Jump to content
weams

MLB will be going to a three-batter minimum rule in 2020 that should make it especially difficult for lefties who struggle versus righties to find work.

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Plenty of sporting events take 3+ hours.

I'm in the camp that doesn't have a huge problem with it.

I don't have a huge problem with it.  I just go to bed in the 6th or 7th inning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Frobby said:

I don’t think the amount of time this saves materially changes the length of the game as a whole.   It simply eliminates a portion of some games that is incredibly boring.    The time elapsed during pitching changes is extremely boring, and when you do it twice in five minutes, that’s my definition of ultra-boring.    And then you get managers like Girardi who do it three times in an inning without blinking.    Zzzzzzzz.......

It's just like the timeouts in basketball.  The game is moving along with a good rhythm, and then just when it get really tense near the end they introduce six extra commercial breaks.

There's two issues - length and pace. I'd like them to improve both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Good, long discussion, but here’s the bottom line:

“There are 26 weeks in a Major League Baseball season, and we saw 779 of these appearances in 2018. That's about 28 times per week, or roughly one per team per week. It's not a lot. It's not nothing.”

So, figure 26 times per team in a season, on average.    As I expected, 14 for the Orioles in 2019 was on the low side.     

It's a decent, reasonable start to getting their hands around pace and length of game.  Not too extreme.  So the inevitable reaction is that it doesn't do enough, so they should scrap it.  But if it was a more intrusive change we'd get that it's going waaaay to far and they shouldn't do it.

Share this post


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

It's a decent, reasonable start to getting their hands around pace and length of game.  Not too extreme.  So the inevitable reaction is that it doesn't do enough, so they should scrap it.  But if it was a more intrusive change we'd get that it's going waaaay to far and they shouldn't do it.

I'm just opposed to any of the changes I have seen which will limit strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Or maybe you could just use one pretty good pitcher for an entire inning (or God forbid, two) once in a while where they get three fairly routine outs.  Instead of watching the manager trot out to the mound six times in the middle of an inning in every close/late game.

Alternately we could go back to the normal MLB solution, which in this case is to say any sport that lasts less than 3-4 hours isn't a sport at all, absolving the need to try to come up with any solution at all.

Maybe.  

Will be curious to see if this really helps shave off any time.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Can_of_corn said:

I'm just opposed to any of the changes I have seen which will limit strategy.

Limits create strategy.  If you're playing chess the strategy comes from the limits to where and how each piece can move.  It would be a chaotic mess if all pieces moved like the queen. 

Making a pitcher pitch to three batters doesn't necessarily limit strategy.  It changes the strategic options.  It may open up options on offense.  It makes the manager think ahead on which pitcher he wants to bring in.  Much of the LOOGY machinations is more like automatic button pushing than hard-thought choices.

Share this post


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

Maybe.  

Will be curious to see if this really helps shave off any time.  

I'm curious if a decrease in game length increase attendance or TV ratings.

 

Share this post


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

I'm curious if a decrease in game length increase attendance or TV ratings.

 

Of course it will, come on.  Dude, games are going to go from 3 hours and 5 minutes to 2 hours and 55 minutes.  Knowing that, don't you want to buy a ticket?  

Share this post


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

Of course it will, come on.  Dude, games are going to go from 3 hours and 5 minutes to 2 hours and 55 minutes.  Knowing that, don't you want to buy a ticket?  

I might just drive up for a game if they get it under 2:53.

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I'm curious if a decrease in game length increase attendance or TV ratings.

 

That's like looking for broad changes in team runs allowed based on use of 40-inning LOOGYs in a 1450 inning season.  You could argue that the effect is so small you might as well not use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DrungoHazewood said:

That's like looking for broad changes in team runs allowed based on use of 40-inning LOOGYs in a 1450 inning season.  You could argue that the effect is so small you might as well not use it.

I wasn't just referring to the 20 seconds this move will carve off of the length of the average game.

If they make enough changes to cut off say 10 minutes, does it change anything?  What about 20 minutes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldnt find the current average time, but I did see that in 2017, the time rose to 3 hr and 5 minutes, in spite of MLB efforts to reduce it.

Of course, implementing replay system has to impact time, and Im not opposed to instant replay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see a strategy with the three batter thingy. 

Loogy gets the first guy out.  Manager signals two Intentional Walks and brings in the next ground ball throwing pitcher.  Batter hits into a Double Play , inning over

Pitcher starts an inning, batter hits a triple.  Manager signals two Intentional Walks, brings in the next reliever.

Both benches are warned about hitting  batter, Loogy gets his guy out. throws at the next batter, gets ejected, bring on the next pitcher.

Share this post


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

I couldnt find the current average time, but I did see that in 2017, the time rose to 3 hr and 5 minutes, in spite of MLB efforts to reduce it.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL/2019-misc.shtml
 

Looks like the median is about 3:10.     And the Red Sox take 10 minutes longer than any other AL team.     I say we eliminate them.    Who’s with me?

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1

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 feel like it is really tough to evaluate the future of a bullpen just because of the unknowns. Who really knows what flawed starter will be thrown to the bullpen and be a stud....I don’t think anyone saw Zach Britton coming. I guess the good news is that when you have the depth the Os are growing, it gives a decent indication that there can be impact arms in the pen.
    • I understand the OP grade of an A, but I would imagine that grade takes into account what our organization was as much as what it currently is. If you compare it to our history, I would agree with the A grade. But comparing to other organizations, I would think a B is probably more realistic. I say this having done zero research to support this comment. Either way, I am happy with the state of the pitching, and think next year will be a big one to see what we actually have.
    • Depth drove that one.  We have the best catching prospect, but not much depth.  Knock on wood, Adley gets hurt/doesn't perform, our grade would drop tremendously.
    • This is a pretty simplistic way of looking at Brocail's body of work - albeit unusual from our best poster. I do not have the time to go into more detail, but I will put out a few thoughts that may have led to a change in our pitching coach - in the absence of looking at a detailed pitcher by pitcher analysis from last year to this year. - I believe our defense was supposed to be better in 2020 than 2019 - something that could have impacted pitcher results. - the removal of Dylan Bundy (2019 ERA 4.79, ERA+ 98) and the addition of Alex Cobb (2020 ERA 4.30, ERA+ 106) - speaking of Mr. Bundy, his improvement in results in 2020 with another organization based on a change in pitch mix (as well as opponents) is not a good reflection on our pitching coach - especially if it were determined that the pitch mix change was something that should have been implemented last year based on available data.  Not sure of the results of other pitchers who left the organization. - also not sure of the improvement of someone like Tanner Scott  from 2019 (ERA 4.78, ERA+99) to 2020 (ERA 1.31, ERA+351!) - what role did Brocail have in the improvement or perhaps in Scott's mediocre numbers last year. My guess is that our GM has made a numbers based decision on Brocail - just as it was pointed out here how bad Flores was in 2020.  
    • So is Brocail done with the O's all together, or could he be reassigned?
    • I don’t get how starting pitching gets an A and catching gets an A-. We have arguably the best catching situation in the sport.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...