Jump to content
Diehard_O's_Fan

MLB and Union talk major rule changes

Recommended Posts

I'm not a big fan of rule changes in general. Seems like this is a reaction to the recent slow FA movement. Part of this is the new GM's look for value, not name recognition. If they enact some of these stupid rules they will be changing it back in a few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tx Oriole said:

Houston won a WS couple years ago. I don't consider Houston a large market. 

Isn't Houston the 4th largest city in the nation, and the largest that has just one MLB team?

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bradysburns said:

I thought of that too. Hey, they don't like teams sucking for too long. I feel the same, and I never used to like the idea of "rebuilding." Mainly because I didn't trust anyone in the front office to handle it right.

Now I think we have THE front office team to handle it. And I want them to not worry about wins and losses this year, but build something wisely... something lasting.

So I wouldn't want to see an artificial "cattle prod" entering the equation. 

Also, there's something worse for baseball than a team losing 100 games two years in a row. 

And that is: a team losing 80 games every year... forever. And that's what this rule could trigger, as teams like the O's try TOO SOON to be competitive, rather than building a fundamentally sound, long-term program. 

Yep, been there done that.   I'm more than willing to try to do it differently this time around.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SteveA said:

Isn't Houston the 4th largest city in the nation, and the largest that has just one MLB team?

I don't know. Even though I have family in Houston I've never spent more than a few hours there. Way too big for me. I grew up in a town of under 10,000. Where I live now is in the country. 

Share this post


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

I don't think they could have processed an order that size in 30 minutes.

Yeah, all the tickets were pre-printed and there was just one of each.

And they were color coded to match the seats at Memorial Stadium.

Upper deck pink, general admission gold, lower box green(?), terrace box blue(?).

It's been a while, anyone remember all the colors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Redskins Rick said:

Its not unusual at this stage of the off season, to not have a clear idea of who would be in the 4th and 5th slot. You dont even need the 5th slot until week 3 of the regular season.

Not really relevant to the thread, but this isn't correct. The Orioles will need a fifth starter for the 6th game of the season at the latest (April 2). That's part of a stretch in which they have six games in six days.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me there are two issues with the game today.  Pace of play and lack of balls in play during games.  Pitch clock and banning the shift would go a long way to tackle both of these problems.  I am not crazy about either one but I love the sport and want what is best for it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Diehard_O's_Fan said:

I absolutely love the thought of having a DH in the National League. That sure would make inter league play more fair for American League teams. It is also a safety thing when you have a pitcher batting for the first time in a year. There have been countless pitchers that have got hurt during inter league play.

If everyone has the DH, there is no point in a separate AL and NL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, VaBird1 said:

If everyone has the DH, there is no point in a separate AL and NL.

 

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sure.

To me interleague play killed it.

All the major sports have various conferences, divisions etc. and tend to play the teams in their own division more often, don’t they?  But baseball’s the only sport where the rules vary.     It’s kind of stupid. I prefer the AL rule because I hate seeing pitchers hit, and I hate seeing teams walk the 8th place hitter to get to the pitcher when a 2-out rally occurs in the early innings.   

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wacky idea:  

 

Teams set a payroll,

 

Players are paid 100% of the payroll,

 

Players decide among themselves how to divide up said payroll,

 

Players sign with a team but their actual salary is determined by their peers.

 

Playoff shares are above and beyond regular season salary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, olddogger said:

Wacky idea:  

 

Teams set a payroll,

 

Players are paid 100% of the payroll,

 

Players decide among themselves how to divide up said payroll,

 

Players sign with a team but their actual salary is determined by their peers.

 

Playoff shares are above and beyond regular season salary.

Wacky. What union allows that?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading all of this, I must say I'm a little nervous for the game of baseball.  Maybe I'm wrong, but MLB needs to be careful in its decisions making over these next few years and make sure it doesn't shoot itself in the foot and potentially destroy this game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sure.

To me interleague play killed it.

I liked interleague play. I don't like the DH. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Redskins Rick said:

I think its ludicrous to have the DH in only the AL.

 

Sorry but I love the NL game more than the AL.  I want the pitcher to bat. Sorry but that's baseball. I despise the DH. That's not baseball. Sorry if I stepped on someone's toes. 

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.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







  • Posts

    • I don't imagine Mason Williams will be able to play the next few days so we will probably get to see more of Hays on this homestand.
    • From a purely impersonal point of view, I agree with you.    But in the real world, guys who have been with the club most of the year and have made some contributions aren’t going to be completely cut off.    They’ll get tossed a bone here and there.     And yes, I realize that one can debate whether Smith or Wilkerson  “made some contributions.”    
    • It was intended as a wisecrack.    The mores of 1976 weren’t the same as today.    Believe me, Weaver said a lot worse.     As to Cuellar, I understand Weaver made the remark after Cuellar complained about not getting enough starts in 1976, a year in which he went 4-13 with a 4.96 ERA (66 ERA+).    To me it was just Weaver’s colorful way of saying that he felt he’d given Cuellar plenty of chances that year.    Not a comment on Cuellar’s overall performance during his career.    And my point in quoting Weaver was that Cuellar got a lot more chances that year than a pitcher without his track record would have gotten.     Even Earl Weaver believed that a guy who had earned it over a long period of time deserved some rope.   Buck was far from alone in that regard.   
    • They have to many players on the team.  I think they should be evaluating the guys who need evaluating.  I think we can close the book on Smith and Wilkerson.
    • I would keep Villar.  He is a good major league player.  We have too few of them to give them away.
    • It was a cheap shot on his first wife as well.
    • I haven't done the full 40-man eval but I'd protect him over the other guys you listed. Would the plus curve and the slider that is more slurrvy, I think he's got a pretty good chance of being a solid bullpen arm. From July to the end of the year batters slashed .147/.284/.206/.490 off him with a 0.47 ERA over 19.1 IP with 22 Ks and 11 BBs. Agreed the fastball command needs to tighten up a bit but at 93-95, it has enough on it to keep guys honest even when he not commanding as well.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...