Another rule change re: position players pitching

[Squirrel]

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2023/02/mlb-mlbpa-discussing-rule-change-regarding-position-players-pitching.html
 

I think this is another potentially good rule but it depends on when and how it is implemented, but I do think this practice should be limited.

[danielp19653]

I agree it used to be kind of a fun little side show to a game that otherwise was already done. It happens often enough now the novelty has worn off and feels no different to just having a mercy rule and ending the game

[Mike Sixel]

Just let a team forfeit if they want. Simple (other than sponsors and Vegas, of course)

[Craig Arko]

Also the ghostrunner rule has been made permanent. 

[Vanimal46]

1 minute ago, Craig Arko said:

Also the ghostrunner rule has been made permanent. 

Yep. I really dislike that rule. 2nd worst rule in the 4 major sports. Nothing will ever top the shootout to break ties in hockey. 

[tony&rodney]

Manfred is really good at representing the owners, but he is really bad at promoting baseball. 

Manfredball is here to stay ... or until a new guy who likes baseball like Giammatti comes along. It is an unfair take on my part, admittedly, but the ghost runner is forever an abomination for baseball. Gone are the days of a relief pitcher who is impossible to get a hit off of but simply does not strike out batters pitching in extra innings. Some of the best relief pitchers in baseball history could not be used in extra innings today. Imagine not being able to use your relief pitcher whose BA against is .080 because he doesn't strike out enough batters.

[tony&rodney]

2 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Yep. I really dislike that rule. 2nd worst rule in the 4 major sports. Nothing will ever top the shootout to break ties in hockey. 

At least the NHL plays extra time and the 4 on 4 is actually interesting. The shootout is kind of dumb but at least a team gets to use its best scorers. With Manfredball a team's best relief pitcher must be a strikeout guy. A pitcher with a WHIP of .90/ a ground ball artist is useless in extra innings. I would rather see a team play with two outfielders and three infielders than see the ghost runner. Granted Duran is good for Manfredball.

[Dman]

Those rules make sense to me.  It always stinks when a team is down to position players pitching. 

I don't mind the ghost runner rule as it adds more consistency to when a game ends. Unless baseball just wants to go with tie games then I think the ghost runner rule is an acceptable solution. If your team can't get a guy in from second with three chances you probably don't deserve to win anyway.  Also you had 9 innings to prove you were the better team and you didn't so I guess I don't feel too bad about the results for ghost runner games. 

Lot's of sports have tie breaker rules it is what it is IMO. 

[Vanimal46]

3 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

At least the NHL plays extra time and the 4 on 4 is actually interesting. The shootout is kind of dumb but at least a team gets to use its best scorers. With Manfredball a team's best relief pitcher must be a strikeout guy. A pitcher with a WHIP of .90/ a ground ball artist is useless in extra innings. I would rather see a team play with two outfielders and three infielders than see the ghost runner. Granted Duran is good for Manfredball.

The shootout rule will forever be the dumbest rule in all of sports because it’s not derived from anything natural about the game. It’s just a gimmick and I’d rather have games end in a tie after OT. 

I agree with you why the ghost runner rule is just as dumb. You don’t need to generate a hit to get the runner home from 2nd. 2 sacrifice flies will do it. A passed ball and a sac fly. 

If they insist on doing this to eliminate long baseball games, have the ghost runner start on 1B, or start this ridiculous rule after 12 traditional baseball innings. 

[Craig Arko]

27 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Yep. I really dislike that rule. 2nd worst rule in the 4 major sports. Nothing will ever top the shootout to break ties in hockey. 

I’m not a fan but I can learn to live with it.

[Parfigliano]

1 hour ago, Mike Sixel said:

Just let a team forfeit if they want. Simple (other than sponsors and Vegas, of course)

And those who bought a ticket.

[Parfigliano]

Ghostrunner rule stinks.  Position player pitching rule stinks.  Shift rule stinks.  Leave baseball alone.

PS---get off my lawn.

[Mike Sixel]

14 minutes ago, Parfigliano said:

And those who bought a ticket.

Meh, once a team is so far behind they are putting out a position player, it is likely the 8th or 9th and each side MIGHT get one more at bat. Not sure that matters. But I get your point.

[chpettit19]

The position player pitching rule makes sense to me. I hope it leads to more two-way players. I think they're fun and can be a real advantage to a team in terms of team building and managing. Even if they're a reliever instead of Ohtani. I don't remember the exact wording of the 3-batter rule, but would it be possible to bring in a lefty to face a lefty, move that pitcher to LF as your right handed LFer comes in to get the righty out, and then bring the lefty back to the mound and the LFer back to LF to get the next lefty out? I think that'd be fun.

[Nine of twelve]

34 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

...would it be possible to bring in a lefty to face a lefty, move that pitcher to LF as your right handed LFer comes in to get the righty out, and then bring the lefty back to the mound and the LFer back to LF to get the next lefty out? I think that'd be fun.

I believe there is a rule that only once per game can a pitcher be moved to another position then back to pitcher.

[chpettit19]

5 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

I believe there is a rule that only once per game can a pitcher be moved to another position then back to pitcher.

Well it's probably a pretty rare thing that you'd use so that's probably good enough. Just another possible strategy to use every now and then I guess.

[Nine of twelve]

First, I don't see using a position player to pitch as a problem. What's wrong with doing it?

Second, and I realize this is rare, but what about a player like Ohtani who is a legitimate pitcher and a legitimate position player? Let's say for the sake of argument that Ohtani were a closer instead of a starter. Does that mean he can't DH and then be moved to pitcher in the ninth inning? That seems unfair to me. Why should it be allowed for a pitcher to play a non-pitching position but not vice versa?

[Nine of twelve]

2 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

If they insist on doing this to eliminate long baseball games, have the ghost runner start on 1B, or start this ridiculous rule after 12 traditional baseball innings. 

I also dislike the ghost runner rule. But for the sake of argument let's accept the premise that it's desirable to shorten extra-inning games and that using this rule accomplishes that. If that's the case then putting only a runner at second base is a half-assed approach. Instead, go all-out and load the bases. That will make it even more unlikely that the teams will score an equal number of runs in an inning. 

[Vanimal46]

3 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

I also dislike the ghost runner rule. But for the sake of argument let's accept the premise that it's desirable to shorten extra-inning games and that using this rule accomplishes that. If that's the case then don't add only one runner at second. Instead, load the bases to start every extra inning. That will make it even more unlikely that the teams will score an equal number of runs in an extra inning.

Might as well. If that doesn’t work we can underhand 5 pitches to the lead off batter and see how many home runs they hit to break the tie. Ultimate tie breaker is HR distance calculated. 

[MMMordabito]

I don't mind the position players not pitching rule. Be competitive.

F the Manfred Man.

[Squirrel]

36 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

First, I don't see using a position player to pitch as a problem. What's wrong with doing it?

Second, and I realize this is rare, but what about a player like Ohtani who is a legitimate pitcher and a legitimate position player? Let's say for the sake of argument that Ohtani were a closer instead of a starter. Does that mean he can't DH and then be moved to pitcher in the ninth inning? That seems unfair to me. Why should it be allowed for a pitcher to play a non-pitching position but not vice versa?

I think the link explained this. Players are designated a pitcher, a position player or a two-way player. Two- way players aren’t just position players, they have a separate designation, so the rule doesn’t apply to them, only to those players designated as position players

[Nine of twelve]

1 hour ago, Squirrel said:

I think the link explained this. Players are designated a pitcher, a position player or a two-way player. Two- way players aren’t just position players, they have a separate designation, so the rule doesn’t apply to them, only to those players designated as position players

OK, but how is that equitable? Why should a team with a two-way player be given an advantage over a team without one? What's to prevent a team from pitching the same non-pitcher enough times to give him two-way status, thereby exempting him from this rule? What about a first-year player who is a two-way player? Would he have to pitch enough innings in his rookie season before he can be designated a two-way player? Or could he be designated as such right from the start? And, if so, wouldn't it be favorable for a team to do so for every player? Would those innings have to be in blowout situations only? What if there are not enough of those opportunities to enable the player to accrue enough innings? It sounds like it could be a Catch-22--you can't become a two-way player unless you have played two ways, and you can't play two ways unless you have become a two-way player.

Too much confusion over a solution in search of a problem. I think it would have been much more fair and simple not to have instituted this rule. Just let managers manage.

[Squirrel]

5 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

OK, but how is that equitable? What's to prevent a team from pitching the same non-pitcher enough times to give him two-way status, thereby exempting him from this rule? What about a first-year player who is a two-way player? Can he be designated as such right from the start? Would he have to pitch enough innings in his rookie season before he can be designated a two-way player? Would those innings have to be in blowout situations only? What if there are not enough of those opportunities to enable the player to accrue enough innings? It sounds like a Catch-22.

Too much confusion over a solution in search of a problem. I think it would have been much more fair and simple not to have instituted this rule. Just let managers manage.

Seriously? Come on. Unless you have a player that can seriously and legitimate,y pitch, no team is going to give a position player that many innings just to get them two-way status. I’d be pissed if the Twins did this, just to do this. How many two-way players are there, exactly? It’s rare. You are convoluting the discussion by giving a hypothetical that isn’t going to happen.

[Nine of twelve]

3 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

Seriously? Come on. Unless you have a player that can seriously and legitimate,y pitch, no team is going to give a position player that many innings just to get them two-way status. I’d be pissed if the Twins did this, just to do this. How many two-way players are there, exactly? It’s rare. You are convoluting the discussion by giving a hypothetical that isn’t going to happen.

It has already happened with the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. And you did not address my first point that it gives teams with a two-way player an unfair advantage.

[Nine of twelve]

5 minutes ago, Squirrel said:

Seriously? Come on. Unless you have a player that can seriously and legitimate,y pitch, no team is going to give a position player that many innings just to get them two-way status. I’d be pissed if the Twins did this, just to do this. How many two-way players are there, exactly? It’s rare. You are convoluting the discussion by giving a hypothetical that isn’t going to happen.

And if it's so rare, why have the rule in the first place?

[Squirrel]

1 hour ago, Nine of twelve said:

And if it's so rare, why have the rule in the first place?

For Ohtani. Again, how many two-way players are in the league? I hardly think the rule is unfair. Maybe it will encourage more, and if teams can develop a legitimate two-way player, more power to them. But teams are not going to give innings to a position player who cannot pitch legitimately at the MLB level in order to try and get that player a two-way designation. You are trying to come up with a hypothetical that is very, very unlikely in order to prove some kind of a point.

[lecroy24fan]

Michael Lorenzen is another two way player, which was odd last year since technically the Angels had two of them.

There are a handful of players trying to get that designation for the upcoming season. All are players who weren't great a position players so they're learning to pitch.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

7 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Yep. I really dislike that rule. 2nd worst rule in the 4 major sports. Nothing will ever top the shootout to break ties in hockey. 

After the 11th, the game switches to Homerun Derby, position players pitch to pitchers

[Vanimal46]

5 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

After the 11th, the game switches to Homerun Derby, position players pitch to pitchers

If that ends the game sooner than later let’s do it! 

[rwilfong86]

It started out fun and entertaining when guys like Astudillo and Anthony Rizzo among others were used, now it happens way too frequently. I can do without watching a backup player serve up gopher balls that are crushed into the upper deck.