306 replies to this topic

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Three True Outcomes is the real enemy here.

Absolutely. The ball isnt put in play enough.

[Mike in STL]

Since that happens, like, twice a season, that isn't a problem that actually needs solving.

I've said my idea before--essentially, once the first pitch is thrown in an inning, you get one "free" pitching change, but the new pitcher must either complete the inning, give up a run, or be injured (with the DL as a requirement) before the next pitcher can enter. That solves 95% of the actual problems. The innings of X starts, gives up a hit, Y enters, gets an out and walks a guy, Z enters...etc. But it relates to the actual game action, not some artificial three-batter standard.

Also, you could do things like eliminating most of the warmup pitches, possibly requiring the relocation of the bullpens, etc., to cut down on the time itself.

So your proposal is the first pitcher of an inning gives up a homer.
Free pitching change
Next pitcher could conceivably have to face four straight batters if he loads the bases since he has to end the inning, give up a run, or go on the DL. Or worse, 6 straight batters if he loads the bases then gets three Ks. If you have a bit of a cushion You’ll end up having the pitcher play catch with the outfield so a runner can score if the next batter is a more optimal matchup for the next guy you want to bring in.

Agree with doing away with the warm up pitches. Bullpens in the tunnel with a camera in there seem fine to me as well so the reliever only has to come from the dugout.

[DJ MC]

So your proposal is the first pitcher of an inning gives up a homer.
Free pitching change
Next pitcher could conceivably have to face four straight batters if he loads the bases since he has to end the inning, give up a run, or go on the DL. Or worse, 6 straight batters if he loads the bases then gets three Ks. If you have a bit of a cushion You’ll end up having the pitcher play catch with the outfield so a runner can score if the next batter is a more optimal matchup for the next guy you want to bring in.

 

Yes.

 

Also, they wouldn't "play catch". They would intentionally walk the batter. Which I bet we will see now under a similar scenario.

[Mike in STL]

Yes.

 

Also, they wouldn't "play catch". They would intentionally walk the batter. Which I bet we will see now under a similar scenario.

No they wouldn't. That keeps the bases loaded. Maybe they want the DP in order depending on hitter, score, inning, etc... More likely  they would throw a wild pitch, aka, safely roll the ball or lightly toss it past the catcher who will leisurely pick it up so the runners advance, but only one base, and you can change your pitcher without putting another runner on.

 

Your give up a run proposal is too goofy. Although it would mean the O's can pretty much make pitching changes, seemingly any time they want. 

[Mackus]

I also prefer the new 3 batter rule to DJ's variation. Don't particularly like any rules where a pitcher cannot be replaced, though.

[BSLChrisStoner]

MASN: A take on the proposed new MLB playoff format
https://www.masnspor...off-format.html

[CantonJester]

Three True Outcomes is the real enemy here.

 

 

Absolutely. The ball isnt put in play enough.

 

100% agreed. 

[Mike B]

Melewski does a nice job, summarizing the different rules.

https://www.masnspor...-with-fans.html

[BSLChrisStoner]

@Ken_Rosenthal

Union telling players that roster size will reduce to from 30 and 28 on Thursday and remain at that level for the rest of the season and postseason, source tells The Athletic. Taxi squad will be expanded from three players to five players for remainder of the season.

[BSLRoseKatz]

BSL: Rating The MLB Rule Changes

[Mike in STL]

BSL: Rating The MLB Rule Changes

Pretty much agree except I’d go a full 0/10 on 7 inning doubleheader’s and 0/10 on 16 team playoffs.

It felt like getting cheated when the O’s dropped a few one run games in doubleheader’s. What could have been if they got two more chances. I could entertain the idea of a mercy rule of winning by 10 runs after 7 innings in a doubleheader game though. Either move on to game 2, or if in game 2, you’ve already played 14-16 innings on the day of you want to cry mercy and call it.

You’re points are exactly why 16 team playoffs aren’t good, but it also won’t prevent tanking (see the NBA). I also hate this 1 game wild card, if they want to expand to 12, and have it be a football format, with the top two getting a bye to the division round, and the others in a 5 game series at the home park of the better record team, no days off in that round. I’d like that. I wasn’t crazy about a best of three to determine 1st round winners, but fine with it given the circumstances. In a 162 game season I hate seeing one or two games decide a 90+ team wins fate. I’d even like to see the DS expanded from a 5 game to 7 game series.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

1.Universal DH is an obvious thumbs up.


2.Im good with a man on 2nd starting in the 12th or 13th. Not in the 10th.

3. 7 inning DH. Nope.

4.16 team playoff. Nope. I could be talked into considering 12 teams. The thing I really like about the normal wildcard round is the one game winner take all aspect of it.

5. Three batter minimum. Id prefer that you are allowed to matchup however you want late in games. My proposal is 3 batter minimum the first 6 innings of games but from the 7th on you can use your BP how you'd like

[Mackus]

I'd be more understanding of the 7-inning doubleheaders if they were scheduled. Somehow that feels less offensive to me than the rainout makeups.  If MLB wanted to go to a more compressed schedule that included scheduled doubleheaders, I'm on board with those being 7-innings.  But I hate that two games get reduced from 9 innings to 7 just because of a rainout.

 

I strongly dislike the 16-team playoff.  I didn't really like expanding to 10, but it clearly has helped the Orioles and the do-or-die game is fun.  I think I'd be against any expansion beyond 10, would listen on a modest expansion, but 16 is way too many. 

[Mike B]

The Universal DH should be locked in.  99% of the pitchers can not hit a lick, the 1% that can hit a little, do not come close to making it an argument for letting pitchers hit.

 

The 7 inning DH rule.  Only if we are going to play more of them.  If not pass.

 

The runner on second....still a no, but I did not hate it as much as I thought.

 

3 batter minimum.  Again a no, but I can live with it.

 

Expanded playoffs....I like more games...it is going to happen IMO, but 16 seems to many.

[BSLRoseKatz]

Pretty much agree except I’d go a full 0/10 on 7 inning doubleheader’s and 0/10 on 16 team playoffs.

It felt like getting cheated when the O’s dropped a few one run games in doubleheader’s. What could have been if they got two more chances. I could entertain the idea of a mercy rule of winning by 10 runs after 7 innings in a doubleheader game though. Either move on to game 2, or if in game 2, you’ve already played 14-16 innings on the day of you want to cry mercy and call it.

You’re points are exactly why 16 team playoffs aren’t good, but it also won’t prevent tanking (see the NBA). I also hate this 1 game wild card, if they want to expand to 12, and have it be a football format, with the top two getting a bye to the division round, and the others in a 5 game series at the home park of the better record team, no days off in that round. I’d like that. I wasn’t crazy about a best of three to determine 1st round winners, but fine with it given the circumstances. In a 162 game season I hate seeing one or two games decide a 90+ team wins fate. I’d even like to see the DS expanded from a 5 game to 7 game series.

I know basketball has tanking, but it's definitely easier to convince fans to not try to make the playoffs when over half the teams make it when you know you'll get to see a Zion or Ja Morant the next year as compared to baseball where I don't think over 5% of the fanbase watched Adley or Kjerstad in college and already knew about their hype going in 

[dude]

BSL: Rating The MLB Rule Changes

 

Still think you should make this a poll.

[BSLChrisStoner]

The Ringer: The Mound Is Too Damn Close

https://www.theringe...d-move-distance

[You Play to Win the Game]

No.

[BSLChrisStoner]

No.

That's my first inclination...  but it's an article worth reading, and thinking about in a larger context. 
 

[You Play to Win the Game]

I read it, and still a firm no. Batters have gotten stronger and better too. And there's no logical or good answer to the fact that even more pitching injuries would happen if they did this. Which is already a big problem in baseball.