306 replies to this topic

[Mackus]

I don't agree that strikeouts and homeruns are a problem.

[Pedro Cerrano]

This is like the whole “the games are too long” argument. People that love baseball will watch it. People that aren’t interested in it aren’t gonna start watching because the game is 10 minutes shorter.

I’ve never met someone that has said “man I’d start watching if it wasn’t for the three true outcomes issue”

I’ve never met someone that has said “I love baseball but I am going to stop watching because there are too many three true outcomes”

[BSLChrisStoner]

This is like the whole “the games are too long” argument. People that love baseball will watch it. People that aren’t interested in it aren’t gonna start watching because the game is 10 minutes shorter.

I’ve never met someone that has said “man I’d start watching if it wasn’t for the three true outcomes issue”

I’ve never met someone that has said “I love baseball but I am going to stop watching because there are too many three true outcomes”

Baseball is my favorite sport. 

IMO, the current game sucks for a lot of reasons.  This three true outcome era being a huge part. 

I do agree that people that aren't interested in baseball aren't going to be interested in baseball if  a game ends 10 minutes shorter.

But I think this is a bit different.  

[mweb08]

I don't agree that strikeouts and homeruns are a problem.

 

I agree on the latter. The ball being put in play on not just a higher percentage of plate appearances, but a high percentage of pitches, would make for a more entertaining game IMO. More opportunities for exciting defensive plays and baserunning, and even errors and blunders, make for a better product in my view. 

 

To be clear, this isn't the tipping point on whether or not I watch at all or not, it's just a factor in the level of my enjoyment of the game.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Here's Bill James's opinion.  He's also in favor of gradually increasing the minimum size of bat handles, to slightly reduce bat speed.

 

 Well. . .I have written about this before, so I'm repeating myself for most of the audience.  But (a) the mound does need to be moved back, but (b) moving it to 66 feet--or, for that matter, 62 feet--would basically crash the software.   Pitchers have spent many years learning to make a breaking pitch break at exactly the right distance so that it (a) looks like it won't be a strike, but then breaks over the plate, or (b) looks like it will be a strike, but then jumps outside in the last ten feet.   If you moved the mound back 2 feet, all breaking pitches suddenly become obsolete.   Every breaking pitch is going to either be in the dirt or wild outside--every one.  So YOU JUST CAN'T DO THAT.  

 

While you need to achieve that result, you need to work on it 2 inches at a time.  Move it back to 60 feet, 8 inches this year, 60-10 in two years, 61-0 in four years.   Eventually it will be back where it needs to be; nobody's career will be ended by that, and we'll find the balance point where it works, rather than guessing where it ought to be.  

 

[McNulty]

25% of all PAs are Ks, 40% don’t have a ball in play, and there have been more Ks than singles for a few seasons now (and the gap is widening).

Problem.

[mweb08]

Here's Bill James's opinion:

 

 

 

He brings up a worthy concern. The issue of how flexible pitchers are in regards to distance to the plate would have to be rigorously examined to see how feasible this solution is and if it is realistic, the ideal timing and increments of the adjustments.

 

There are various potential negative side effects of this that could make it a poor idea. I really don't have a great idea of how it would turn out, but I do think it's an idea that is worth further investigation and consideration.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Fine, I guess I'd be open to trying this, incrementally, in the minors.

[Old Man]

Could move the pitching mound to 2nd base, and let them pitch from there.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Baseball is my favorite sport.

IMO, the current game sucks for a lot of reasons. This three true outcome era being a huge part.

I do agree that people that aren't interested in baseball aren't going to be interested in baseball if a game ends 10 minutes shorter.

But I think this is a bit different.

And yet you still watch and follow it religiously

[Mike in STL]

Robo strike zone could solve a lot of problems. Some of the egregious ball and strike calls lead to a K or BB that shouldn’t. Some of the egregious calls lead to a 1-2 count rather than a 2-1 count. One makes the hitter have to protect. The other makes the pitcher have to throw a pitch more likely to be put in play.

[BSLChrisStoner]

And yet you still watch and follow it religiously

Yep, they have me for life.  

But I want the game to thrive as much as possible, and for another generation of fans to come to love the game. 
I don't want to make the game unrecognizable with changes...  but if there are changes which will make more people appreciate the game (and frankly also make the game more enjoyable for me to watch as a fan) I'm on-board.

[mweb08]

I bought a 13 game package for the O's, but I still would like the team and the overall game to be better.

 

The NBA is my favorite sports league, yet if I was in charge I would make several changes to it, some quite significant.

 

I also live in the United States and will likely continue to do so for a long time, but I can still recognize its flaws and try to push it to become better.

 

As James Baldwin famously said:

“I love American more than any other country in the world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.”

[You Play to Win the Game]

I just think the line: "We need to make baseball more relevant" needs to go away. It isn't going to happen. Unless cell phones and technology rewind to the 80's. It's just too much of a commitment. I'm all for making the game better for the fans who are still here though. So I shouldn't have been as bullish about this.

 

One thing I miss about the game is the lost art of base running. The strategy involved, picking your spots, the athleticism required from great base runners, etc. I think solving the 3-outcome issue would help with this too. 

[mweb08]

Robo strike zone could solve a lot of problems. Some of the egregious ball and strike calls lead to a K or BB that shouldn’t. Some of the egregious calls lead to a 1-2 count rather than a 2-1 count. One makes the hitter have to protect. The other makes the pitcher have to throw a pitch more likely to be put in play.

 

All for Robo umps! That's a much more cut and dry matter to me than the suggestion of moving the mound back, which could result in problematic unintended consequences. 

[Old Man]

Here is my take. Youngsters are still following the football game. So the sport is keeping their fan base intact, as older folks go through life's process and are no longer with us, the fandome is still thriving with younger ones. Granted rec sports football isnt what it was, but still pretty strong, compared to baseball.

 

Youngster just dont really care or understand what they are missing out on the game of baseball.  Its well down on their radar list.

 

Baseball is not going to die overnight.

 

If this planet is around for another 30-40 years. not sure, MLB will be able to survive.

[Mike B]

My fear for Baseball is that some of the key decison makers do not understand the game, and I wonder if some even like it.

[Mike in STL]

All for Robo umps! That's a much more cut and dry matter to me than the suggestion of moving the mound back, which could result in problematic unintended consequences.

Very true. Rather see the skill of pitchers vs hitters when everyone knows exactly where the strike zone is before they start altering other things that lead to like you said, unintended consequences.

[Mike in STL]

My fear for Baseball is that some of the key decison makers do not understand the game, and I wonder if some even like it.

That’s my thinking too. Some things make no sense that they try to pitch as new ideas.

[mweb08]

Very true. Rather see the skill of pitchers vs hitters when everyone knows exactly where the strike zone is before they start altering other things that lead to like you said, unintended consequences.

 

To be clear, I am very open to the idea of also moving the mound back, but I am much less confident in that as an upgrade to the game than I am with the robo umps.