MLB looking at possible limits on the use of relief pitchers

[spinowner]

 

I also don't think the ability to change pitchers 8 times in an inning is sacrosanct. 

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. I think the manager should be able to use any player in any position at any time, except of course if a player has already been removed from the game.

[Dantes929]

 

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. I think the manager should be able to use any player in any position at any time, except of course if a player has already been removed from the game.

I never learn anything from those who agree with me so no problem there..    Why do you say "except of course if a player has already been removed from the game"?   Is the game improved by the inability of a manager to use any player in any position just because that player has already been substituted for?  Other sports are not ruined by being able to substitute freely.   I don't know why baseball would be any different.    Keep in mind I like the rule as it is but don't know what the alternative would look like, just like I don't know what limiting relief pitcher changes would look like.    People think base ball is great because it never changes but its really not true.    Roster sizes, mound heights, DH, catcher collisions, play review, phantom tags, strike zone, have all changed over the years just to name a few..

[SwainZag]

 

I never learn anything from those who agree with me so no problem there..    Why do you say "except of course if a player has already been removed from the game"?   Is the game improved by the inability of a manager to use any player in any position just because that player has already been substituted for?  Other sports are not ruined by being able to substitute freely.   I don't know why baseball would be any different.    Keep in mind I like the rule as it is but don't know what the alternative would look like, just like I don't know what limiting relief pitcher changes would look like.    People think base ball is great because it never changes but its really not true.    Roster sizes, mound heights, DH, catcher collisions, play review, phantom tags, strike zone, have all changed over the years just to name a few..

 

 

I think substitutions in baseball are just fine.  You could take too much advantage of things if you could allow players back into a game.  Roster limits would help curb this, but there would be nothing to stop a team from running out 3 DH type players and readily substituting in a fielder every inning.  Sano could be penciled in at SS, replaced by Escobar every half inning back and forth.  Or....Sano gets on base, gets pinch run for, and then re-substituted in for the next batter.  Too many ways to take advantage of a baseball game by re-using players.

[spinowner]

 

 Other sports are not ruined by being able to substitute freely.   I don't know why baseball would be any different.  

As SwainZag pointed out, here's why. Mike Trout leads off for the Angels. If he gets on base, bring in a pinch runner and he bats again, substituting for the next player in the order. If he gets on base again, bring in another pinch runner and he bats again, substituting for the next player in the order. Repeat repeatedly.

[mikelink45]

I actually like it!  I know I may be the only one on this forum to think it has some merit, but, in fact, it creates even more strategy when you know you have limited access and have to figure out who can do more than get one lefty out.   A well pitched game is what we saw from Ervin Santana - a starter who owns the entire game.  All the relief pitching changes and matches makes me feel like I am at a basketball game where the last 5 minutes lasts as long as the rest of the game. 

[Willihammer]

 

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.

It might cost 30 seconds of game time but it slows the pace, no? Improving pace is the stated goal. When an IBB occurs immediately before a pitching change as they often do, the combo really slows things down.

 

Wouldn't you prefer a change like that to something more drastic like "reliever must face x-number of batters" or "only x pitching changes per half inning allowed?"

[spinowner]

 

It might cost 30 seconds of game time but it slows the pace, no? Improving pace is the stated goal. When an IBB occurs immediately before a pitching change as they often do, the combo really slows things down.

 

Wouldn't you prefer a change like that to something more drastic like "reliever must face x-number of batters" or "only x pitching changes per half inning allowed?"

As for me, I'd prefer neither change.

[spinowner]

 

 I think the manager should be able to use any player in any position at any time, except of course if a player has already been removed from the game.

I'll amend my comment to say that the manager should be able to use any player in any position at any time within the rules as they are currently configured.

[Dantes929]

 

I think substitutions in baseball are just fine.  You could take too much advantage of things if you could allow players back into a game.  Roster limits would help curb this, but there would be nothing to stop a team from running out 3 DH type players and readily substituting in a fielder every inning.  Sano could be penciled in at SS, replaced by Escobar every half inning back and forth.  Or....Sano gets on base, gets pinch run for, and then re-substituted in for the next batter.  Too many ways to take advantage of a baseball game by re-using players.Like 

 

As SwainZag pointed out, here's why. Mike Trout leads off for the Angels. If he gets on base, bring in a pinch runner and he bats again, substituting for the next player in the order. If he gets on base again, bring in another pinch runner and he bats again, substituting for the next player in the order. Repeat repeatedly.

Like I said, I don't know if it would be better or not because I don't know what it would look like.   Your examples seems to take it to an extreme which could be mitigated within the wording of the rule.  Volleyball has re entry but you can't  just continually keep your best strong side hitter in that spot the entire game.    It is easy to keep Trout from batting in spots 1-9 by putting in the rules he has to reentry in his same spot in the order.    I think Legion baseball already has a reentry rule that does not enable them to take it to extreme levels.    Likewise, I don't want a rule that says a manager cannot use relief pitchers but would not mind seeing one that either speeds up the process or keeps them from making 4 changes in one inning.      None of this really addresses the issue of guys dominating the late innings though.   I would keep an open mind to any proposals is all.

[Willihammer]

This is good.

 

http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2016/8/19/12553634/mlb-rule-changes-pace-of-play-shifts

[KirbyDome89]

That was a good article. The first thing I thought after reading his comments the other day was "How can this guy not see that those suggestions run counter to each other?" That was beside the fact that I disagreed with both points regarding the shift and limiting the use of relief pitchers. I'm not sure what to think of the guy yet, but the more he talks the more I'm convinced he is concerned solely with "leaving his mark," rather than doing what is best for baseball. 

[Willihammer]

Manfried seems so convinced it is pace of play that is keeping kids out of baseball, I would be curious to know what evidence that theory is based on.

Another possibility is that its content is so locked down and expensive that Baseball is excluding kids from watching it at all.

[Vanimal46]

All of these suggestions coming from Manfried are just silly. Limiting pitching changes and shifts are altering the strategy of the game. Don't see how they cut down on game time or increase pace.

 

Expanding or shrinking the strike zone also seems silly. It seems like his vision is having all pitching staffs be like the Twins with a pitch to contact approach.

[Vanimal46]

Fangraphs penned their own article about this topic. "Rob Manfried and the Dangers of Unintended Consequences"

[Boom Boom]

Get rid of manager's challenges would be my suggestion. Pace - Improved. I'd be OK with a few more bad calls if we never had to wait for the bench coach to give the "thumbs down" again.

 

If baseball wants to attract younger fans I would suggest shrinking the schedule. Being a football, basketball, or hockey fan isn't nearly as time-consuming.

[biggentleben]

 

Get rid of manager's challenges would be my suggestion. Pace - Improved. I'd be OK with a few more bad calls if we never had to wait for the bench coach to give the "thumbs down" again.

If baseball wants to attract younger fans I would suggest shrinking the schedule. Being a football, basketball, or hockey fan isn't nearly as time-consuming.

 

The first suggestion loses the younger fan who can easily check on their MLB.tv whether a call was right over and over. That's what predicated instant replay in the first place.

 

Your second suggestion is laughable. Football begins games in September with the Super Bowl in February. That's 5 months. Basketball begins in October and ends in June. That's 8 months. Hockey is the same as basketball. Baseball begins in April and ends in October. That's 6 months. If you want to argue that baseball plays too frequently and should hold back to 2-3 games per week like baseball/hockey to have less games and make it more of an event, then fine, but certainly basketball and hockey are much longer than baseball in season length. Football is not all that much different, but it's a different animal altogether.

 

Coverage-wise, football is non-stop, so I find it to be numbing to constantly get updates on a team without much change in content. Baseball has an ebb and flow of its season and offseason, including having the draft within the middle of the season. One of the things that actually attracts younger audiences when you ask is that they have what is really akin to "seasons" of a year within the sport.

 

There are a lot of things that baseball can do to change things, though I do find it interesting that there are so many "what is wrong with baseball" when baseball has the largest market share it's held since the 1994 strike, is experiencing incredible growth in revenue (beyond that of nearly all major sports), and have by far the most-renowned technologically advanced sport by far as far as production and presentation done by the league, led by MLB Advanced Media. The game is actually very, very healthy.

[twinssporto]

Maybe my logic is flawed but I read that link and can't believe what I read...If the intent is to provide more offense for the game that idea may make sense.  If its to speed up the game I don't think it will work well.  What happens if I pitcher starts getting shelled?  Can't pull him and the other team has people just running the bases...

 

Crazy talk...Cue R.E.M. song. "It's the end of the world as we know it..."

[ScrapTheNickname]

The way you attract younger fans is to have young people who love to play baseball transition into being major league fans. This is how the fanbase grew from the start.Everybody played the damn sport and loved it! Now? Some white suburban kids predominantly and and Hispanics from various 3rd world countries who see it as perhaps fun but mostly as a way out of poverty. MLB is probably screwed then if it thinks it is going to continue to grow its fan-base unless it continues to create young baseball players in inner cities, etc. What was this forum about again?