Norva

2017 MLB Season

370 posts in this topic

I hope this isn't too early or I missed another post, but...

 

Today pitchers and catchers reported to camp for the Cleveland Indians. Over the next few days the rest of the MLB will report and in 13 days the first Spring Training games will commence. Baseball is back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Reds suck, and the Marlins are going to be the 2nd Wild Card at best. I have little-to-nothing to look forward to this season.

 

But damnit, I'm ready for baseball!

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Norva said:

Baseball is back!

 

And not a moment too soon.

 

I'll toss this in to get the conversation started. What do we think of the experimental extra innings rule MLB is trying out in the WBC and the low Minors? If MLB is so worried about the pace of play (and I agree it needs to be addressed), the solution is simple. Stop batters from stepping out after every pitch and find a way to make pitchers pick up the pace. Doing those two things would solve the problem. This extra innings rule is idiotic. 

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

And not a moment too soon.

 

I'll toss this in to get the conversation started. What do we think of the experimental extra innings rule MLB is trying out in the WBC and the low Minors? If MLB is so worried about the pace of play (and I agree it needs to be addressed), the solution is simple. Stop batters from stepping out after every pitch and find a way to make pitchers pick up the pace. Doing those two things would solve the problem. This extra innings rule is idiotic. 

What, like 10% of all games are extra innings? 20% of those longer than 12 innings? This is idiotic because it will hardly ever come into play. I'm okay with it in the minors though, no sense having to bring in pitchers on short rest because 500 people want to watch the game in Fresno go longer. 

 

My idea is to limit the active roster. Carry 25 guys, but the manager must list a specific number of active players.

 

Anything we can do to prevent specialists coming in for one batter would be nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

I'll toss this in to get the conversation started. What do we think of the experimental extra innings rule MLB is trying out in the WBC and the low Minors? If MLB is so worried about the pace of play (and I agree it needs to be addressed), the solution is simple. Stop batters from stepping out after every pitch and find a way to make pitchers pick up the pace. Doing those two things would solve the problem. This extra innings rule is idiotic. 

While I don't care for it, I at least get some of the logic behind it.

 

The overall quality of the baseball game does drop once games go longer and longer.  And, a byproduct of that, the next game's product likely takes a dip, too.  That following game gets handled differently because you're basically operating with 80% of your roster (assuming your previous day's SP, the next game's SP, the previous day's catcher, and a couple relievers are either unavailable or last resort PH/PR options).  Just as the NHL doesn't go with unlimited overtimes in the regular season, MLB wants to try to do anything it takes to make sure each team is able to put out their best efforts for as many of the 162 games as possible.

 

The bigger issue is that the game is so specialized now, as well as teams are so fearful of overusing their expensive arms.  It was a breath of fresh air seeing Andrew Miller pitch like 3-4 innings of relief.  It used to be 5 starters, one closer, and 5-6 interchangeable relievers.  Now there's a closer, an 8th-inning guy, a 7th inning guy, a left-handed specialist, a groundball specialist, and a long reliever.  Starters generally get yanked before the 7th inning.  (And now there's that philosophy the Rays and Royals used...starter goes a couple trips through the lineup, then it's onto the relievers, even if the SP has thrown just 65 pitches.)  And in the NL, these pitching changes mean pinch hitters, and you burn through your reserves.  And now there's defensive specialists, too.  The spirit of the setup of baseball wasn't to use 18 guys in a 9-inning game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read somewhere that over the course of last season there were 16 games that went longer than 14 innings. It's not a problem that I'm concerned about. 

 

Here's what it would do: guy gets bunted to third base, then scored on a sac fly. It would be boring. 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't even shorten the game! There'd just be more scoring, both teams would likely just score that runner inning after inning forever instead of score no one inning after inning. It's dumb.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

I read somewhere that over the course of last season there were 16 games that went longer than 14 innings. It's not a problem that I'm concerned about. 

 

Here's what it would do: guy gets bunted to third base, then scored on a sac fly. It would be boring. 

 

 

You read it here! Or at least in the hot stove thread.

 

On 2/9/2017 at 0:59 AM, cmm said:

Just like with automatic intentional walks, this is trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. There were a whopping 14 games last year that went 14 innings or longer. Out of 2,428 (two games were cancelled and not made up). That's 0.58%. There were another 18 that went 13 innings. So are we going to turn extra innings into MLB's version of 3-on-3 overtime because 1.32% of the time the game goes 13 innings or longer?

 

If they want to do something like that in the low minors where they limit pitcher usage and don't want position players pitching every time the game goes extra innings, fine. But there's no way they should do this at the big league level.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HedleyLamarr said:

While I don't care for it, I at least get some of the logic behind it.

 

The overall quality of the baseball game does drop once games go longer and longer.  And, a byproduct of that, the next game's product likely takes a dip, too.  That following game gets handled differently because you're basically operating with 80% of your roster (assuming your previous day's SP, the next game's SP, the previous day's catcher, and a couple relievers are either unavailable or last resort PH/PR options).  Just as the NHL doesn't go with unlimited overtimes in the regular season, MLB wants to try to do anything it takes to make sure each team is able to put out their best efforts for as many of the 162 games as possible.

 

The bigger issue is that the game is so specialized now, as well as teams are so fearful of overusing their expensive arms.  It was a breath of fresh air seeing Andrew Miller pitch like 3-4 innings of relief.  It used to be 5 starters, one closer, and 5-6 interchangeable relievers.  Now there's a closer, an 8th-inning guy, a 7th inning guy, a left-handed specialist, a groundball specialist, and a long reliever.  Starters generally get yanked before the 7th inning.  (And now there's that philosophy the Rays and Royals used...starter goes a couple trips through the lineup, then it's onto the relievers, even if the SP has thrown just 65 pitches.)  And in the NL, these pitching changes mean pinch hitters, and you burn through your reserves.  And now there's defensive specialists, too.  The spirit of the setup of baseball wasn't to use 18 guys in a 9-inning game.

If this was MLB's primary concern, they wouldn't schedule night games when a team has a game in another city the next day.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What A Queer.png

 

2m2csps.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with extra inning games, but if you want to get rid of them, or alter them, just eliminate them and institute ties in the standings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, smzimbabwe said:

I don't have a problem with extra inning games, but if you want to get rid of them, or alter them, just eliminate them and institute ties in the standings.

The half second where I actually considered that made me feel dirty, and not in a "thrill me, chill me, fulfill me" way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 8:32 PM, infrared41 said:

 

And not a moment too soon.

 

I'll toss this in to get the conversation started. What do we think of the experimental extra innings rule MLB is trying out in the WBC and the low Minors? If MLB is so worried about the pace of play (and I agree it needs to be addressed), the solution is simple. Stop batters from stepping out after every pitch and find a way to make pitchers pick up the pace. Doing those two things would solve the problem. This extra innings rule is idiotic. 

They use a pitch clock in the minors. It's actually pretty effective in AA. Not sure we'll see it in the majors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what baseball really ought to do? Have everyone pitch one inning in a game. No way to get the tells on the pitchers then! /s

 

What would be a really interesting change of pace is have normal rules for the 10th inning, then start the 11th with the runner on second, then should it get to 12th, become next score wins. It allows for some extra inning play but changes the rules to accelerate it a bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

They use a pitch clock in the minors.

 

I know. I saw it in action in Columbus. Loved it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God speed, Swish. Probably my favorite player of all time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went to a game in Buffalo with it, and I didn't like the pitch clock. It felt like it went too fast. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now