MLB looking at possible limits on the use of relief pitchers

[TheLeviathan]

 

I doubt most baseball fans would care one way or the other. The argument has always been framed based on relation to how non-fans of the sport view baseball. I think it's key, though, that we don't fix things that aren't broken in order to broaden the appeal. 

 

Many people do feel it's broken.  20 years ago you didn't sit through 20 minutes of extra commercial time from the 6th-9th because managers want to look smart in how they manage their bullpen.

 

And there are a ton of other ways to speed things up to just make the game feel more crisp and less deliberately slow.  

[clone52]

 

I meant do they get to stand in the batters box and hit 8 practice pitches - not swinging at the air.  

 

Pitchers don't get 8 practice pitchers with a batter in the batters box either.  

[spinowner]

 

The reality of long games starts with effective pitching.  Look at the Twins game the other day when they lost 1-0.  That was a 2:26 game.

 

Both pitchers were throwing strikes and getting guys out.  Even if that game would have been a 3-2 game it would have still probably been about a 2:45 game.  When pitchers start to throw ball after ball and get 75% of the hitters into a 3 ball count it lengthens the game. 

 

In general that makes for a more enjoyable baseball game and that has nothing to do with length.  When you are watching a sport where the majority of the plays (pitches) nothing happens you need to get more efficient.  I don't know the number of pitches that are put in play (or even swung at) vs the total number of pitches, but throwing strikes makes it more exciting in my opinion.  And that can only improve with the quality of players.  No rules will change that.

I agree and disagree. Pitchers throwing more strikes moves the game along and that's a good thing. But there is an obvious rule that will change that, namely enlarging the strike zone. And that's the only rule change that I would find acceptable. The problem with making that change is that it would increase the rate of strikeouts, which I think we don't want. So in conjunction with that I'd also advocate lowering the pitcher's mound. These two changes made together would make it easier for pitchers to throw strikes but also make it easier for batters to hit pitches. More base hits, fewer walks, comparable number of K's, faster-paced game, more action. To me it's a win all the way around.

[spinowner]

 

I do like the no warmups idea.....unless there is an injury.

Disagree. Even though mounds are pretty uniform at the start of a game the contour changes little by little during the course of a game, especially if there's been any rain. A pitcher should be entitled to get a feel for the mound.

[spinowner]

3 balls, 2 strikes? No.

Limit catcher trips to the mound? No.

Limit pitching changes? No. (No limiting pinch hitters either.)

Require a pitcher to face more than one batter? No. (A pitcher is already required to face one batter.)

Limit defensive shifts? No.

Eliminate relief pitcher's 8 warm-ups? No.

Pitch clock? Maybe, but only with bases empty.

Speed up replay challenges? Yes.

Reduce time between innings? Get rid of GBA in the mid-7th? Yes.

Enlarge the strike zone and lower the pitcher's mound? Yes.

[kab21]

 

Require a pitcher to face more than one batter? No. (A pitcher is already required to face one batter.)

 

 

Why not?

[ashbury]

If a pitcher enters the game mid-inning, they're ready. No warm-up pitches unless an injury caused them to enter a game.

Manager's first visit to the mound: "I just noticed, your shoulder hurts."

 

Manager's second visit: "Ump, my pitcher's hurt. That's right, ain't it, Ace?"

[spinowner]

 

Manager's first visit to the mound: "I just noticed, your shoulder hurts."

 

Manager's second visit: "Ump, my pitcher's hurt. That's right, ain't it, Ace?"

Yep. And regarding the pitch clock, "Time, ump, I've got some dust in my eye."

[spinowner]

 

 

Require a pitcher to face more than one batter? No. (A pitcher is already required to face one batter.)

 

 

 

Why not?

Because it would be unfair to enable the opposing manager to use a pinch hitter knowing a new pitcher couldn't be brought in.

[kab21]

 

Because it would be unfair to enable the opposing manager to use a pinch hitter knowing a new pitcher couldn't be brought in.

This doesn't bother me at all. 

[brvama]

I'm not in favor of changing the game, but do favor addressing certain aspects of the time delays. In my opinion, the pace and length of baseball games have been negatively impacted by TV and the commercials. Back in the 1800's when I played, when the inning was over you ran to your position, took a couple of balls until the pitcher had 4-5 warmups and off you went. Of course, back then there wasn't even radio.

 

Seriously, the pace is very important to the enjoyment of the game. What slows the game isn't the game, but the time delays of the players and broadcasts. There's no reason a batter needs to visit his therapist or the pitcher needs to call home after every pitch. That's what drives me crazy. PLus the infinite amount of commercials when play is stopped. These guys are professionals, play the damn game already. Catch the ball, throw the ball -- see the ball, hit the ball.

[d-mac]

 

Revenues don't measure anything as far as popularity is concerned. The revenues of all sports are exploding as desperate cable companies try to remain relevant.

 

The problem here with RPers is that the game grinds to a complete halt in the late innings at times because there are multiple pitching changes (commercial breaks) in an inning. This absolutely does suck.

 

Added commercial time is nothing unique to baseball. That's something that has been happening in ALL sports. So using the "extra commercial time" argument is a bit of a red herring. 

[kab21]

 

Added commercial time is nothing unique to baseball. That's something that has been happening in ALL sports. So using the "extra commercial time" argument is a bit of a red herring. 

You have completely missed the point. They wouldn't even have to go to commercial for multiple relief pitchers in an inning to kill the pace of the game in what should be the best part.

[spinowner]

 

Because it would be unfair to enable the opposing manager to use a pinch hitter knowing a new pitcher couldn't be brought in.

 

 

This doesn't bother me at all. 

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. And it's not that often that a pitcher faces only one batter. I'm not going to take the time to look it up but I bet it's only a couple times a week in all of MLB.

[DJL44]

 

I hate a 7th or 8th inning in a close gamethat consists of the first pitcher putting a couple of runners on and getting replaced by a specialist. TV advertisement. The specialist pitches to one batter and gets replaced. TV advertisement. During this time you meeting at the mound or two and the result is that the pace of play at what should be the best part of the game has ground to a complete halt.

 

Seems to me everything is cool if you eliminate the TV advertisements.

[kab21]

 

Seems to me everything is cool if you eliminate the TV advertisements.

No, commercials between innings are fine. Commercials suck when a team is down 1 run with runners on 1st and 2nd and the game is getting exciting.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. And it's not that often that a pitcher faces only one batter. I'm not going to take the time to look it up but I bet it's only a couple times a week in all of MLB.

Loogy's by definition only pitch to 1-2 batters most of the time.

 

Let's take a look at an overmanaging type (Joe Maddon)

Travis Wood 14/49 games faced 1-2 batters

Pedro Strop (a RHP) 9/44 games faced 1-2 batters

Clayton Richard 11/25 games faced 1-2 batters

 

that is 34 times on one team alone (only the 3 specialists) that a pitcher was brought in for 1-2 hitters and then exited. Sometimes they would have finished the inning but this is happening in games a lot more than you seem to think.

 

 

[spinowner]

 

No, commercials between innings are fine. Commercials suck when a team is down 1 run with runners on 1st and 2nd and the game is getting exciting.

 

Loogy's by definition only pitch to 1-2 batters most of the time.

 

Let's take a look at an overmanaging type (Joe Maddon)

Travis Wood 14/49 games faced 1-2 batters

Pedro Strop (a RHP) 9/44 games faced 1-2 batters

Clayton Richard 11/25 games faced 1-2 batters

 

that is 34 times on one team alone (only the 3 specialists) that a pitcher was brought in for 1-2 hitters and then exited. Sometimes they would have finished the inning but this is happening in games a lot more than you seem to think.

I appreciate the time and effort you put in to do the research, but my comments were about facing only one batter.

[kab21]

 

I appreciate the time and effort you put in to do the research, but my comments were about facing only one batter.

I appreciate your appreciation. My criticisms are about multiple pitching changes in one inning. If someone only faces 1-2 batters then it is likely that there are multiple pitching changes occurring.

[DaveW]

Here's an idea: instead of 2 minutes per half inning, decrease to 1:30 for all non playoff games, once the playoffs start then waste the extra time on commercials.

[kab21]

 

Here's an idea: instead of 2 minutes per half inning, decrease to 1:30 for all non playoff games, once the playoffs start then waste the extra time on commercials.

The time in between innings doesn't really affect the flow of the game. Stoppages during the inning should be the target.

[Willihammer]

That's exactly why outsourcing all warmups to the bullpen seems like a good idea IMO. You could have the pitching changes but cut down on the warmups and you save game time that way. If a guy's not warm, then the current pitcher will be bound by the pitch clock to keep facing batters until he is warm.

[Mike Sixel]

If you can't warm up when you come in.....how will tv and radio run more ads? I think that's a legit question.

[Vanimal46]

Unless there was an injury to a pitcher during the inning, any reliever coming in should be warm. They're throwing 10-15 pitches before they even come into the game. Maybe even more than that. We've all seen the 10 second clips where the broadcast shows us who's warming up, and they're almost always throwing at a rapid fire rate. 

There's some extenuating circumstances that would justify letting a pitcher warm up: If they come in cold as a result of injury, or the conditions on the field. If the mound is muddy from rain, then sure, let them get their bearings with a couple of pitches. If it's a 90 degree sunny day in the middle of July, let's get the show on the road. 

[Willihammer]

If you can't warm up when you come in.....how will tv and radio run more ads? I think that's a legit question.

Maybe you give him 30 seconds to have 2-3 warmups just to toe the rubber and dig a landing spot. The broadcast could run a 30 second in-game ad.

But they shouldn't need a full 2:05 break just to swap in a pitcher.

 

And by all means, truck em in on a golf cart that has a big Miller ad on the side.

[Vanimal46]

I would be fine with product placement during a baseball broadcast, like the golf cart that has a big Miller ad on the side if it meant fewer TV breaks. 

[bizaff]

 

If you can't warm up when you come in.....how will tv and radio run more ads? I think that's a legit question.

 

I think the way they portray the problem doesn't match what they really want.. Baseball doesn't want to "shorten games", they want to "shorten games without losing ad time".  No way they get rid of the commercial break for a new pitcher coming in - that's real money they make.  I highly doubt they shorten any break from 2 min - more lost ad time.

 

I really like the idea there are NO clocks in baseball.. if they decide to add it to MLB I hope they don't show it, just the umpire knows when it expires.

[Willihammer]

Another thing you see a lot of late in games- intentional walks. Would be easy to speed that up.

[jimmer]

 

Another thing you see a lot of late in games- intentional walks. Would be easy to speed that up.

It's my understanding that's actually being seriously talked about.

[Dantes929]

I am in the camp that says 15 minutes to an already pretty long average game is quite significant.    Golf doesn't have a time limit but if you added 15 minutes to every one of my rounds I wouldn't like it.    If the 15 minute average increase was because 50% of the games went into extra innings then that would be fine because the increase in time comes with a commensurate increase in action.    That is not the case.    It is just longer between pitches, between innings, between reviews and between pitching changes.    There is no return for my increased 15 minute investment.

 

I also don't think the ability to change pitchers 8 times in an inning is sacrosanct.   Its the way the game has evolved but not necessarily the best it can be.    Player changes are already limited by roster sizes and that has changed throughout the years.   In the early 1900's the roster size was 16 players.   I see no problem with making a rule limiting pitcher substituions but don't know what that would look like.  In theory, in September with expanded roster size the Twins could change pitchers after every out the entire game.

I like the time limit between pitches and don't see why a reliever can't come running in before the manager gets to the mound and get no more than 3 warm up pitches.  

[spinowner]

 

Another thing you see a lot of late in games- intentional walks. Would be easy to speed that up.

How? I don't like the idea of just giving a batter first base. The pitcher needs to actually throw the pitches. And even so, that would save, what, 30 seconds? And my guess is a typical a team issues maybe one IBB per week. I don't think that's significant.