Three thoughts on the pitch clock

[rm5678]

9 hours ago, interloper said:

The Phillies TV broadcast yesterday did the pitch clock perfectly. The clock was organically a part of their scorebug, rather than awkwardly tacked on, and it only popped up when there were 10 seconds left. At 8 seconds, the numbers turned yellow. That's how it should be done. Just like the play clock in football only popping up with however many seconds left.

I hope MASN was paying attention (they weren't). 

Yes, I liked that too. I'd be fine with MASN doing it exactly like that, but like you said, they probably weren't paying attention.

[Ripken]

23 hours ago, interloper said:

The Phillies TV broadcast yesterday did the pitch clock perfectly. The clock was organically a part of their scorebug, rather than awkwardly tacked on, and it only popped up when there were 10 seconds left. At 8 seconds, the numbers turned yellow. That's how it should be done. Just like the play clock in football only popping up with however many seconds left.

I hope MASN was paying attention (they weren't). 

That would cost tens of dollars to implement.  MASN doesn't have that kind of money.

[interloper]

1 hour ago, Ripken said:

That would cost tens of dollars to implement.  MASN doesn't have that kind of money.

I was almost impressed that they figured out getting a camera on the clock and then shrinking it down to shove on the side of the scorebug. Plucky ingenuity. But also, like, just have some intern redo the graphics. 

[Frobby]

So now that we’re 32 games in, what do people think about the new rules?  Personally, my initial favorable impression has only been confirmed.  I love the faster speed of the games and elimination of much wasted time.  The one rule that worried me a little, the limit on pickoff throws, hasn’t been as problematic as I feared, and I’m happy with the level of increased stolen bases. So, count me strongly in favor of the changes!

By the way, after the 1:59 game in KC, I went back to see if the 1970 Orioles had any games under 2 hours.   Yes they did, in fact, ten of them, the shortest of which was played in 1:39.   So even with the changes, the game is still a bit slower than in the old days.  But I think the limits they’ve put on are sufficient.  

[accinfo]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

So now that we’re 32 games in, what do people think about the new rules?  Personally, my initial favorable impression has only been confirmed.  I love the faster speed of the games and elimination of much wasted time.  The one rule that worried me a little, the limit on pickoff throws, hasn’t been as problematic as I feared, and I’m happy with the level of increased stolen bases. So, count me strongly in favor of the changes!

By the way, after the 1:59 game in KC, I went back to see if the 1970 Orioles had any games under 2 hours.   Yes they did, in fact, ten of them, the shortest of which was played in 1:39.   So even with the changes, the game is still a bit slower than in the old days.  But I think the limits they’ve put on are sufficient.  

Yes I think these rules have been great.  The Orioles winning may make them seem greater than I would have otherwise but this seems good for the game.  Comparing to the 70's just the amount of pitching changes that occur in the modern game are going to make the over all games slower.  I would like to know what the average innings most starters went then compared to now.  Just a guess that it was 7 + then and it is about around 4 or so now.  

 

[SteveA]

I really notice the sped up game the most when I am following the game on Gameday, such as at work.

I'll follow an inning and then switch my attention away to what I'm doing at work for what feels like 5 minutes, and I'll have a whole inning or more to catch up on when I check back.

Watching on TV, sometimes it feels a bit rushed in that you can't get a replay or a couple of replays of a big play like a HR or 2-run double or great defensive plays because the action picks back up so fast.

At the game, the idea of going and getting concessions during the game is almost out the window.   Before you could leave as soon as an inning ended, and yeah it would take longer than the commercial break, but you won't have missed much if it took 5 minutes or so to get through the line.

I like the steals.   The pitch clock violations haven't been common enough to become annoying.   And while I wasn't crazy about eliminating the shift, I do think that it encouraged a lot of batters, especially lefty batters, to embrace the HR-or-nothing launch angle approach that to me has made baseball less enjoyable to watch, because now they stand a fighting chance to get hits that don't go over the fence.   Joey Gallo hitting over .300, LOL.

[Frobby]

38 minutes ago, accinfo said:

Yes I think these rules have been great.  The Orioles winning may make them seem greater than I would have otherwise but this seems good for the game.  Comparing to the 70's just the amount of pitching changes that occur in the modern game are going to make the over all games slower.  I would like to know what the average innings most starters went then compared to now.  Just a guess that it was 7 + then and it is about around 4 or so now.  

 

6.4 IP/start in 1970, 5.2 today.  

[Ohfan67]

I love the faster pace. Very happy with the rule changes. 

[tntoriole]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

So now that we’re 32 games in, what do people think about the new rules?  Personally, my initial favorable impression has only been confirmed.  I love the faster speed of the games and elimination of much wasted time.  The one rule that worried me a little, the limit on pickoff throws, hasn’t been as problematic as I feared, and I’m happy with the level of increased stolen bases. So, count me strongly in favor of the changes!

By the way, after the 1:59 game in KC, I went back to see if the 1970 Orioles had any games under 2 hours.   Yes they did, in fact, ten of them, the shortest of which was played in 1:39.   So even with the changes, the game is still a bit slower than in the old days.  But I think the limits they’ve put on are sufficient.  

Exactly this .. and the griping about possible arm effects aside, i think working fast helps any pitcher 

[NCRaven]

Seems like a lot more balls in play and action on the base paths.  Very pleased.

[Sports Guy]

They are great…as was always going to be the case. I don’t love the pickoff rule but whatever.

[StatusDC]

Huge fan of the change. No more waltzing around between pitches.

[Moose Milligan]

Loving the rule changes.  Pace of play is so much better.

[forphase1]

6 hours ago, Frobby said:

So now that we’re 32 games in, what do people think about the new rules?  Personally, my initial favorable impression has only been confirmed.  I love the faster speed of the games and elimination of much wasted time.  The one rule that worried me a little, the limit on pickoff throws, hasn’t been as problematic as I feared, and I’m happy with the level of increased stolen bases. So, count me strongly in favor of the changes!

By the way, after the 1:59 game in KC, I went back to see if the 1970 Orioles had any games under 2 hours.   Yes they did, in fact, ten of them, the shortest of which was played in 1:39.   So even with the changes, the game is still a bit slower than in the old days.  But I think the limits they’ve put on are sufficient.  

I love all the rule changes. My only complaint is that replays are sometimes missed or rushed.

[Etch]

 I miss batters stepping out after every pitch to adjust their useless batting gloves.