MLB Rule Changes

[Blake]

According to the Sporting News, MLB is looking at 2 rules changes in order to "enhance" the game of Baseball and attract the younger crowd.

 

1. No more having pitchers throw 4 pitches for an intentional walk. Instead, managers will signal for a batter to take the base. (this is a pace of play rule and is stupid in the extreme. Games have been won and lost by a pitcher having to throw an intentional walk)

 

2. Raising the strike zone from just below the knee to just above the knee. (Hello, Owners, I think you've just helped reduce the value of your sinker ball pitchers to zero. But, that's an opinion as I have no hard data to back that up)

 

Anyway, comments, ridicule and and general snark are always appreciated.

 

See link here: http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/news/2017-mlb-rule-changes-strike-zone-intentional-walks-proposals-mlbpa-union/1ipttbbsq3laz1lomo21b99hek

[Vanimal46]

Sometimes an intentional walk brings out the best and worst of a player... I think we remember Pat Light's low moment last year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeTeyRKil9A

 

And Miggy Cabrera taking advantage of a lazy intentional walk attempt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6YzVvtxoaY

 

If they're looking at ways to increase the pace of play, the intentional walk isn't going to move the needle much. 

[Blake]

 

Sometimes an intentional walk brings out the best and worst of a player... I think we remember Pat Light's low moment last year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeTeyRKil9A

 

And Miggy Cabrera taking advantage of a lazy intentional walk attempt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6YzVvtxoaY

 

If they're looking at ways to increase the pace of play, the intentional walk isn't going to move the needle much. 

The intentional walk is a great way for some baseball weirdness to ensue. Those are two great examples.

[woolywoolhouse]

How about this proposed rule change MLB is going to test in rookie ball?

 

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/report-mlb-testing-a-new-radical-extra-inning-rule-in-rookie-ball-to-shorten-games/

 

 

Major League Baseball plans on testing a rule change in the lowest levels of the minor leagues this season that automatically would place a runner on second base at the start of extra innings, a distinct break from the game's orthodoxy that nonetheless has wide-ranging support at the highest levels of the league, sources familiar with the plan told Yahoo Sports.

 

[Blake]

 

How about this proposed rule change MLB is going to test in rookie ball?

 

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/report-mlb-testing-a-new-radical-extra-inning-rule-in-rookie-ball-to-shorten-games/

I saw that also, but since it's in rookie ball and won't affect MLB this year, skipped mentioning it.

[Steve Lein]

I'm on board with the intentional walk. It's purpose is to put a guy on base, and is not a "skill" in any sense of the game of baseball.

 

It doesn't really affect pace-of-play as they're saying, but I don't believe there is a point to making the pitcher throw the pitches. If your argument is you don't get to see the weird instances like the above anymore, I'm being honest when I say that's an extremely piss-poor argument against it.

 

If it's only in the rookie-leagues, I don't have an issue with the extra-inning runner on 2B rule. Pretty sure that is a rule in amateur tournaments quite often. I don't believe it has any place in full-season minors or the MLB, though.

[gunnarthor]

I hate all three but the rookie league thing is horrific.  

[Vanimal46]

 

I'm on board with the intentional walk. It's purpose is to put a guy on base, and is not a "skill" in any sense of the game of baseball.

 

It doesn't really affect pace-of-play as they're saying, but I don't believe there is a point to making the pitcher throw the pitches. If your argument is you don't get to see the weird instances like the above anymore, I'm being honest when I say that's an extremely piss-poor argument against it.

 

If it's only in the rookie-leagues, I don't have an issue with the extra-inning runner on 2B rule. Pretty sure that is a rule in amateur tournaments quite often. I don't believe it has any place in full-season minors or the MLB, though.

I would argue it is a "skill" that very few pitchers practice, which results in weird stuff happening... I could post many other videos of pitchers missing the mark, and the team batting scores from a wild pitch. 

There's also times when a pitcher and catcher decide halfway through they do not want to intentionally walk the batter, and strikes him out instead. 

[Steve Lein]

 

I would argue it is a "skill" that very few pitchers practice, which results in weird stuff happening... I could post many other videos of pitchers missing the mark, and the team batting scores from a wild pitch. 

There's also times when a pitcher and catcher decide halfway through they do not want to intentionally walk the batter, and strikes him out instead. 

 

I look at it as an "integrity of the game" thing. Is it really in the best interest of the game for a team to lose, or win, a game because of these instances? I would emphatically say no.

[Vanimal46]

 

I look at it as an "integrity of the game" thing. Is it really in the best interest of the game for a team to lose, or win, a game because of these instances? I would emphatically say no.

I don't see why not... It's been a part of the game since the beginning. If a pitcher can't throw a 65-70 mph lob to their catcher's glove, they should probably practice that more. 

[nicksaviking]

I don't mind changes. Lots of people don't like any kind of change and perhaps don't realize that the game has changed so many times during and before our lifetimes that rule changes are actually the norm and not actually unique. That starting with a runner on 2B in extra innings sure is an odd one though, if they don't like running out of pitchers, why didn't they just expand the roster to 26 like they keep talking about instead of continually kicking that can down the road.

 

And come on, where's the one that would actually have game impact, putting the pitchers on a clock.

[Steve Lein]

 

I don't see why not... It's been a part of the game since the beginning. If a pitcher can't throw a 65-70 mph lob to their catcher's glove, they should probably practice that more. 

 

I actually think the argument you're using here aids my own. What is the point of these 65-70 MPH "lobs" in a "skill" sense of the game? I don't see it.

[Mike Sixel]

 

How about this proposed rule change MLB is going to test in rookie ball?

 

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/report-mlb-testing-a-new-radical-extra-inning-rule-in-rookie-ball-to-shorten-games/

 

cool with it in teh minors, but not the majors. Play by the same rules thru the whole game....this isn't football, where playing longer leads to more concussions and other major bodily harm....

[Mike Sixel]

 

I would argue it is a "skill" that very few pitchers practice, which results in weird stuff happening... I could post many other videos of pitchers missing the mark, and the team batting scores from a wild pitch. 

There's also times when a pitcher and catcher decide halfway through they do not want to intentionally walk the batter, and strikes him out instead. 

 

what, 99% of the time, it's just boring. The question is, is the 1% worth the time? I don't know the answer to that, but I'd not change this rule personally. You don't give someone an automatic free throw to speed up basketball......

 

I'd argue that they are looking at the wrong things. The batters getting out of the box and adjusting their "equipment" every pitch is BORING. It's not just about pace, it is about interest. No one wants to watch that. No one.

 

As for the strikezone change? Making the zone smaller, so more guys reach base is going to speed up the game?

[Pardon My Dinger]

Pat Light has officially lost all (comic) value. Good riddance. 

[Vanimal46]

 

what, 99% of the time, it's just boring. The question is, is the 1% worth the time? I don't know the answer to that, but I'd not change this rule personally. You don't give someone an automatic free throw to speed up basketball......

 

I'd argue that they are looking at the wrong things. The batters getting out of the box and adjusting their "equipment" every pitch is BORING. It's not just about pace, it is about interest. No one wants to watch that. No one.

 

As for the strikezone change? Making the zone smaller, so more guys reach base is going to speed up the game?

I agree that they're looking at the wrong things... 95% of the time an IBB doesn't result in anything besides a walk. But an IBB takes what, a minute out of the total game time? If the goal is to speed up the pace of play, it's not going to make a difference IMO. That's why I'd like to keep it as is, so we can see the 5% of weird baseball stuff happen. 

Batters getting out of the box to adjust their gloves after every pitch is BORING. Concur. The pitch clock is a great tool that I've seen in action at Round Rock Express games. It doesn't come into play often, but it does keep pitchers in check that they have to throw a pitch within 30 seconds. 

I'm also on board with reducing the number of warm up pitches an incoming pitcher needs. They just spent 10 minutes in the bullpen throwing 20 pitches. Give them 2-3 pitches to get used to the mound, and get the show on the road. 

[gil4]

 

How about this proposed rule change MLB is going to test in rookie ball?

 

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/report-mlb-testing-a-new-radical-extra-inning-rule-in-rookie-ball-to-shorten-games/

 

I was going to look for that link and comment "at least they aren't doing this."  Thank you for posting it for me, so all I had to do was add my comment. 

 

With a runner placed on 2B, how often would the team's first move be to use the new intentional walk rule to put the force in order?   Maybe they can look into adding the DP/Flex rule, too.  http://qcofficials.com/Aces96/Rules/DpFlexRule.html

[Loosey]

The weird instances happen at an extremely low rate.  If we were to compare it to the opposite way the NFL changed extra points, making them harder, I would guess the % of weird IBB things is less than missed extra points at the old distance.  

 

I don't think this will make a difference in the game except for the fact it will reduce the time by about a minute per Intentional walk.

[laloesch]

I wouldn't mind the BB rule.  Having the pitcher throw 4 balls to the catcher is redundant.  Just do away with it.

 

That said if they REALLY want to speed up the pace of the game then they should reexamine how many times a batter can call time outs in the box or how often a pitcher can step off the mound.  Those two action DO slow down the pace of the game significantly.  

[TheLeviathan]

Yeah, I don't see what these changes do to improve the sport.  Pass.

[Vanimal46]

Found an article on SBNation about the International Walk Rule Change. 

"In the 2015 season, there were 951 intentional walks in all of Major League Baseball, or 31.7 per team. That means that on average, teams would be issued an intentional walk about every five games. That's a minute of awful and boring mixed into 900 minutes of baseball." 

It's just a weird thing for the MLB to identify and say, YEP, this is going to help increase pace of play. 

[Vanimal46]

 

I wouldn't mind the BB rule.  Having the pitcher throw 4 balls to the catcher is redundant.  Just do away with it.

 

That said if they REALLY want to speed up the pace of the game then they should reexamine how many times a batter can call time outs in the box or how often a pitcher can step off the mound.  Those two action DO slow down the pace of the game significantly.  

Agreed. There are many other alternatives to speed up the game. Forgoing the IBB pitches all together isn't moving the needle much at all, and decreasing the strike zone in theory should slow down the game. 

The proposed changes don't make much sense. 

[Steve Lein]

 

I was going to look for that link and comment "at least they aren't doing this."  Thank you for posting it for me, so all I had to do was add my comment. 

 

With a runner placed on 2B, how often would the team's first move be to use the new intentional walk rule to put the force in order?   Maybe they can look into adding the DP/Flex rule, too.  http://qcofficials.com/Aces96/Rules/DpFlexRule.html

 

Reminds me of the "courtesy-runner" rule in Town Ball we had. Any time the catcher got on base you could bring in another player to run for him. Let him get in the dugout and get ready to catch the next inning. Runner was not a substitution. Also had "re-entry" rules. Often used it to take a player out so he could get ready to pitch the next inning.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Usually the IBB is part of a strategic moment in the game, so I don't mind the extra bit of time to run through game possibilities. Also, not all IBB come at the start of the plate appearance.

 

How about instead of 0 or 4, the pitcher throws one pitch to signal the walk?

[Blake]

 

I'm on board with the intentional walk. It's purpose is to put a guy on base, and is not a "skill" in any sense of the game of baseball.

 

It doesn't really affect pace-of-play as they're saying, but I don't believe there is a point to making the pitcher throw the pitches. If your argument is you don't get to see the weird instances like the above anymore, I'm being honest when I say that's an extremely piss-poor argument against it.

 

If it's only in the rookie-leagues, I don't have an issue with the extra-inning runner on 2B rule. Pretty sure that is a rule in amateur tournaments quite often. I don't believe it has any place in full-season minors or the MLB, though.

My argument against was made in my original post: That games are won and lost via the intentional walk. Baseball is a game of errors, and the wild pitch during an intentional walk is part of how the game is played. MLB is not beer league softball. 

 

I mentioned weirdness in response to the post by Vanimal, who posted a couple of great examples of how pitching an intentional walk can be extremely interesting.

[laloesch]

 

Agreed. There are many other alternatives to speed up the game. Forgoing the IBB pitches all together isn't moving the needle much at all, and decreasing the strike zone in theory should slow down the game. 

The proposed changes don't make much sense. 

 

I'm also not opposed to shortening the season back to 140 or 154 games.  I think 10 or 11 games against each of your fellow AL or NL teams is PLENTY.  Do away with inter-league which is completely pointless and then reduce the number of pitching changes allowed in a game and that would significantly reduce game times and the long season fan fatigue that starts to set in late August early September.   

[theBOMisthebomb]

Why are we worried about pace of the game at the risk of compromising the integrity of the game? These are horrible ideas. What's next - having the runner after hitting a home run not have to entirely circle the bases like slow pitch softball? If you want to solve perceived pace of play then get rid of television commercials and you will be back to 2 hour games.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I'm also not opposed to shortening the season back to 140 or 154 games.  I think 10 or 11 games against each of your fellow AL or NL teams is PLENTY.  Do away with inter-league which is completely pointless and then reduce the number of pitching changes allowed in a game and that would significantly reduce game times and the long season fan fatigue that starts to set in late August early September.   

 

Interleague is pointless if you want to see Kershaw pitch live in an AL city you live in? Huh?

 

EVERY other sport has interleague play.....because fans want to see players/teams that they don't get to see every day.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Why are we worried about pace of the game at the risk of compromising the integrity of the game? These are horrible ideas. What's next - having the runner after hitting a home run not have to entirely circle the bases like slow pitch softball? If you want to solve perceived pace of play then get rid of television commercials and you will be back to 2 hour games.

 

What, exactly, is the "integrity" of the game? I mean, some think Shifts ruin the integrity, or that the DH does, or inter-league play does.....

 

the integrity of the game is the game following it's own rules.

 

And, what good does the hitter circling the bases actually do? Why not just count the runs and everyone on base and the hitter just go to the dugout?

 

Sure, just get rid of money, that will keep the sport alive.....

[Vanimal46]

Why are we worried about pace of the game at the risk of compromising the integrity of the game? These are horrible ideas. What's next - having the runner after hitting a home run not have to entirely circle the bases like slow pitch softball? If you want to solve perceived pace of play then get rid of television commercials and you will be back to 2 hour games.

Getting rid of commercials isn't realistic... Because money. Lots and lots of money