? Stop allowing teams to roster 20+ AAAA relievers throughout the year who can all throw 95+ and average a K an inning on 20 pitches of max effort. Force teams to go the Rich Gossage route and actually pay good relievers to eat up innings or fail to do so and guarantee no long extra inning games or extra inning wins.

 

I admit the weakness to my argument is total lack of data. I honestly have no idea if there were more really long extra inning games in 2019 versus 1979.

 

I'll leave this right here...

 

Starting extra innings with a runner on second has had large ramifications to date. In 2019, baseball saw 37 games go 13 innings or longer, with eight over 15 innings. Last year, there were only 11 games that lasted 13 innings or longer, and none over 15. The idea behind reducing marathon games might be that, with pitching staffs built with more and more one-inning pitchers over time, and injuries continuing to stay prevalent, putting pressure on the game to end quicker could be good for arms on every team.

 

Certainly, everyone working at the game appreciates avoiding 20-inning marathons. But those attending the game might disagree, and cite the fact that, with this rule in place, extra-inning runs have scored at over two times the rate they score in the first nine innings. That’s fundamentally different baseball! Their retort might ask baseball teams to build their rosters with more pitchers capable of going longer in emergency situations. — Sarris

 

https://theathletic.com/4191908/2023/02/13/mlb-extra-innings-position-player-rules/

[Dick_Pole]

Great! Now all we need is data from 1979 to compare to 2019. See if there is some non-stupid rule that can be implemented to reduce the length of games.

[Dick_Pole]

Have you watched any baseball the past couple years??

 

Maybe the way I said it was poorly written. What I meant is that it doesn't eliminate the possibility of very long games. Like putting a bandage on a leaky raft. You'll slow down the leak but there are ways of addressing the underlying issue that can be more effective.

 

The problem is there are very long games because of low offense in the late innings. There is low offense in the late innings because teams rotate 20+ relievers with similar skill sets through the club and use them sparingly. For max effort low output pitching, new looks to hitters, limiting scouting report data available to the opponent, etc. Limit the amount of total pitchers a team can use throughout the year (different than the 13 roster limit). That'll force them to find guys who can throw 80-100 innings out of the BP like the good old days instead of four guys covering that same workload throughout the year.

 

Some teams will succeed at this, some teams will fail. The teams that fail will lose extra inning games quickly. When every team runs through a bunch of AAAA relievers with similar skills sets, and every team starts the inning with a runner at second, all you're doing is increasing the odds of scoring runs approximately equally. You want games to end quickly in extra innings? You need variability in run scoring ability. One team needs to be able to score runs while shutting the other team's offense down.

 

Basically instead of using these cheap-ass Tampa Bay Rays methods of slithering through and finding ways to game the system, I want teams to actually develop and pay quality pitching out of the BP. How many of us can name every pitcher the Jays used last year without looking it up? 30 years ago you could have done it, maybe missed a guy who threw 5 innings that year. Barely knowing half the guys on your team like it's some kind of NFL practice squad isn't a good fan experience.

[JaysAllMighty]

New rule changes/ updates:

 

Extra inning runner now permanently implemented. Still not going to be used in the Playoffs

 

 

I approve! Saves the bullpen for better quality games.

[John_Havok]

Maybe the way I said it was poorly written. What I meant is that it doesn't eliminate the possibility of very long games. Like putting a bandage on a leaky raft. You'll slow down the leak but there are ways of addressing the underlying issue that can be more effective.

 

The problem is there are very long games because of low offense in the late innings. There is low offense in the late innings because teams rotate 20+ relievers with similar skill sets through the club and use them sparingly. For max effort low output pitching, new looks to hitters, limiting scouting report data available to the opponent, etc. Limit the amount of total pitchers a team can use throughout the year (different than the 13 roster limit). That'll force them to find guys who can throw 80-100 innings out of the BP like the good old days instead of four guys covering that same workload throughout the year.

 

Some teams will succeed at this, some teams will fail. The teams that fail will lose extra inning games quickly. When every team runs through a bunch of AAAA relievers with similar skills sets, and every team starts the inning with a runner at second, all you're doing is increasing the odds of scoring runs approximately equally. You want games to end quickly in extra innings? You need variability in run scoring ability. One team needs to be able to score runs while shutting the other team's offense down.

 

Basically instead of using these cheap-ass Tampa Bay Rays methods of slithering through and finding ways to game the system, I want teams to actually develop and pay quality pitching out of the BP. How many of us can name every pitcher the Jays used last year without looking it up? 30 years ago you could have done it, maybe missed a guy who threw 5 innings that year. Barely knowing half the guys on your team like it's some kind of NFL practice squad isn't a good fan experience.

 

The three batter rule for relievers started to address that even though it was more intended to keep game flow going instead of having three pitchers come in to face 1 batter each in whatever inning.

[Laika]

Maybe the way I said it was poorly written. What I meant is that it doesn't eliminate the possibility of very long games. Like putting a bandage on a leaky raft. You'll slow down the leak but there are ways of addressing the underlying issue that can be more effective.

 

The problem is there are very long games because of low offense in the late innings. There is low offense in the late innings because teams rotate 20+ relievers with similar skill sets through the club and use them sparingly. For max effort low output pitching, new looks to hitters, limiting scouting report data available to the opponent, etc. Limit the amount of total pitchers a team can use throughout the year (different than the 13 roster limit). That'll force them to find guys who can throw 80-100 innings out of the BP like the good old days instead of four guys covering that same workload throughout the year.

 

Some teams will succeed at this, some teams will fail. The teams that fail will lose extra inning games quickly. When every team runs through a bunch of AAAA relievers with similar skills sets, and every team starts the inning with a runner at second, all you're doing is increasing the odds of scoring runs approximately equally. You want games to end quickly in extra innings? You need variability in run scoring ability. One team needs to be able to score runs while shutting the other team's offense down.

 

Basically instead of using these cheap-ass Tampa Bay Rays methods of slithering through and finding ways to game the system, I want teams to actually develop and pay quality pitching out of the BP. How many of us can name every pitcher the Jays used last year without looking it up? 30 years ago you could have done it, maybe missed a guy who threw 5 innings that year. Barely knowing half the guys on your team like it's some kind of NFL practice squad isn't a good fan experience.

 

Could implement a fantasy baseball style transaction or player limit, but with a soft cap and penalties like luxury tax.

 

Ex:

- you can only use ~25 pitchers in a season. any more and you start to suffer draft pick or international signing room penalties.

- you can only send down a healthy pitcher to call up a new pitcher X amount of times in a season. any more and you start to suffer draft pick or international signing room penalties.

 

you'd need some type of wiggle room or exemption for injury replacements but they could figure that out. like, if you place a P on the 60 day DL and call up a P that called up P is exempt from both calculations. And trade exemptions I guess.

[connorp]

Could implement a fantasy baseball style transaction or player limit, but with a soft cap and penalties like luxury tax.

 

Ex:

- you can only use ~25 pitchers in a season. any more and you start to suffer draft pick or international signing room penalties.

- you can only send down a healthy pitcher to call up a new pitcher X amount of times in a season. any more and you start to suffer draft pick or international signing room penalties.

 

you'd need some type of wiggle room or exemption for injury replacements but they could figure that out. like, if you place a P on the 60 day DL and call up a P that called up P is exempt from both calculations. And trade exemptions I guess.

 

Or, you know, you could just put runners on the bases and tell you people the stfu. You can’t make everyone happy in life

[Laika]

Or, you know, you could just put runners on the bases and tell you people the stfu. You can’t make everyone happy in life

 

I don't care about the extra inning rules. I think they are fine.

 

I just generally agree with Dickhead that the relief pitcher assembly line is pretty boring for the game. There are literally 200 RH relievers who throw 95 with a good slider sitting in AAA or AA, waiting for their chance to spend one week in the big leagues and throw 3 innings. It's boring.

 

If teams were limited in how much they could dip into that well you'd see more guys like Cimber hold permanent jobs. Guys who don't rely on max effort / velo and get it done in different, less stressful ways.

[connorp]

I don't care about the extra inning rules. I think they are fine.

 

I just generally agree with Dickhead that the relief pitcher assembly line is pretty boring for the game. There are literally 200 RH relievers who throw 95 with a good slider sitting in AAA or AA, waiting for their chance to spend one week in the big leagues and throw 3 innings. It's boring.

 

If teams were limited in how much they could dip into that well you'd see more guys like Cimber hold permanent jobs. Guys who don't rely on max effort / velo and get it done in different, less stressful ways.

 

As JH said above, really what matters and what they’re clearly tackling from different angles, is game flow. I don’t think there’s any need to change fundamentally how teams are built

[Laika]

As JH said above, really what matters and what they’re clearly tackling from different angles, is game flow. I don’t think there’s any need to change fundamentally how teams are built

 

Those are separate issues. Both can matter.

[connorp]

Those are separate issues. Both can matter.

 

There’s always two sides to the coin. When there’s a clear opportunity to improve, it’s worth it. What you’re suggesting isn’t really an improvement. People like home runs and they also like guys throwing 99. Expediting the end of 2-1 and 3-2 games isn’t a bad thing. It’s still gripping to watch. Changing out pitchers each inning (calls to BP mid-inning) is bad, and that’s where they started to address things.

[Laika]

Capping the # of pitchers teams can use would also mean:

 

- SP going deeper into games

- "getting to their bullpen" becomes a positive thing again for offenses

 

I think people like balls in play and offense a little bit more than seeing every reliever throw 98.

 

Velo is cool but it's super cool when it's DeGrom or Verlander throwing 100 in the 5th inning. Or an elite closer pumping 102.

 

Nobody really gives a s*** about the middle reliever touching 98.

[Laika]

Anyway, they made fundamental rule changes to the way the sport is played, to begin this year (the base changes, shift banning, the clock) but IMO roster constraints such as I've suggested are perhaps a less-intrusive way to increase offense. I dunno.

 

weird sport

 

when they started tinkering with the rules in hockey too much, I lost a lot of interest.

[connorp]

Anyway, they made fundamental rule changes to the way the sport is played, to begin this year (the base changes, shift banning, the clock) but IMO roster constraints such as I've suggested are perhaps a less-intrusive way to increase offense. I dunno.

 

weird sport

 

when they started tinkering with the rules in hockey too much, I lost a lot of interest.

 

Again, s*** just sailing over your head as usual. The focus right now is clearly shorten the game time. Many objective people outside the scope of lifelong purists would agree this is probably the biggest need to address to keep MLB with NFL and NBA with this new gen.

 

Offense can be a later concern

[Laika]

Again, s*** just sailing over your head as usual. The focus right now is clearly shorten the game time. Many objective people outside the scope of lifelong purists would agree this is probably the biggest need to address to keep MLB with NFL and NBA with this new gen.

 

Offense can be a later concern

 

They didn't make the bases bigger or ban the shift to shorten the games, you f***ing brick.

[connorp]

They didn't make the bases bigger or ban the shift to shorten the games, you f***ing brick.

 

Well, those are clear reasons to improve. Bases and rules mean more action and could be more outs too. Shifts actually take time amigo. We don’t need an NFL 40 second play clock for them to get into position and it also helps it not be so stupid with 4 guys on one side of the infield. And yeah, it helps offense

[Brownie19]

Anyway, they made fundamental rule changes to the way the sport is played, to begin this year (the base changes, shift banning, the clock) but IMO roster constraints such as I've suggested are perhaps a less-intrusive way to increase offense. I dunno.

 

weird sport

 

when they started tinkering with the rules in hockey too much, I lost a lot of interest.

 

I'm curious what rules you though ruined hockey for you? Eliminating the 2 line pass? Tighter rules against head contact (which has reduced body checking)? Restricting the goalies playing the puck? Shootouts to break ties?

 

These days I'm enjoying the NHL now more than ever - but that could be because my kids all play hockey and they've rekindled my enjoyment of the sport.

[Spanky__99]

Either or they just signed a CBA... they can't make any changes till this contract runs out, no? Dude's be bitching about semantics, really.

[Spanky__99]

They didn't make the bases bigger or ban the shift to shorten the games, you f***ing brick.

 

lol

[Laika]

I'm curious what rules you though ruined hockey for you? Eliminating the 2 line pass? Tighter rules against head contact (which has reduced body checking)? Restricting the goalies playing the puck? Shootouts to break ties?

 

These days I'm enjoying the NHL now more than ever - but that could be because my kids all play hockey and they've rekindled my enjoyment of the sport.

 

When they started mandating cheesy calls, like every horizontal stick = hooking and every little one handed chop = slashing.

 

The trapezoid for goalies is lame IMO.

 

And yeah, I liked it when there were huge open ice hits all the time. But I understand the need to change some of that.

 

Fighting was cool.

[BTS]

Video replay for offside was also a mistake. Nobody wants a 5-minute delay and disallowed goal because they were a foot offside on zone entry 30 seconds before the goal was scored.

 

Same thing with video replay on stolen bases.

[Brownie19]

Video replay for offside was also a mistake. Nobody wants a 5-minute delay and disallowed goal because they were a foot offside on zone entry 30 seconds before the goal was scored.

 

Same thing with video replay on stolen bases.

 

Interesting debate as I don't think fans want to see games decided on officiating errors either. But I agree they need to speed up the reviews.

[Brownie19]

When they started mandating cheesy calls, like every horizontal stick = hooking and every little one handed chop = slashing.

 

The trapezoid for goalies is lame IMO.

 

And yeah, I liked it when there were huge open ice hits all the time. But I understand the need to change some of that.

 

Fighting was cool.

 

Interesting. I think all of us have a little cave man in us that enjoys watching people try to kill each other on the ice and some fisticuffs. But I must say I really enjoy how much faster the game is now and how there's so much more skill involved. I think it's great for the game and for youth hockey as every kid wants to develop great hands and moves now.

 

There was a long period there were every time there as a big hit or a dirty play, we'd have to watch 2 enforcers (who more often than not weren't even involved in the play) come out for their 3 minutes of ice time that game to have a scripted fight that solved/changed nothing. I hated that era - especially since the fights themselves got shittier. We don't see fights like back in the day with Probert, Domi and Clark where they'd be pounding each other for 30 seconds - all offense, no defense. It's been mostly wrestling and a bunch of missed punches for a long time. I think there's a realization that this is their job and CTE and concussions are real and nobody wants to drink out of a straw for the rest of their lives.

 

I still enjoy a good tilt between 2 players who've been battling all game - but I also think the game can just do without it. Nothing wrong with 2 players just respecting the effort of one another like in the NFL or NBA and not having to finally get so frustrated they have to stop the game to try and punch each other.

[John_Havok]

The thing with video replay is, they should be prepared for a possible challenge and have the stuff ready and queued up for the ref to look at and make his decision quickly. It's pretty obvious when a very close possible offside occurs, so have the guys in the replay room be prepared.

 

I think there was a rule update for MLB this year on the replays that with the new pitch clock, Managers have to indicate if they want time to have their team replay room look at the play, they have to hold up their hand or something and they only get 15 seconds now to indicate if they want a challenge. The new wording has to do with the pitch clock, because it won't start until that 15 second window for indicating a challenge is over.

 

Umps apparently have also been instructed to be very strict on this, and wont be allowing managers to put up their "wait for 15 seconds" unless its a really close play since the managers could abuse it to get extra time for their pitchers between pitches.

[BTS]

[BTS]

[L54]

And so it begins

[L54]

This is why I wouldn’t pitch at the WBC if I was a pitcher, especially one who has made like 2M in career earnings to date. Not worth the risk

[Terminator]

 

Nestor has a hamstring issue but shouldn't miss too much time. What's their upper minors depth like?

 

I'm just looking at their roster resource page and their lineup leaves a lot to be desired. That rotation 1-5 is nasty, even after the Montas injury. But another injury or two and they could be feeling it.