MLB and Union talk major rule changes

[24fps]

8 hours ago, atomic said:

Yeah I am against outlawing the shift.  The guys bothered by the shift are the same guys who make the game incredibly boring.  These are the same guys who strike out close to 200 times a season.

One change that would make the game a lot more interesting but would never happen.  Make it a foul ball when you hit the ball over the fence in fair territory.  No more home runs.  It would eliminate guys like Trumbo and Davis.  And you would have more hits and less strike outs. Like I said they would never let that happen but really there should be some way to get rid of the guys who strike out constantly have no speed and try for a home run at every at bat. I think WAR over values such players and I think analytic departments are getting wise to the overvaluation of them. 

Shoot off one of your feet.  No more people pointing out what a lousy dancer you are.

[tntoriole]

8 minutes ago, Tx Oriole said:

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. 

I agree with you, but the union is never going to eliminate the DH and I think there should be one unified set of rules. 

Leave the pitcher’s mound alone, and the draft rules changes must have been written by the Yankees and Red Sox so no to them...

It didn’t say anything about expansion or realignment, but I would be OK switching leagues. 

[Tx Oriole]

3 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

I agree with you, but the union is never going to eliminate the DH and I think there should be one unified set of rules. 

Leave the pitcher’s mound alone, and the draft rules changes must have been written by the Yankees and Red Sox so no to them...

It didn’t say anything about expansion or realignment, but I would be OK switching leagues. 

Nor would I.

[Frobby]

6 hours ago, atomic said:

Do you think the 2019 Orioles will have more or fewer games under 10k in attendance than the 1971 team?  

I’d guess fewer.   The ‘71 team had 1.023 mm in attendance and drew fewer than 10,000 at home 32 times.  Offhand I’d peg this year’s attendance at 1.3 mm or so, but we’ll see.   It’ll be significantly down, for sure.   

[24fps]

1 hour ago, weams said:

Wacky. What union allows that?

The same union that signs off on outlawing home runs.

[MikeAD]

I think league wide DH is a great move.  I'm also a fan of the extra innings base runner.  MLB knows it is having trouble with new fans and growth and long all night 2-2 baseball isn't the way to do it. Nor are watching a professional swat at 3 fastballs every 2-3 innings.  For the regular season, move to ties after the 12th inning.  No winner.    

I doubt either happens but who knows especially if the first All Star game with extra innings runner goes to extra innings.  Could be exciting.  

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, 24fps said:

The same union that signs off on outlawing home runs.

I think it would be fun to see a field where the fence was, say, 425 feet down the line and 500 feet in center.  You’d very rarely see a traditional home run, and it would take a titanic blast to do it.    But you’d see inside the park homers, doubles and triples increase very dramatically, and speed would become a much bigger element on both offense and defense.    

[24fps]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think it would be fun to see a field where the fence was, say, 425 feet down the line and 500 feet in center.  You’d very rarely see a traditional home run, and it would take a titanic blast to do it.    But you’d see inside the park homers, doubles and triples increase very dramatically, and speed would become a much bigger element on both offense and defense.    

I like it!  How about five bases in an asymmetrical layout with a 10th man on the field - a 4th baseman.  The union would certainly go for that and there's nothing like an element of confusion to keep the fans on their toes.  But maybe that idea's just not radical enough.  Maybe Rob's ahead of all of us and has already hired Japanese game show experts as consultants.

I wonder if all of this couldn't be resolved by Rob Manfred no longer trying to satisfy everyone - owners and players - who have no intention of sacrificing anything tangible for the good of the game anyway.  Just a crazy thought on my part.

 

[Tx Oriole]

56 minutes ago, MikeAD said:

I think league wide DH is a great move.  I'm also a fan of the extra innings base runner.  MLB knows it is having trouble with new fans and growth and long all night 2-2 baseball isn't the way to do it. Nor are watching a professional swat at 3 fastballs every 2-3 innings.  For the regular season, move to ties after the 12th inning.  No winner.    

I doubt either happens but who knows especially if the first All Star game with extra innings runner goes to extra innings.  Could be exciting.  

Has to be a winner. How many games went into extras that lasted all night? I'd hate to see the game be changed so much that it isn't baseball anymore. Set time or a time clock. No need to ruin the best game in the world. NFL football was so much better 50 or so years ago than it is now. At least to me. I'm just an old man that hates change in the sport I love. 

[Sessh]

2 hours ago, ScGO's said:

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.

My thoughts exactly. It's quite bizarre what is being bandied about these days. The direction things are going right now is not good IMO. Baseball is in trouble especially with Tony Clark being perfectly fine with another strike in 2021 and that such an idea is gaining traction with players from what I've been reading. Another strike will kill baseball, again, JMO. It will certainly be over for me and I'm already hanging on by a thread, it seems.

Some of these changes are drastic and I don't think I have the energy to really dig in, but I will say I disagree with forcing the DH with a rule. I think it should be decided by the home team before every game whether or not both teams will use or not use the DH in both leagues. I don't understand why it has to be enforced one way or the other. Give teams the option and see how it shakes out. Many of these other proposed rule changes are just depressing. Prioritizing game time over everything else can't possibly end well for the sport.

[jabba72]

I have no issue with a three hitter minimum for pitchers, and runner at 2nd starting in the 10th inning.  Its time baseball changed, in these cases for the better. However they managed to keep games under 2:40 back in the old days, I'd like to see that done again. 

[Bradysburns]

7 hours ago, SteveA said:

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

Yeah. I have to admit: I've changed my tune on rebuilding. It's hard to argue with the combination of analytics, player acquisition and player development. It has been interesting to watch the AngelBros put this together. If they let Mike do his thing, I think we're gonna be competitive again long term. 

[jabba72]

1 hour ago, Tx Oriole said:

Has to be a winner. How many games went into extras that lasted all night? I'd hate to see the game be changed so much that it isn't baseball anymore. Set time or a time clock. No need to ruin the best game in the world. NFL football was so much better 50 or so years ago than it is now. At least to me. I'm just an old man that hates change in the sport I love. 

I dont really see a need for the DH in the NL unless those teams want it. But Im all for speeding up the game.  There shouldnt be any reason for pitchers to wait 30-35 seconds between pitches.

[sevastras]

• A three-batter minimum for pitchers-I end my mlb subscription and watch casually if nothing is on and I have nothing else to do

• A universal designated hitter-I am not happy

• A single trade deadline before the All-Star break-good

• A 20-second pitch clock-I am not happy

• The expansion of rosters to 26 men, with a 12-pitcher maximum-26 good/12 max seems silly

• Draft advantages for winning teams and penalties for losing teams-not happy

• A study to lower the mound-More offense=longer games, I don’t care either way but why put these other stupid rules in to keep pace of play?  You can’t add more offense for excitement and sacrifice other aspects to move the game along

• A rule that would allow two-sport amateurs to sign major league contracts-doesn’t matter ,  Bundy was one of the last to sign an mlb contract and all it does is make a deadline to be out of the minor league system  

I am 37, so not old. Leave the game alone, I love this game but I am about done with it. Manfred is the biggest d-bag. I am not a fair weather fan either, so don’t think I am souring because the Os suck. If done right, I prefer they suck a couple years and build something solid. 

I am serious though, if some of these changes happen, I am going to focus all of my baseball watching on Cuba, DR, Venezuela (when things improve) and other Latin American countries. 

[ExileAngelos]

3 hours ago, MikeAD said:

I think league wide DH is a great move.  I'm also a fan of the extra innings base runner.  MLB knows it is having trouble with new fans and growth and long all night 2-2 baseball isn't the way to do it. Nor are watching a professional swat at 3 fastballs every 2-3 innings.  For the regular season, move to ties after the 12th inning.  No winner.    

I doubt either happens but who knows especially if the first All Star game with extra innings runner goes to extra innings.  Could be exciting.  

Surely you can't be serious....