PDA

View Full Version : Post Your Suggested Rule Changes



powrwrap
05-24-2012, 12:04 PM
There's got to be something you would change in the rules of baseball so let's list them. I'll start.

I'd like to see a limit on the number of times a pitcher can throw over to first base to hold a baserunner from stealing. I was at a Twins game last month and the pitcher threw over to first base 9 times during one guy's at-bat. If a pitcher throws over to first base more than five times during the same at-bat he can no longer throw over there again or else the baserunner is automatically awarded 2nd base. Let's say the pitcher has thrown over there 4 times. If he throws over there the 5th time and the runner returns to 1st base safely, the umpire calls time and awards the runner 2nd base. If during the throw over the runner vacates the base the play is live and the runner is in peril of being put out.

I'd also like to see the 25 seconds between pitch rule enforced.

one_eyed_jack
05-24-2012, 12:35 PM
1) Expand instant replay - some kind of system similar to the NFL where the manager gets a set number of challenges per game on safe/out and fair/foul calls while certain calls, like home runs, are subject to automatic review.

2) Outlaw takeout slides and home plate collisions - these are non-baseball plays that create huge injury risks and add nothing to the game.

NorthwestTwinsFan
05-24-2012, 12:36 PM
There are a few things I would change that aren't rules per se, but changes I would like to see nonetheless. The first would be to allow the official scorer to decide who the winning and losing pitchers are for each game. It just doesn't seem right that a starter could pitch 8 scoreless innings, the closer comes in and gives up the lead and if his team scores in the next inning, he gets the win.

Another one is if a fielder madly misplays a ball, it should still be considered an error even if he didn't touch it. The batter shouldn't be awarded a hit if a popup lands in between 3 fielders in front of home plate.

I realize these aren't exactly rule changes and would have no impact on the actual game, they are still things that should be changed.

Boom Boom
05-24-2012, 12:40 PM
Eliminate the rule that using your DH as a defensive replacement forfeits the DH.

Not that I disagree with the rule, I'm just sick of Gardy tossing and turning over it.

J-Dog Dungan
05-24-2012, 12:42 PM
1) It rarely happens that a pitcher throws over to first 9 times, and the occasion that you're talking about led to the Twins scoring several runs.
2) I wouldn't have a problem with them enforcing the 25 seconds between pitches rule either.
3) I wouldn't have a problem with having a LITTLE more instant replay, but if we add too much to the replay rules, it will slow the game down even more.
4) Takeout slides are frowned upon; just yesterday the Twins got a DP called because A.J. did a takeout slide on Dozier even though they only got one out, and home plate collisions are just part of the game.

Twins Fan From Afar
05-24-2012, 12:54 PM
On any team that has a player with the last name "Butera," such team shall only be allowed to have that particular Butera play in a baseball game one (1) time per week.

twinsfanstreif
05-24-2012, 01:09 PM
Trades in the draft, it's so dumb that we are the only sport that can't trade picks. If someone covets certain players or is trying to rebuild then they should be able to do what they can to get what they want. It usually works out for both sides. Say we draft Buxton with our number 2 pick but we still want a college starter that can come in and help, that may not be there at 32 so we trade 32 and 42 to a team who is not impressed with the talent at the top to get another top 15 pick. It works out on both sides.

adjacent
05-24-2012, 01:20 PM
Regarding to the draft, I hate that draft position rewards losing. There should be some trick there. Like, if you don't win 8 (or 7, or 9) games in September, you lose your draft position. Or something of that sort, so teams have something to play for until the end of the season.

J-Dog Dungan
05-24-2012, 01:53 PM
The only rule change that I would like would be that teams could trade draft picks.

Kirby_Waved_At_Me
05-24-2012, 02:24 PM
Award two bases for an intentional walk - I've seen that written a few times in other places, and I like the idea as a way to encourage the players/managers to pitch to guys in key situations.

powrwrap
05-24-2012, 02:26 PM
Award two bases for an intentional walk - I've seen that written a few times in other places, and I like the idea as a way to encourage the players/managers to pitch to guys in key situations.

I'll go a different direction--if a team wants to intentionally walk a batter have the catcher call time and inform the umpire, "we're intentionally walking this guy", ala high school rules. Let's speed up the game.

Craig in MN
05-24-2012, 02:27 PM
I'd add a timeout rule. Managers stay in the dugout unless they call a timeout. If they want to talk to a pitcher or argue a call, they need to call a timeout to go on the field. The only exception is for injuries. If they want to make a pitching change, they walk out to tell the home plate umpire and then go back to the dugout. If the new pitcher takes too long to get to the mound, his team gets charged with a timeout. That should keep things moving quite a bit.

I'd also set a 25 man active roster for September games. A team can carry 40 guys if they want, but they name their 25 active players before each game. It's not often that it becomes a problem, but a team with no limits can make a ton of extra moves that don't make the baseball any better.

This isn't a specific new rule, but I'd give some teeth to keeping batter in the batters box and the pitcher throwing quickly.

Trading draft picks is fine, but the bonus limitations on signing players and crapshoot nature of any signing make it a not very valuable endeavour.

I've always wondered about batters being able to steal first base....if a runner tries to steal second, or there is a wild pitch, etc, the batter can try to steal first.

Kirby_Waved_At_Me
05-24-2012, 03:03 PM
I'll go a different direction--if a team wants to intentionally walk a batter have the catcher call time and inform the umpire, "we're intentionally walking this guy", ala high school rules. Let's speed up the game.

I'm in favor of combining the two. Or, at least, you don't have to throw 4 wide ones if the bases are empty. If there's a guy on, the pitcher should still have to account for the runner that could potentially advance on one of those 4 pitches.

USAFChief
05-24-2012, 03:15 PM
Put a 5th umpire in a booth with access to all television feeds. That's how you implement instant replay. In most cases we at home know whether a call was blown within a few seconds, almost always before play resumes. This umpire follows the game and lets the crew chief know if he's reviewing a call. Calls that are reversed result in umpires best judgement on placing runners, etc, like they currently do with fan interference for example.

More correct calls, little impact on the flow of the game. Managers can still come on the field to argue rules, but cannot argue judgement calls, just like they can't argue balls and strikes.

Thrylos
05-24-2012, 03:23 PM
Rules? Lets see:

- A balk works the same way it works now (i.e. runners on base move up one base) but also as a HBP (i.e. batter goes on first.)
- A home plate umpire who does not get 90% of the ball-strikes called correctly (per Pitch F/X) is suspended for a series the first time, two series the next, half a season the third and forever the last.
- Established a 5th umpire on a booth who can review every out and hit by instant replay an have the ability to over-rule what is called on the field (this will not take any more time it takes now, since there is replay going on anyways. Crew chief wears a headphone and is told on the spot of the over-rulling)
- If a manager gets out of the dugout to argue a call, it counts as a mound visit. If the argument is longer than the mound visit allowd time (30 seconds) the pitcher on the mound has to be replaced. Same with the second visit in an inning. (would be obsolete by instand replay, but...)
- Umpires who touch managers/players/coaches etc are suspended the same way players/managers/coaches who touch umpires are.
- A throw to an occupied base counts the same as a pitch out (i.e. a ball)

IdahoPilgrim
05-24-2012, 04:02 PM
I realize this is a touchy subject, but you asked, so: Standardize whether or not the DH is used. My personal preference is to get rid of it, but I understand the practical difficulty in that, so I'll accept everybody using it - just everybody use the same rules. I know some like the diversity between the leagues and the effect it has on interleague play and world series, but I'm not sold on that.

I'm also ready, especially if my above proposal is rejected, to scrap interleague play - keep it in the leagues, play a balanced or semi-balanced schedule, and only have the leagues meet in the Series.

OK, OK, I'll admit, I'm a traditionalist. I'm not big on the wild card thing either.

powrwrap
05-24-2012, 04:58 PM
Rules? Lets see:

- A balk works the same way it works now (i.e. runners on base move up one base) but also as a HBP (i.e. batter goes on first.)

Why? A balk is almost always an accident. A balk is deceiving the runner. Why should the batter get rewarded?


- A home plate umpire who does not get 90% of the ball-strikes called correctly (per Pitch F/X) is suspended for a series the first time, two series the next, half a season the third and forever the last.

Do you know umpire scores via F/X? I admit I don't, but I'll guess that no one gets less than 90% correct.


- If a manager gets out of the dugout to argue a call, it counts as a mound visit. If the argument is longer than the mound visit allowd time (30 seconds) the pitcher on the mound has to be replaced. Same with the second visit in an inning. (would be obsolete by instand replay, but...)

So managers who argue calls while his team is on offense accumulate mound visits??


- A throw to an occupied base counts the same as a pitch out (i.e. a ball)

That's an interesting twist on my idea, but would lead to gigantic lead-offs and more stolen bases. If that is your intent, OK, but I'd rather see scoring via hitting the ball rather than guys constantly stealing bases. (go watch any 12 or 13 year old ball game.)

powrwrap
05-24-2012, 05:01 PM
I realize this is a touchy subject, but you asked, so: Standardize whether or not the DH is used. My personal preference is to get rid of it


http://i46.tinypic.com/jtw66h.jpg

NorthwestTwinsFan
05-24-2012, 05:39 PM
Standardize whether or not the DH is used. My personal preference is to get rid of it, but I understand the practical difficulty in that, so I'll accept everybody using it - just everybody use the same rules. I know some like the diversity between the leagues and the effect it has on interleague play and world series, but I'm not sold on that.

I like this idea, although I'd go the other way and have both leagues use the DH. Obviously I'm in the minority on this one, but I hate watching pitchers bat. I'll admit, the added strategy of an NL game is interesting, but I'm not paying to see players who are either going to bunt or strike out on 3 pitches every time. I'd rather see guys who are paid to hit in the batter's box.

Riverbrian
05-24-2012, 06:28 PM
1. Trading of draft picks for sure.
2. Minimum and maximum salary cap.
3. Relegation ala soccer. (I know... be careful with that one and near impossible with the current farm systems)

mike wants wins
05-24-2012, 06:36 PM
1. Change the draft. Allow the worst 10 teams to sign any two players they want before any other team. Give them 2 weeks to negotiate any price they want. After that, it is a draft, with slots for salaries. Allow trades of picks and picked players once they are picked.
2. DH for both leagues. It is not more exciting to watch a double switch than allowing legit hitters to hit 5 times a game. There isn't all that much added strategy, because a huge percent of the time, there is only one logical choice.
3. Intentional walks are automatic. While you are at it, runners don't have to run every base on a HR (ok, that ones not totally serious).
4. Every team makes the playoffs. This one is complex, and I'll have to dig it up off Fangraphs.....and is way too controversial to happen.

Bark's Lounge
05-24-2012, 06:37 PM
If it is deemed that a batter was intentionally hit by a pitch (the crew chief gets to make this judgement call). The pitcher will not be ejected, but as punishment the team who had their batter get hit gets to use aluminum bats the rest of the game. This is of course a joke.:)

Ultima Ratio
05-24-2012, 10:59 PM
Only one base on a overthrow

oh oh oh and peg outs!

:)

Ultima Ratio
05-24-2012, 11:10 PM
In all seriousness, I'm not sure how to make a pitch f/x computerize strike zone work, but I'm becoming more receptive to the idea. The reason is because of how poorly umps call the outside corner. Most umps set up on the inside corner and have a great view of that corner, but really guess/estimate on the outside corner. There are way too many balls outside being called strikes, especially against our lefties. Tennis has successfully appropriated technology in support of human line judges to call the lines on a serve. I think you could have a computer call the outside corner in this same way, or this would be like only using the technology to call the service box line deep, but not the center line. I only want the outside corner called by technology to begin with to see how it goes, and I really don't see how to computerize the strike zone high and low since batters are different heights, therefore while the corners are the same for eery hitter, hight and low strike differ and would be more problematic for a computerized system to call. Last, you still need a human ump to call safe and out on the base baths after a ball is in play. Just like the variety in stadiums, I used to really enjoy the human variety of different strike zones... but the more I've seen with the pitch location technology and with my own eye, I think a consistent and accurate strike zone would be just swell.

SpiritofVodkaDave
05-24-2012, 11:15 PM
Award two bases for an intentional walk - I've seen that written a few times in other places, and I like the idea as a way to encourage the players/managers to pitch to guys in key situations.

It wouldn't work, teams would simply "unintentionally" walk a guy on purpose anyways by throwing everything 2 feet above the strike zone.

Snortwood
05-24-2012, 11:42 PM
Trades in the draft, it's so dumb that we are the only sport that can't trade picks.

There were a few incidents where not-as-yet drafted players "held up" the team(s) that were looking to draft them by making specific demands. The rule that disallows MLB teams from trading a draft pick the first year resulted from Pete Incaviglia's refusal to play in Montreal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Incaviglia). But - we've seen similar behavior in other sports, and they seem to survive - Elway forcing his way out of somewhere to get a mile high, Manning Eli escaping San Diego for New York (which is only sane in NFL-World), Kobe finagling a deal to LA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobe_bryant) right out of high school.

Maybe now that baseball's collective bargaining agreement is long-term and relations between the players and the owners, and more importantly among the owners themselves, is stable, maybe this would be the right time for baseball to revisit and perhaps repeal the Incavigilia Rule. I'd be for that, perhaps with the NBA's Musselman Rule attached, that a team cannot be without a first round draft pick two years in a row. By trade, that is - the Musselman Rule offers no protection when you sign an illegal agreement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Smith_(basketball))and it gets discovered in an agent's file and Commissioner Napoleon goes ballistic on you.

USAFChief
05-24-2012, 11:44 PM
Couple things:

1. I think trading MLB draft picks would prove to be a bad idea, with richer teams ending up with an even bigger advantage than they already have. One think I'd like to see eliminated somehow is the "sandwich picks" inserted after a round, which devalue the picks in later rounds, mostly at the expense of teams that had nothing to do with the transaction that resulted in the sandwich pick being awarded. Team A signs team B's free agent, team A gets a sandwich pick, the Twins end up picking one spot later in round two. Why should the Twins second round pick be devalued because another team signed a FA?

2. Technically, there really isn't such a thing as an "intentional base on balls." It's not even defined in the MLB rule book's official list of terms, where a base on balls is defined as four pitches outside the strike zone. It's mentioned in rule four, briefly, but only to confirm that only the catcher can position himself in foul territory, but must start play in his legal position behind the plate. So I don't know how you increase the penalty for something that doesn't exist. As noted above, teams would just have the catcher squat and have the pitcher throw a foot high and outside anyway. I'm not sure why anyone thinks this is a problem, anyway. Intentionally putting a runner on base is enough penalty in and of itself. And absolutely the pitcher should have to throw those four pitches. I've seen wild pitches occur in these situations, most of you have too.

3. I wouldn't mind seeing the balk rule simplified, but I'm not even sure how to do that.

SpiritofVodkaDave
05-25-2012, 09:31 AM
I can't remember the last time MLB had a major "rule" change, which indicates they have the formula correct.

Couple things that I wouldn't mind would be:
-Expanding the major league roster to 26.
-Get rid of pitchers hitting- Now that interleague play will be going on at all points throughout the season (2013+) its time to stop having pitchers hit, I honestly don't see the point. People argue that it adds strategy or whatever to a game, I just think it adds a Drew Butera to the bottom of the lineup for every team. If its game 7 of the world series I don't think we need to see CC Sabathia and Clayton Kershaw taking at bats in the most meaningful game of the year.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
05-25-2012, 10:33 AM
I love the way the game is played, and I don't think many changes need to be made. Although, I do have a few to throw out there. The rules that involve time limits posters have suggested are not in the best interest of the game. I feel that they would make baseball a little too artificial. After all, it is one of the only sports that doesn't have a game clock and that's one of the reasons why it's the greatest sport. With that said, here are a few rule changes I'll offer.
1. Allow rule 4 draft picks outside of round 1 to be traded. The only exception for trading first rounders is if they were acquired by a team through losing a Type A free agent. That pick may only be traded back to its former team (or the team who signed the Type A FA). Supplemental picks can be traded as well. Rule 5 draft picks do not apply as I'd like them to stay similar to waiver claims.
2. Instant replay expansion. Baserunning calls behind home plate only for safe/out. All fair/foul hits under the consent of the corresponding 1st base/3rd base umpire.
3. Stricter umpire regulations. The MLB needs to be harsher when reviewing umpires. The 90% rule mentioned by another poster is a start.
4. Limit pick off attempts to 3 per base runner.

mike wants wins
05-25-2012, 10:50 AM
So, as a runner, once the pitcher has thrown over 3 times, I can get as big a lead as I want, right?

YourHouseIsMyHouse
05-25-2012, 10:51 AM
So, as a runner, once the pitcher has thrown over 3 times, I can get as big a lead as I want, right?

The pitcher can still step off the mound.

gil4
05-25-2012, 12:23 PM
I'll admit, the added strategy of an NL game is interesting, but I'm not paying to see players who are either going to bunt or strike out on 3 pitches every time.

Bill James had some interesting analysis of the "more strategy" claim. While there were more bunts and more pinch-hitters used in the NL, the variation in numbers between the teams was far greater. This is paraphrase of his conclusion, since I don't have the book in front of me: "If there is strategy in the act of bunting or in the act of using a pinch-hitter, then there is more strategy in the NL. If the strategy is in the decision whether or not to bunt or use a pinch-hitter, then there is far more strategy in the AL." His point is that most of the moves in the NL are automatic, leaving very little flexibility for actual strategic decisions.


I'd rather see guys who are paid to hit in the batter's box.

Like Drew Butera? (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

SpiritofVodkaDave
05-25-2012, 03:49 PM
The pitcher can still step off the mound.

And? The runner won't have to be worried about him throwing over at that point. I understand its annoying when a guy throws over a bunch, but it really is pretty rare.
If you are trying to say they need to say they need to do it to speed up the game I could somewhat understand, but in the same post you said they need to expand instant replay which ends up slowing up the game significantly more then the 3 throw over rule.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
05-25-2012, 05:01 PM
And? The runner won't have to be worried about him throwing over at that point. I understand its annoying when a guy throws over a bunch, but it really is pretty rare.
If you are trying to say they need to say they need to do it to speed up the game I could somewhat understand, but in the same post you said they need to expand instant replay which ends up slowing up the game significantly more then the 3 throw over rule.

I'd rather have time going into getting a call right that could change the game than having to watch a pitcher and runner play games with each other. You say that it's really rare which is a pretty invalid point. If it never happens anyway, what is the harm of having that rule? It's just a formality to prevent the 9 time occurrences that DO happen. Seriously, no one likes when it happens. Even fans in attendance start booing after around the 3rd time. Stepping off the mound is completely different than trying to fake out a runner with a windup and a pickoff. It's much less time consuming and the pitcher can still throw over if the runner refuses to budge.

powrwrap
05-26-2012, 11:54 AM
And? The runner won't have to be worried about him throwing over at that point.

Once the pitcher steps off the rubber he is considered an infielder holding onto the ball. He could throw over without being charged with a throw over. Or he could run at the runner and then throw.

boballison
05-26-2012, 02:05 PM
The DH as we have known it for 40 years needs a makeover. An earlier poster referenced Bill James' analysis of baseball purists wanting to keep the "strategies" in the game, but aptly pointing out how it mostly preserves predictable and boring non-strategy. How about reconsidering the DH in terms of adding strategies instead of adding offense as was the case in '73?

Get rid of the "professional DH" by reconsidering the DH as a "designated pinch hitter" for the pitcher's batting slot only, but adding 2 components:

1) Once the DPH hits for the pitcher, he (the DPH) is no longer eligible unless he goes into the game at a position and the new pitcher is slotted into the batting position of the player who is being replaced by the DPH - nothing more than the double switch that purists love.

2) Reserve to the judgement of the manager, whether a DPH is used every time the pitcher's slot comes around.

The result is that the game situation would drive and dictate the strategy of whether to use a player off the bench - thus losing him for the rest of the game unless it is a double switch - so the manager may elect to allow the pitcher to bat with 2-out and the bases empty to preserve his bench's potential for a more critical spot or he could bring in a real hitter with 2-out and the bases juiced in the 6th inning of a 1-1 tie without losing his pitcher. The manager, and by extension, the fans are constantly evaluating each at bat situation for the pitcher - use a hitter and lose him most of the time or stick with the pitcher who could also bunt men over efficiently rather than burning the bench for a low priority situational strategy. Another example would be pitcher leading off in a close game - later innings, but the pitcher is still effective; bring in a DPH who is a swift, OBP type guy to get an inning started BUT keep your pitcher or bring in a big thumper DPH to get someone in scoring position BUT keep the pitcher.

The strategy scenarios would multiply, not decrease - and from a purist standpoint it would not create one-dimensional DH's getting 500 at bats, but more use of benches which would need more multi-dimensional players, while valuing pitchers who had enough skill to bunt rather than watching them strike out.

Just my thoughts

lecroy24fan
05-26-2012, 06:52 PM
I have two rules I'd like to propose:

1) Ban the Wave. It is pathetic , but even worse when it is a 1-0 game that I'm trying to watch and can't see because people are standing up when every pitch happens. Or the person starting the wave is incessantly screaming in my ear.

2) Ban wedding proposals. The first time was pretty good, but it happens at every game now.

Curt
05-28-2012, 09:34 AM
1. Improve umpiring accuracy and consistency (and call "high" strikes)
2. Eliminate instant replay
3. Reduce time between innings
4. Eliminate pre-recorded music played over PA
5. Batter must receive permission from umpire to step out of batters box after non-batted ball
6. Eliminate DH
7. 99 cent hot dogs all the time!

Not necessarily in that order.

Snortwood
05-28-2012, 11:23 AM
-Expanding the major league roster to 26.


How about this - in an effort to shorten the season, so as not to have to schedule games in November which, global climate change and all that aside, is probably not the best plan for most places north of St.Louis at that time of year based on our weather experiences to-date - increase the roster to 26 but only from Mother's Day thru the last weekend before the All-Star Game, AND schedule a split doubleheader every Saturday during that stretch. That would shorten the season by one week. Teams could carry an extra pitcher without damaging their bench. During that stretch all players on the roster get double-time credit for major league service.

Point being - if MLB wants more playoffs, and they don't want to have games amidst swirling snow, do something to get the season moving along. And since you pretty much can't schedule double-headers without an agreement with the player's union, give them something back - more playoff $$s, of course, and more playing time service during that stretch that will shorten the time players have to be in the majors to be arbitration eligible (Super 2s?) and shorter routes to pension-eligibility.

DAM DC Twins Fans
05-28-2012, 12:38 PM
WOW--lots of good ideas. Being a traditionalist--the first thought I had is not there. That is BAN INTERLEAGUE games. I know thats a problem since next year, there will be interleague every day. But you have two teams fighting for a division title playing different schedules--say Tigers and Twins. Add 2 teams--go back to 4 divisions of 8 teams and the 4 division winners make the playoffs. Every division team plays the same number of games against the teams in the other division of the league. So both Twins and Tigers play the Red Sox and Yanks the same number of games. NO WILD CARDS.

Speed up games by enforcing the 25 second pitching rule and reducing the ad time for bullpen calls (I would like to see the time between half innings go back to ONE MINUTE but I know that will never happen with TV).

Allow trading of draft picks--why not be like other sports.

Curt
05-29-2012, 09:13 AM
... BAN INTERLEAGUE games...

Wow. I can't believe I didn't remember that one.

8. BAN INTERLEAGUE games
9. No Carew Blue allowed

mike wants wins
05-29-2012, 09:27 AM
Can someone explain why I'd not want to watch Strasburg pitch live and in person? How is it more entertaining not to watch interleague games? I really, really, don't get that one at all.

Oh yea, all uniforms have to have names on them....why would you have a sport where if you are a casual fan, you have no idea who is in the game? It really does not help the game at all not have names, but it certainly doesn't help the game. I get it is tradition, but really, how would it negatively impact anyone to have names on shirts?

mike wants wins
05-29-2012, 09:31 AM
Why do teams need to play the same schedule? The "team" they play at any given time is not the same team. They don't face the same lineups, they don't face the same pitchers, there are likely to be injuries altering the whole roster.....the fairness issue is not really an issue, not across 162 games. If it is all about fairness, you should be proposing eliminating playoffs, as they are AWFUL at determining the "best" teams.

Curt
05-29-2012, 11:41 AM
Can someone explain why I'd not want to watch Strasburg pitch live and in person?

Go ahead and want it. Nobody is suggesting a rule against it.