+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 49
  1. #21
    All-Pro dezzzR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    38,694
    One of the dumbest rule changes I'v ever seen, easily.

  2. #22
    All-Pro dezzzR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    38,694
    If they want to speed the game up put a 15-20 sec limit between pitches.

  3. #23
    All-Pro TheAnalyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Original Member since 04-04-04
    Posts
    25,483
    Quote Originally Posted by dezzzR View Post
    If they want to speed the game up put a 15-20 sec limit between pitches.
    Again, that would only prove to be a huge mistake. It would wind up hurting pitchers arms and possibly batters by getting hit with a fastball. That is not the answer. Even if they did that, the pitcher can still throw to first base to reset the clock.

  4. #24
    All-Pro BronxBomberBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,941
    Quote Originally Posted by dezzzR View Post
    If they want to speed the game up put a 15-20 sec limit between pitches.

    +1

    This is one of the few options that would make sense. Enough with pitchers like David Price taking forever between pitches!

    It would not effect the game itself at all. It would not harm the pitchers at all (it's ridiculous to think that it would, lol). If you look at footage of pitchers from 40 plus years ago (you know, when they had no pitch counts) they hardly took time between pitches. There's no reason why a reasonable time frame could be set (without runners on base) to be enforced on the mound.

    Good thought, dezzzR!

  5. #25
    All-Pro TheAnalyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Original Member since 04-04-04
    Posts
    25,483
    Here is some more of his tinkering:

    First, Manfred is proposing that the four-pitch walk be eliminated. This would save time, since instead of awkwardly throwing four pitches to a standing catcher while the batter sort of waits there until it's all over, the batter could just go to first base. The second change he's proposing is a little more ... intense. He wants to raise the strike zone several inches to above a player's knee. Currently, the strike zone resides in "the hollow beneath the kneecap," so this would be quite the change. It would eliminate the low strike, which has been called more in recent years.

    But here's the problem, and you may have already noticed it. Even though it might not save much, eliminating the four-pitch intentional walk is meant to save time during a game. But raising the strike zone is supposed to generate more offense, which actually makes games longer. You can't have both. Well, you can, but they work at cross purposes. Any time saved on intentional walks you lose on non-intentional walks. You can have shorter games or more action. If you want both, Manfred needs to essentially cut an inning or two off of the end of every game.
    http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2017/2/7...me-of-baseball

  6. #26
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    9,222
    Quote Originally Posted by BronxBomberBlue View Post
    +1

    This is one of the few options that would make sense. Enough with pitchers like David Price taking forever between pitches!

    It would not effect the game itself at all. It would not harm the pitchers at all (it's ridiculous to think that it would, lol). If you look at footage of pitchers from 40 plus years ago (you know, when they had no pitch counts) they hardly took time between pitches. There's no reason why a reasonable time frame could be set (without runners on base) to be enforced on the mound.

    Good thought, dezzzR!
    Lol. The Yanks are the poster-child for long games. Their batters delay games as a strategy.

    I bet if you average the Yankees/Red Sox games in the past 5 years they would be the longest games in the history of MLB.
    Last edited by DandyDon; 02-11-2017 at 12:29 AM.

  7. #27
    All-Pro BronxBomberBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,941
    Quote Originally Posted by DandyDon View Post
    Wow, seriously? The Yanks are literally the poster-child for long games. Their batters delay the game as a strategy.

    Any Yankees/Red Sox game will possibly be the longest game in the history of the sport.




    Those NYY vs BOS games are long because of the high amount of runs that are usually scored in them, the hitters on both teams are smart and patient who take a lot of pitches because they have good eyes and don't swing at bad pitches, which makes the pitcher work even harder (good strategy), and because of a lot of pitching changes during the middle to the end of the game. NOT because the Yankee hitters take too much time stepping out of the batter's box..

    Anybody who complains about a Yankee vs Red Sux game is either not a real baseball fan, or a Yankee hater.

  8. #28
    All-Pro TheAnalyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Original Member since 04-04-04
    Posts
    25,483
    Quote Originally Posted by DandyDon View Post
    Lol. The Yanks are the poster-child for long games. Their batters delay games as a strategy.

    I bet if you average the Yankees/Red Sox games in the past 5 years they would be the longest games in the history of MLB.
    So true. Yankees are notorious for having longer at bats and keeping an inning going. And Girardi and his pitching changes are crazy at times and some times costs him. Red Sox always do the same though as the the Big Roidtiz always took much time getting ready. Checking his cleats, checking the batting glove, spitting, shifting his weight, rechecking his batting glove, making sure the cameras are on him, doing a lil dance, shifting his weight again, making sure his eyebrows and beard is trimmed perfect.... 3 minutes go by...

    Anyone who cries about people bringing up the length of a Red Sox Yankee game is obviously not paying attention to the game of baseball (and sound ridiculous).

    They are long games.

    I only enjoy it though because Im a big time Yankee fan.

  9. #29
    All-Pro gmen46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Posts
    8,007
    Instead of fooling with the basic components of a game, keep everything the same as is, but reduce regulation games to 7 innings. THAT'LL greatly shorten the length of games without harming fans' sense of sport integrity overall, it seems to me.

    Reduce regular season to 130-140 games, give or take. Start season late April. World Series would end early-mid October. The regular season is too damn long. It dilutes interest, certainly for the non avid baseball fan--which is one reason a broader baseball audience has been shrinking, imo.

  10. #30
    All-Pro TheAnalyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Original Member since 04-04-04
    Posts
    25,483
    Quote Originally Posted by gmen46 View Post
    Instead of fooling with the basic components of a game, keep everything the same as is, but reduce regulation games to 7 innings. THAT'LL greatly shorten the length of games without harming fans' sense of sport integrity overall, it seems to me.

    Reduce regular season to 130-140 games, give or take. Start season late April. World Series would end early-mid October. The regular season is too damn long. It dilutes interest, certainly for the non avid baseball fan--which is one reason a broader baseball audience has been shrinking, imo.
    I strongly disagree about 7 inning games. Baseball is 9 innings. cant change that. I don't mind shortening the season however. start later in April, end a bit earlier (although I love that classic October baseball). Maybe giveven more days off by having a lot more 6 game weeks instead of doing so many 7 game weeks. Figure out a way to add more off days for the players.

    The biggest issue is the commercial breaks but we all know they won't limit those.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts