Mound Visits - Pitch Clock

[weams]

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-endure-four-and-a-half-minutes-of-mound-visits-together/

Quote

Last week, Jeff Passan reported the details of a memo outlining MLB’s proposed pace-of-play rule changes for the 2018 season. They come with a pitch clock and requirements that catchers and infielders and coaches more or less stay put:

The restrictions on mound visits are particularly acute. Any time a coach, manager or player visits a pitcher on the mound, or a pitcher leaves the mound to confer with a player, it counts as a visit. Upon the second visit to the pitcher in the same inning, he must exit the game. Under the proposal, each team would have received six so-called “no-change” visits that would have prevented the pitcher from leaving the game.

 

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2018/01/oday-with-differing-opinions-on-netting-and-pitch-clock.html

Quote

The idea of a pitch clock, which increased in probability after the union rejected commissioner Rob Manfred’s latest pace-of-play proposal, makes O’Day want to bang his head against the wall.

Manfred can unilaterally implement his initial proposal, including the 20-second pitch clock and a reduction in allowable mound visits.

 

Among hurlers who exceeded 30 innings last year, O’Day ranked as the 10th-slowest by averaging 29.5 seconds between pitches, according to FanGraphs. 

...

“I’m not real excited about it,” said O’Day, the team’s union representative. “If you look at the numbers, I’m one of the slower guys, by as slow as 10 percent. There’s a lot that goes into that. It is that I’m methodical when I pitch, but I’m also out there thinking or I’m working with a catcher that maybe he’s never caught me before. Maybe we’re having a hard time with signs. We have teams that are sealing signs with video cameras now, so our sign system has to get more elaborate. So, now it’s taking longer for us to get the pitches in.

“For me to have a pitch clock when I’ve got bases loaded and this is a major league baseball game ... there’s guys on base and I’m facing Aaron Judge or Giancarlo Stanton, you don’t want to be, ‘Oh gosh, here we go.’ So, I’m not really excited about some aspects of it. I think it’s going to come in some form or another and we’ll find something we can agree on, hopefully. Luckily, I’ve been in part of the negotiations with MLB, so I’ve kind of seen how it’s evolved and hopefully we’ll get something done.

“I don’t want to be slow. I really don’t. Sometimes, there’s external factors that influence that, like I was saying before. You’re going to see guys using the loopholes. If you step off the clock resets, so I could stand there for 19 seconds and catcher’s going to show me five different signs or whatever, 10 signs, and then I’m going to step off. Nobody wants to see that, and then you’re going to start the whole process over.

“I don’t know. They’re going to have to do something if it happens. I don’t think that’s the way they want to do it, but if they feel that strongly about it, then I guess they might have to. I don’t know.”

5

https://www.purplerow.com/2018/1/29/16931328/mlb-pitch-clock-colorado-rockies

Quote

A pitch clock qualifies as a radically different thing. The routines of pitchers and hitters will be altered. The years of embedded knowledge on how to hold runners will be altered. Hitters and pitchers will search for cracks in the foundations, ways to sneak around the new rules, or ways to bug the players who are too busy looking for ways to sneak around the new rules. There will be pitchers who discover that pitching at an aggressive pace suits them much better, and there will be pitchers who discover that they really, really need those extra few seconds of composure. This goes for the hitters, too, with some of them realizing they’re actually benefiting from a change in routine, with others struggling to adapt.

You know, chaos.

 

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/22232596/pitch-clocks-pace-play-robo-umps-decide-best-baseball

Quote

Pitch clock requiring pitchers to throw the ball within 18 or 20 seconds when nobody is on base

Who should decide: Owners

Some individual players, and players as a bargaining group, assert this is a substantial change in the way the game is played, and there is evidence pitchers might take more time between pitches because it helps them throw harderand/or stay healthy. While we should defer to the players generously, the difference is small and noisy, won't affect most plays and seems (to me) to fall under preference more than requirement. A much more aggressive clock (say, 12 seconds) that truly forced pitchers to change their style or led to more injuries would probably fall under the players' ownership, but they haven't made a good enough case against the 20-second clock to convince me.

Similarly, owners get to say how much time there is between innings, how long the on-deck batter has to get into the batter's box and other non-disruptive "clock" questions.

---

Pitch clock requiring pitchers to throw the ball within 20 seconds when runners are on base

Who should decide: Players

This would have consequences beyond player comfort. It could affect the running game and pitchers' strategies for thwarting the running game, and so it could therefore unilaterally affect some players' careers significantly. The stakes of competition also go way up when runners are on base, and player concerns become more compelling when runners are in scoring position, when games are on the line, when pitchers are on the ropes and so forth.

---

Limiting visits to the mound by catchers and infielders

Who should decide: Probably the players

But (A) owners could make some limits on visits without dramatically affecting game play, and (B) players could certainly find some workarounds to ludicrously constant visits, which would ease the viewership problem without requiring league intervention. Which is to say, if players refuse to do (B) and owners are reasonable with (A), the benefits to owners' interests would probably outweigh the cost to players' interests.

 

 

[Camden_yardbird]

Everyone recognizes it's advertising that slows games.  Sure small gains can be made in game by reducing visits, but the broad definition of a visit is overkill.

[Nite]

It's not the game, it's the between the innings that is killing the time. But that's where the $$$ is so we know that's not getting shortened. 

[Can_of_corn]

54 minutes ago, Nite said:

It's not the game, it's the between the innings that is killing the time. But that's where the $$$ is so we know that's not getting shortened. 

The hitters calling time and stepping out to adjust themselves after taking a pitch bothers me more than the pitchers.

[Il BuonO]

5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

The hitters calling time and stepping out to adjust themselves after taking a pitch bothers me more than the pitchers.

This. And there’s really no need for it most of the time. 

[Redskins Rick]

Mounds is now a sponsor of MLB, so every mounds visit, the Manager must provide the pitcher and catcher, their own mounds bar, and let them indulge.

:):):)

[Legend_Of_Joey]

31 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

The hitters calling time and stepping out to adjust themselves after taking a pitch bothers me more than the pitchers.

This.

They need to implement/enforce the "must stay in the batters box unless fouling off a pitch" rule...

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Legend_Of_Joey said:

This.

They need to implement/enforce the "must stay in the batters box unless fouling off a pitch" rule...

I’ve long advocated putting shock collars on the batters and giving them a jolt whenever they step out.   

[theocean]

I get what MLB is trying to accomplish. But, I don't think the idea of a pitch-clock=faster -games is going to help bring in more casual fans or younger fans.

One of the things that I think makes the NFL so successful is that they do a great job broadcasting the games. Compared to MLB broadcasts, NFL broadcasts have more exciting camera angles, engaging closeups of players on the sidelines, better graphics, and a better sound mix. There's more downtime in football than baseball! But, the NFL does a great job filling that downtime by checking in to highlights of other games around the league and other methods.

Potential younger fans don't want to spend their entire Tuesday evening watching a game where two old white dudes are talking about old players from 1966. Just making the broadcasts more interesting would go a long way.

[gmelson26]

24 minutes ago, theocean said:

I get what MLB is trying to accomplish. But, I don't think the idea of a pitch-clock=faster -games is going to help bring in more casual fans or younger fans.

One of the things that I think makes the NFL so successful is that they do a great job broadcasting the games. Compared to MLB broadcasts, NFL broadcasts have more exciting camera angles, engaging closeups of players on the sidelines, better graphics, and a better sound mix. There's more downtime in football than baseball! But, the NFL does a great job filling that downtime by checking in to highlights of other games around the league and other methods.

Potential younger fans don't want to spend their entire Tuesday evening watching a game where two old white dudes are talking about old players from 1966. Just making the broadcasts more interesting would go a long way.

I agree about the broadcast presentation, but they only need to focus on the quality of 1 game a week, and it's viewership is higher.  Hard to compete against that really in terms of production quality.  Statcast might change some of that though. 

[Tx Oriole]

11 hours ago, weams said:

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/lets-endure-four-and-a-half-minutes-of-mound-visits-together/

http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2018/01/oday-with-differing-opinions-on-netting-and-pitch-clock.html

https://www.purplerow.com/2018/1/29/16931328/mlb-pitch-clock-colorado-rockies

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/22232596/pitch-clocks-pace-play-robo-umps-decide-best-baseball

 

Baseball is the greatest game in the world. Then comes along someone that wants to make changes. They may go to a game on occasion. Leave the game alone. No change needed. I don't care if the pitcher takes five minutes beteeen pitches. Nor would it bother me if a batter steps out of the box a dozen times. Baseball is great. 

[atomic]

3 hours ago, theocean said:

I get what MLB is trying to accomplish. But, I don't think the idea of a pitch-clock=faster -games is going to help bring in more casual fans or younger fans.

One of the things that I think makes the NFL so successful is that they do a great job broadcasting the games. Compared to MLB broadcasts, NFL broadcasts have more exciting camera angles, engaging closeups of players on the sidelines, better graphics, and a better sound mix. There's more downtime in football than baseball! But, the NFL does a great job filling that downtime by checking in to highlights of other games around the league and other methods.

Potential younger fans don't want to spend their entire Tuesday evening watching a game where two old white dudes are talking about old players from 1966. Just making the broadcasts more interesting would go a long way.

I find football very boring these days.   With all the commercial breaks and replay reviews and injury time outs it seems like they squeeze 10 minutes of action into 3 and a half hours. 

[atomic]

They could eliminate replay challenges.   Also making each relief pitch pitch to minimum of three batters would eliminate a ton of delays.   I don't understand why coaches need to come on to the field.   

Maybe give the team 3 timeouts during the game.   They can make a pitching change during a time out or talk to the pitcher on the mound.   Or the infielders can come out.   If you used your 3 timeouts than you have to wait until inning breaks to change pitchers. 

Don't like the pitch clock.   Seems like if the game is on the line you might need a little more time.  Builds suspense. 

[Frobby]

7 hours ago, cimota said:

I find football very boring these days.   With all the commercial breaks and replay reviews and injury time outs it seems like they squeeze 10 minutes of action into 3 and a half hours. 

That’s basically a true statement.   I made a post about this a few years ago.    There’s only about 11 minutes of snap-to-whistle blow action in a football game.    There’s over an hour of commercials.  https://qz.com/150577/an-average-nfl-game-more-than-100-commercials-and-just-11-minutes-of-play/

However, baseball is only marginally better, with 18 minutes of action.   https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/theres-about-18-minutes-of-action-in-your-average-mlb-game/

[Frobby]

Personally, I’d like to see the game speeded up.    Sometimes, I set my TV to record the game, and just start watching it 30-45 minutes after the game began, fast forwarding through the commercials and maybe the mound conferences, too.

I watched the Patriots-Jaguars game that way and it only took about 2 hours.