157 replies to this topic

[Pedro Cerrano]

It's my old fashioned side coming out again.  Just like giving MCab the MVP when he won the triple crown.  I sorta like the human error element.

[You Play to Win the Game]

That's a weird view for an O's fan to have... watching star Yankees and Red Sox players getting the benefit of the doubt all season at our expense. Umpires are garbage. It's impossible for them to not be biased, or even intimidated at times if not star struck. When the technology is precise, and available, I want it instituted immediately. There's not a better argument for the "integrity of the game" folks than having a precise, consistent strike zone, IMO.

[Pedro Cerrano]

That's a weird view for an O's fan to have... watching star Yankees and Red Sox players getting the benefit of the doubt all season at our expense. Umpires are garbage. It's impossible for them to not be biased, or even intimidated at times if not star struck. When the technology is precise, and available, I want it instituted immediately. There's not a better argument for the "integrity of the game" folks than having a precise, consistent strike zone, IMO.

 

This is more than a tad hyperbolic.

 

I dunno, i know it's not grounded in any sort of concrete knowledge, but I just like the idea of having human umpires.  I'm a pretty nostalgic guy and I like a lot of the "old school" aspects about the game.

[Matt_P]

I think it's still to difficult to define what the strike zone should be for each batter to be an effective measure at this point.  If it's not gonna be any more accurate, then stick with the status quo.

 

I'd go with the computers to prevent bias. Umpires change their strike zone based on the count and using Pitch FX or something would stop that.

[PatrickDougherty]

I'd go with the computers to prevent bias. Umpires change their strike zone based on the count and using Pitch FX or something would stop that.

FWIW umpires have gotten a lot more accurate and unbiased since PitchFX was widely implemented, but I definitely agree with you. PitchFX can be off but at least it's off for everyone in the same way. It's most frustrating when umpires' zones are on wheels.

[bnickle]

I brought up the slide play scenario in a previous post before it happened. It's just not that easy to maintain constant contact with the bag throughout the slide. Are we really going to have managers reviewing all these slides at 2nd or 3rd knowing that there is a decent chance that they can find a fraction of a second clip where the runner loses contact. Technically, it is cut and dry but it doesn't really feel right. I understand what Ponansky is saying. At least in this one scenario. Obviously, overall " getting it right" is right.

[bnickle]

Posnanski: Upon Further Review--There are unintended consequences to review that take away from the game

Out of curiosity, do you agree with your homeboy??

[SportsGuy]

I want more replay.  I don't want it limited.  Replay should be there for everything.

[RShack]

I want more replay.  I don't want it limited.  Replay should be there for everything.

 

Not sure, but I think a little while ago you were saying the game has too much dead time... you wanted less time between innings, etc...  am I making that up?

[You Play to Win the Game]

I want more replay.  I don't want it limited.  Replay should be there for everything.

 
Not sure, but I think a little while ago you were saying the game has too much dead time... you wanted less time between innings, etc...  am I making that up?

Probably more Weber than Rob on that one. Although many of us do want less interruption. That's why the implementation of all the best technology is important. It will speed up the game and once perfected, I could even see the replay system going away. We can dream right. That should be the goal though. But with what we have now... just get the calls right.

[RShack]

I think it's an impractical request at this point and for the near future.  I don't want Questec or PitchFX announcing whether a pitch is a ball or strike at this point over the opinion of an ump behind the plate, I don't think they are good enough (a big part of why I don't like catcher pitch-framing stats, I don't buy that the things tracking that know that a pitch called a strike should have been a ball or vice versa).  I think it's still to difficult to define what the strike zone should be for each batter to be an effective measure at this point.  If it's not gonna be any more accurate, then stick with the status quo.

 

But, if that problem is solved, I'd much rather have a visual or technological way of determining if any part of the ball was within the strike zone over any part of the plate than having an umpire decide.

 

Right now, they could put a chip inside the ball and sensors under the plate... the balls would be $45 each, but so what?  

Same thing with shoes and bases and fielders gloves...

 

Do you want technologically perfect play calling, announced by text on the scoreboard and Siri thru the PA system, and no umps?

 

EDIT:  They could make it Howard Cosell instead of Siri... or Alvin the Chipmunk... or they could make it be the Terminator for strikes and outs, and Liberace for balls and safe...

[SportsGuy]

Not sure, but I think a little while ago you were saying the game has too much dead time... you wanted less time between innings, etc... am I making that up?

yea, I want those things but the length of the game isn't something that bothers me.

But IR is worth the dead time if it means getting things right.

[DJ MC]

Right now, they could put a chip inside the ball and sensors under the plate... the balls would be $45 each, but so what?  

Same thing with shoes and bases and fielders gloves...

 

Do you want technologically perfect play calling, announced by text on the scoreboard and Siri thru the PA system, and no umps?

 

EDIT:  They could make it Howard Cosell instead of Siri... or Alvin the Chipmunk... or they could make it be the Terminator for strikes and outs, and Liberace for balls and safe...

 

1) There are 2,430 regular-season baseball games, and each home team is required to provide 72 new baseballs for every game. Add in playoff games and spare balls for extra-inning games, and you end up with around 180,000 baseballs needed for a major-league baseball season. At $45 per ball, that comes out to $270,000 in baseballs per team.

 

If you're the Lancaster Barnstormers or the NCAA, that's likely an outrageous expense at least until the price comes down. For a major-league baseball organization, that's not unreasonable when the difference between marginal wins and losses in a playoff race can be millions of dollars.

 

2) You don't have to eliminate the umpires. They can still be a valuable part of the game. Part of their job may be end up for show, when they call whatever the computer decides is a ball or strike. Also, though, it's valuable to have people on the field who know the rulebook and can both settle disputes and act as a neutral party in cases where there is a fight or rules need to be enforced.

[Russ]

Your math is a bit off unless you were thinking of something else. Much more prohibitive.

[Russ]

Oh. Divided by 30 teams. Gotcha.

[DJ MC]

Oh. Divided by 30 teams. Gotcha.

 

Yes. I meant to put that in, sorry. Edited.

 

Overall it would be around $8.1 million total.

[RShack]

Yes. I meant to put that in, sorry. Edited.

 

Overall it would be around $8.1 million total.

 

So, less than 2 Tommy Hunter's....

[DJ MC]

So, less than 2 Tommy Hunter's....

 

In terms of mass it would be clo...oh, you mean cost; yeah. For each team, half the cost of a league-minimum player.