Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
AceKing

Two Feet and Robotic Umps....

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Luke-OH said:

So yeah, some of these ideas are interesting and worth investigation (other than moving the mound back which is dumb), but by implementing them all at once you cloud any type of usable data you'd get about the effect on pace of play, run environment, etc. 

Also, a little off topic, but I hear all the time people saying that young people don't like baseball and the solution is less HR and Ks and more balls in play. But I haven't heard any kid say anything like that, kids love big velocity and moonshots. What kids want is more personality in the game, more swagger, and probably less people complaining about the state of the game in broadcasts. 

People of all ages have all ages have claimed their love of the homerun and the strikeout. They can be exciting, of course. But sometimes what people claim doesn't truly reflect reality. Consider not just a "ball in play" like a popup to the Catcher, but a "ball in play" basehit to the gap with runners on first base and second base. There is a degree of tension during those plays that doesn't exist, or ceases to exist, when the K is recorded or there is dead ball time following the HR. We can hear the excitement in the crowd.The noise in the stands is organic,  as opposed to the blasting sound system creating much of the sound following a K or HR and leading fans into creating more sound than they would have naturally. Watch a high school game -- one where there is no sound system -- and consider the noise of the fans and players themselves as they react to strikeouts and homeruns versus basehits with runners on base. The will vocally react to Ks and HRs, of course, but the loudest reactions are usually in response to the basehits combined with base running.

Consider for a moment: 
What is the most exciting play in the past 10 years of Orioles history?
What play created the loudest fan reaction in OPACY over the past ten years?

Other topic: I think we all would appreciate fewer people complaining about the state of baseball in broadcasts, for damn sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Tx Oriole said:

I just wish they'd leave the game alone. 

Absolutely! and the best way to accomplish that is to get rid of our commissioner. I wonder what Clemenza charges these days....

(whistling innocently)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Beef Supreme said:

People of all ages have all ages have claimed their love of the homerun and the strikeout. They can be exciting, of course. But sometimes what people claim doesn't truly reflect reality. Consider not just a "ball in play" like a popup to the Catcher, but a "ball in play" basehit to the gap with runners on first base and second base. There is a degree of tension during those plays that doesn't exist, or ceases to exist, when the K is recorded or there is dead ball time following the HR. We can hear the excitement in the crowd.The noise in the stands is organic,  as opposed to the blasting sound system creating much of the sound following a K or HR and leading fans into creating more sound than they would have naturally. Watch a high school game -- one where there is no sound system -- and consider the noise of the fans and players themselves as they react to strikeouts and homeruns versus basehits with runners on base. The will vocally react to Ks and HRs, of course, but the loudest reactions are usually in response to the basehits combined with base running.

Consider for a moment: 
What is the most exciting play in the past 10 years of Orioles history?
What play created the loudest fan reaction in OPACY over the past ten years?

Other topic: I think we all would appreciate fewer people complaining about the state of baseball in broadcasts, for damn sure.

The Delmon Double, without a doubt.

Edited by Philip
Spelling
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, now said:

Bigger Bases... Seems an overreaction... just because of Manny?

I don't even remember what this is a reference to regarding Machado, but I sincerely doubt that any rule change they are testing is "just because of Manny."

Collisions at first base are not uncommon. Additionally, the current rules that demand the runner to first stay in a lane that does not include the base itself are inherently problematic. If no other changes to the bases make it to MLB, a new "first base" that extends into the running lane would help reduce collisions as well as interference, even if the first base extension is not made of the same material as the base itself. I envision it to be a chalk square equal in size to the base (though it would be important to have a way that the ground crew could quickly replace the chalk when players dive or slide into the base, which will almost certainly increase if the base extension is enacted). That chalk extension is in foul ground, so it would not change the dimensions of the field or the rules. Moreover, the fielder could also use the extension of first base, enabling more athletic defensive plays as well as a much wider path for any fielder to throw the ball to the player covering firstbase on bunts or dribblers in front of the plate.

Share this post


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

Pretty sure that never happened, except in batting practice.   

Home run derby. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Beef Supreme said:

I don't even remember what this is a reference to regarding Machado, but I sincerely doubt that any rule change they are testing is "just because of Manny."

Collisions at first base are not uncommon. Additionally, the current rules that demand the runner to first stay in a lane that does not include the base itself are inherently problematic. If no other changes to the bases make it to MLB, a new "first base" that extends into the running lane would help reduce collisions as well as interference, even if the first base extension is not made of the same material as the base itself. I envision it to be a chalk square equal in size to the base (though it would be important to have a way that the ground crew could quickly replace the chalk when players dive or slide into the base, which will almost certainly increase if the base extension is enacted). That chalk extension is in foul ground, so it would not change the dimensions of the field or the rules. Moreover, the fielder could also use the extension of first base, enabling more athletic defensive plays as well as a much wider path for any fielder to throw the ball to the player covering firstbase on bunts or dribblers in front of the plate.

They've been using an orange safety bag in high school and rec ball for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They do have a double first base in some of the other types of baseball.  (Softball/Tee-Ball) which enabled the batter-runner access to the foul side and the fielder access to the fair side.  If this was used along with the batter runner path to the base, the "Interference" call at first by the Batter/Runner would be easy to call and the Batter/runner and fielder collisions eliminated.

Share this post


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

Agreed! There is a reason Ken Griffey Jr. was basically the face of the MLB in the 90's when it came to promotions and stuff. Aside from being a great player, he had a personality and it was built up. Who doesn't remember watching him hit dingers with his hat turned backwards?

I completely agree with you. As a kid growing up in the 90s, Griffey Jr was by far the most exciting and best player in my mind. The McGwire/Sosa home run race also was a big deal. Cal Ripken's streak was a big deal.

To their credit, I think MLB has been doing a pretty good job lately on Instagram of trying to market player personality and swagger. Mookie Betts, Javier Baez, Nolan Arenado, Manny Machado, Aaron Judge, Bryce Harper - they all could be capable of Griffey-level stardom if marketed correctly.

I personally feel that MLB's problems bringing in younger fans has more to do with marketing and accessibility than making the game quicker. Kids today are the children of millennials like myself, a lot of us are getting rid of cable - which is the only way you can watch baseball anymore. It's also pretty stinkin' expensive to go to a game as a family.

The only good baseball video game is exclusive to the PS4 - so you're cutting out a lot of kids there. Think of how many kids learn football from playing Madden. And tanking doesn't develop diehard, lifelong baseball fans either - you just get sports fans who want to watch a winning team.

There's a lot of factors - and I don't think a 2.5 hour game versus a 3 hour game is keeping kids away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Number5 said:

They've been using an orange safety bag in high school and rec ball for years.

Part of the reason why I advocate chalk instead of a double first base is that the "safety" portion of the base could interfere with batted balls and it might not be  as "safe" as chalk. I could envision a second bag creating a tripping obstacle. Even the bases as they currently exist are dangerous to a degree (broken fingers, sprained wrists and ankles, even the occasional damaged ligament as the spikes slide over the top of the base and the runner crashes down when their spikes catch dirt...) I think the safest approach for players of all ages is to implement a safety zone that is made of nothing more than chalk.

Share this post


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

Pretty sure that never happened, except in batting practice.   

Yeah, it was batting practice (and Home Run Derbys), but MLB did not hesitate to repeatedly show the videos and talk about "The Kid."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, thezeroes said:

They do have a double first base in some of the other types of baseball.  (Softball/Tee-Ball) which enabled the batter-runner access to the foul side and the fielder access to the fair side.  If this was used along with the batter runner path to the base, the "Interference" call at first by the Batter/Runner would be easy to call and the Batter/runner and fielder collisions eliminated.

You'll never eliminate collisions at first until you can eliminate bad throws. :-) Or, for that matter, until you can eliminate the intent of a player to interfere (e.g. ARod).

Plus, it is natural for righties to come out of the batters box and run through the infield grass as they orient themselves on a path to first base (picture Cal "running out" a four-hopper to shortstop). Sometimes, those runners never quite get into the lane on the direct path to the base. I do agree with you that an extended first base would decrease interference and collisions but eliminating them won't happen because of this one change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Beef Supreme said:

Part of the reason why I advocate chalk instead of a double first base is that the "safety" portion of the base could interfere with batted balls and it might not be  as "safe" as chalk. I could envision a second bag creating a tripping obstacle. Even the bases as they currently exist are dangerous to a degree (broken fingers, sprained wrists and ankles, even the occasional damaged ligament as the spikes slide over the top of the base and the runner crashes down when their spikes catch dirt...) I think the safest approach for players of all ages is to implement a safety zone that is made of nothing more than chalk.

A batted ball that hits the safety bag is a foul ball.  Zero problem with that.  There is, of course, no greater chance of tripping over the safety bag as there is currently with the white bag.  I don't share your concerns about that.  You are envisioning problems that don't, in fact, create problems in the millions of games that have been played using a safety bag.  I would guess that nearly every player in professional baseball would have little, if any, difficulty adjusting to playing with a safety bag, since virtually all of them have played with the safety bag previously in their careers.  A chalk outline on the ground would make the base umpire's ability to see the play inherently more difficult and would of course result in many situations where the "base" has been rubbed out as the game progresses.  Given the fact that the safety bag has, in fact, worked in many, many games without any of your concerns creating real problems, it would seem that the safety bag is a much better plan than a chalk outline, if MLB decides to make any such change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Number5 said:

A batted ball that hits the safety bag is a foul ball.  Zero problem with that.  There is, of course, no greater chance of tripping over the safety bag as there is currently with the white bag.  I don't share your concerns about that.  You are envisioning problems that don't, in fact, create problems in the millions of games that have been played using a safety bag.  I would guess that nearly every player in professional baseball would have little, if any, difficulty adjusting to playing with a safety bag, since virtually all of them have played with the safety bag previously in their careers.  A chalk outline on the ground would make the base umpire's ability to see the play inherently more difficult and would of course result in many situations where the "base" has been rubbed out as the game progresses.  Given the fact that the safety bag has, in fact, worked in many, many games without any of your concerns creating real problems, it would seem that the safety bag is a much better plan than a chalk outline, if MLB decides to make any such change.

Your math is a little off: there is double the chance of tripping over a double first base than there is of tripping over the current first base. 

Also, I don't think you are citing any source material when you claim that, " You are envisioning problems that don't, in fact, create problems in the millions of games that have been played using a safety bag." Despite how you feel, there is almost 0% chance that no injury has ever occurred "in the millions of games that have been played using a safety bag" because of the double first base. Gonna rate this claim, "pants on fire."

Of course players would adjust to the double bag but that does not mean that it would not still be a tripping hazard. The bases as they exist are tripping hazards.

Finally, I referred to a quick replacement  of the chalk being a necessity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Spring Training Stats

Baseball Savant Stats

Minor League Stats







×
×
  • Create New...