The extra inning runner on 2B rule

[Moshagge3]

I'm very confused by people thinking that Tyler Wade and Pat Valaika trying to see who could bunt better was a thrilling conclusion to that game.

[Frobby]

So according to my calculations, the home team is 55-62 in extra inning games under the new rules. The NL home teams have been very inept, 23-31.   AL teams are 32-31.

This excludes a couple of games that were played in the “wrong” ballpark in 2020, e.g. the Nationals playing as the visiting team in Washington against the Blue Jays because the Jays didn’t have a stadium ready yet.    I believe I saw two games like that where the “visiting” team won.   But there might have been others I didn’t recognize.  

And guess which team has played the most extra inning games at home under the new rule?   It’s the Orioles, who are 3-5 in their 8 home extra inning games.   Meanwhile the Royals haven’t played a single extra inning game at home since the rule was adopted.   The most successful team has been Oakland, at 6-1, while the Pirates are 0-4 at home.  
 

[bobmc]

13 minutes ago, Frobby said:

So according to my calculations, the home team is 55-62 in extra inning games under the new rules. The NL home teams have been very inept, 23-31.   AL teams are 32-31.

This excludes a couple of games that were played in the “wrong” ballpark in 2020, e.g. the Nationals playing as the visiting team in Washington against the Blue Jays because the Jays didn’t have a stadium ready yet.    I believe I saw two games like that where the “visiting” team won.   But there might have been others I didn’t recognize.  

And guess which team has played the most extra inning games at home under the new rule?   It’s the Orioles, who are 3-5 in their 8 home extra inning games.   Meanwhile the Royals haven’t played a single extra inning game at home since the rule was adopted.   The most successful team has been Oakland, at 6-1, while the Pirates are 0-4 at home.  
 

That's a lot of effort for a SSS bruh!  But thanks!  *

 

*. caffeine talking 

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, bobmc said:

That's a lot of effort for a SSS bruh!  But thanks!  *

 

*. caffeine talking 

Yeah, it may not have been worth it.  The results surprised me but they may not mean much over 117 games.   

[ChosenOne21]

You know, every time I think about the runner on second base rule, I keep thinking about 5/6/2012 (Chris Davis pitches and gets the win) and how that game wouldn't have been possible with that rule. To me, that game was the turning point for the Orioles that kicked off our five-year run. Only game I've watched where I was in tears at the end.

I understand the benefits of having a runner on second. But if the cost is no more games like that one, I don't think I'll ever be fully on board with it

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, ChosenOne21 said:

You know, every time I think about the runner on second base rule, I keep thinking about 5/6/2012 (Chris Davis pitches and gets the win) and how that game wouldn't have been possible with that rule. To me, that game was the turning point for the Orioles that kicked off our five-year run. Only game I've watched where I was in tears at the end.

I understand the benefits of having a runner on second. But if the cost is no more games like that one, I don't think I'll ever be fully on board with it

Nine years ago today.  I remember it like yesterday.   

Losing a few memorable endings like that is definitely a downside to the runner on 2B rule, but for me it doesn’t outweigh the advantages.
 

[BohKnowsBmore]

On 5/1/2021 at 7:33 AM, Frobby said:

Yeah, it may not have been worth it.  The results surprised me but they may not mean much over 117 games.   

There's probably a way to test this, but there is a possible state of the world in which really good teams are less likely to go to extras at home than poor teams (that is they tend to win in regulation OR push bad teams to extras on the road), changing the sample population a bit / what we would expect the record for the home team to be.

[DrungoHazewood]

5 hours ago, ChosenOne21 said:

You know, every time I think about the runner on second base rule, I keep thinking about 5/6/2012 (Chris Davis pitches and gets the win) and how that game wouldn't have been possible with that rule. To me, that game was the turning point for the Orioles that kicked off our five-year run. Only game I've watched where I was in tears at the end.

I understand the benefits of having a runner on second. But if the cost is no more games like that one, I don't think I'll ever be fully on board with it

Two of the best games in Orioles history were extra-inning games where players had to play weird positions. Lenn Sakata and Chris Davis.  But that's two games in 40+ years.  I loved them.  But literally 95% of extra inning games I've gone to bed before the end.

Is this for the fans, or for the die hard fans, or for people who like rules to be enforced?  Because the overwhelming majority of fans go home or tune out when the game goes into extras.  Playing 15-inning games is primarily for accountants and lawyers and literalists who can't abide by the slightest inconsistency.

And I'll repeat for the millionth time... this is really just a symptom of the pace and length of baseball games in general.  The 26-inning tie the Dodgers and Braves played in 1920 was under four hours.  Today we have nine inning games that are longer.  If there was a 26-inning game today that started at 7:05 it would literally last until five in the morning.  There would be no need for runners at second in extras or seven inning doubleheaders if they could play nine innings in two hours, as was common for a century.

[SteveA]

Yesterday the White Sox might have lost partly because Tony LaRussa didn't know all the intracacies of the runner-on-2nd rule.

The rule has a clause that says if the guy who is supposed to start on 2nd base (the last batter spot the previous inning) is a pitcher, you are allowed to go back one batter in the order and use THAT guy instead.    So you don't have to make your pitcher run the bases.    It is your choice, you are not required to use the position player instead of the pitcher.

LaRussa didn't know that, so with the score 0-0 in the top of the 10th, he had Liam Hendriks go to 2nd base as the runner to start the inning.  When he could have used Jose Abreu if he had wanted to instead.

With Hendriks on 3rd with one out, the runner on first took off, and the Cincinnati catcher gunned him out at 2nd for out #2.   The White Sox didn't score in the top of the 10th, and Cincinnati won 1-0 in the bottom of the 10th.

The Reds catcher said afterwards that he was confident in throwing to 2nd because he didn't feel a pitcher would try to sprint home on the throw to 2nd.  He might not have thrown with a position player there.

[Moshagge3]

10 hours ago, ChosenOne21 said:

You know, every time I think about the runner on second base rule, I keep thinking about 5/6/2012 (Chris Davis pitches and gets the win) and how that game wouldn't have been possible with that rule. To me, that game was the turning point for the Orioles that kicked off our five-year run. Only game I've watched where I was in tears at the end.

I understand the benefits of having a runner on second. But if the cost is no more games like that one, I don't think I'll ever be fully on board with it

Wouldn't that game have been way more fun if we could have seen whether Endy Chavez could execute a bunt to get the ghost runner to third and Wilson Betemit could hit a deep enough fly ball to bring him in?! /sarcasm/

[survivedc]

30 minutes ago, Moshagge3 said:

Wouldn't that game have been way more fun if we could have seen whether Endy Chavez could execute a bunt to get the ghost runner to third and Wilson Betemit could hit a deep enough fly ball to bring him in?! /sarcasm/

First of all, I’ve been surprised by the lack of small ball in extra innings since the rule was instituted. The home team seems to use it a bit after holding the visitors scoreless, but it has been less common than I expected.

Second of all, polls are pretty clear that fans (this fan included) want more balls put in play, more defensive players making choices and base runners using their speed. It is exciting when someone bunts and they throw the guy out at 3rd, or there is a bang bang play at the plate. What isn’t exciting is 4 innings full of strikeouts following 9 innings full of strikeouts.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

7 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Two of the best games in Orioles history were extra-inning games where players had to play weird positions. Lenn Sakata and Chris Davis.  But that's two games in 40+ years.  I loved them.  But literally 95% of extra inning games I've gone to bed before the end.

Is this for the fans, or for the die hard fans, or for people who like rules to be enforced?  Because the overwhelming majority of fans go home or tune out when the game goes into extras.  Playing 15-inning games is primarily for accountants and lawyers and literalists who can't abide by the slightest inconsistency.

And I'll repeat for the millionth time... this is really just a symptom of the pace and length of baseball games in general.  The 26-inning tie the Dodgers and Braves played in 1920 was under four hours.  Today we have nine inning games that are longer.  If there was a 26-inning game today that started at 7:05 it would literally last until five in the morning.  There would be no need for runners at second in extras or seven inning doubleheaders if they could play nine innings in two hours, as was common for a century.

With the rate that pitching changes happen now it's going to be very difficult to speed up the pace of games. And if the opener becomes a concept most teams embrace that will only mean even more pitching changes. Also players looking to make hard contact only over putting the ball in play is likely to stretch out pitch counts.

Unless MLB can figure out a way to stretch out starters to where throwing 7 innings is norm again the 3+ hour game is here to stay. 

[Frobby]

Looks like this rule is going away in 2022, along with 7-inning doubleheader games.   Too bad, I like the rule.  
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/31812409/seven-inning-doubleheaders-extra-inning-runner-rule-likely-dropped-mlb-2022-commissioner-rob-manfred-says

[wildcard]

10 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Looks like this rule is going away in 2022, along with 7-inning doubleheader games.   Too bad, I like the rule.  
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/31812409/seven-inning-doubleheaders-extra-inning-runner-rule-likely-dropped-mlb-2022-commissioner-rob-manfred-says

Bargaining chip for the owners in CBA negotiations?

[Oriole1940]

Thank God Almighty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!