MLB /Union discussing drastic rules changes

[brett05]

You know they are trying to eliminate the old Tony LaRussa "a new pitcher for every hitter routine". I always hated that. A lot time the AB is decided on one pitch....then it's back to the mound, another pitcher brought in, watch him walk in, watch him warm up....really tedious (stuff). I'd be more than willing to give this at least a shot to see how it works out. One thing it should do is shorten the bullpen thus adding an extra position player.

And to increase interest among Non-baseball fans, I get it to a degree.

Personally this is what makes the game great. Chess moves.

 

[fatbeard]

I hate the minimum batters faced. Next would be minimum playing time for batters which is equally a bad idea.

Is there a sudden plague of position-player switching delaying games that I was not aware of?

Universal DH? I don't care. Universal Rule is what I care about. We have to stop this separate rules. It's the same league, should be the same rules. This will finally remove the advantage that the NL has had since interleague play began.

The AL has a .526 all-time winning percentage vs. the NL in interleague play, and prior to last year they won interleauge play 14 years in a row. But you do you!

 

[brett05]

Is there a sudden plague of position-player switching delaying games that I was not aware of?



The AL has a .526 all-time winning percentage vs. the NL in interleague play, and prior to last year they won interleauge play 14 years in a row. But you do you!

1) The change of pitchers isn't that big of a delay.
2) The winning percentage has nothing to do with the disadvantages that are built in to InterLeague Play. But don't let that get in your way.

 

[CSF77]

League pretty much killed this. They are not changing until next CBA. I expect some analysis ongoing this year on time related issues but the next CBA should end up huge.

 

[fatbeard]

1) The change of pitchers isn't that big of a delay.

It's a 3-5 minute commercial break in the middle of an inning. It's terribly disruptive to the viewing experience.

2) The winning percentage has nothing to do with the disadvantages that are built in to InterLeague Play. But don't let that get in your way.

This is your best one yet. So, there are magical disadvantages against the AL built into interleague play that--somehow--don't manage to manifest themselves in the W/L record despite a 5700-game sample size? Makes sense!

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

The DH in both leagues is way overdue. Once they got rid of the "presidents" of each league (which I believe was before interleague, could be/probably am wrong) they should have instituted it.

 

[brett05]

It's a 3-5 minute commercial break in the middle of an inning. It's terribly disruptive to the viewing experience.

Not really. And it's the advertising that brings in the money. So.

This is your best one yet. So, there are magical disadvantages against the AL built into interleague play that--somehow--don't manage to manifest themselves in the W/L record despite a 5700-game sample size? Makes sense!

*sigh*

ok, what's to say that the AL despite the factual disadvantages it has because of the rule of a DH wouldn't be winning more?

Some facts for you.

1) The AL has to budget for a DH, the NL does not
2) The NL gets to have a better lineup in the AL parks by replacing their pitcher. The AL receives no advantage when playing in the AL parks.
3) The AL loses a member of their lineup in NL parks. The NL suffers no disadvantage.
4) Finances that the NL does not have to use on a DH gets to be used elsewhere.
5) The AL has to cover for every position that an NL team has to and a DH.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

1) The AL has to budget for a DH, the NL does not
2) The NL gets to have a better lineup in the AL parks by replacing their pitcher. The AL receives no advantage when playing in the AL parks.

These two seem to be at odds with each other. It stands to reason that since the NL doesn't have to budget for a full year of the DH that the player they choose for that role in IL games wouldn't be as good as the regular DH the AL team who has already budgeted.

 

[fatbeard]

Not really. And it's the advertising that brings in the money. So.

YMMV. I find it awful when the broadcast cuts away to car commercials with a late-game bases-loaded situation due to a reliever change.

*sigh*

ok, what's to say that the AL despite the factual disadvantages it has because of the rule of a DH wouldn't be winning more?

Some facts for you.

1) The AL has to budget for a DH, the NL does not
2) The NL gets to have a better lineup in the AL parks by replacing their pitcher. The AL receives no advantage when playing in the AL parks.
3) The AL loses a member of their lineup in NL parks. The NL suffers no disadvantage.
4) Finances that the NL does not have to use on a DH gets to be used elsewhere.
5) The AL has to cover for every position that an NL team has to and a DH.

Setting aside these specious claims, you're missing the forest from the trees. The central point is that if the AL is disadvantaged by interleague play as you claim, why doesn't that disadvantage manifest itself in the actual W/L record? A 5700 game sample of twenty years is a big sample size; it's more than two entire regular seasons worth of games. If what you're arguing is true, there would be obvious evidence of it. So where's the beef?

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

YMMV. I find it awful when the broadcast cuts away to car commercials with a late-game bases-loaded situation due to a reliever change.

Personally, cut out the warmup pitches when the reliever is called from the bullpen. Unless it's following an ejection, you've already been warming up in the pen. No need to cut way for commercial there.

 

[brett05]

These two seem to be at odds with each other. It stands to reason that since the NL doesn't have to budget for a full year of the DH that the player they choose for that role in IL games wouldn't be as good as the regular DH the AL team who has already budgeted.

I agree.
However,
The lineup of the NL gets better than their everyday lineup. So the NL gains. Cause even when they have the better player at DH compared to the pitcher, the money they used elsewhere when not having to pay for a DH still gets to be used where the AL team does not get such a luxury.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

I agree.
However,
The lineup of the NL gets better than their everyday lineup. So the NL gains. Cause even when they have the better player at DH compared to the pitcher, the money they used elsewhere when not having to pay for a DH still gets to be used where the AL team does not get such a luxury.

Not necessarily because of what you specifically mentioned in your first point.

 

[brett05]

YMMV. I find it awful when the broadcast cuts away to car commercials with a late-game bases-loaded situation due to a reliever change.



Setting aside these specious claims, you're missing the forest from the trees. The central point is that if the AL is disadvantaged by interleague play as you claim, why doesn't that disadvantage manifest itself in the actual W/L record? A 5700 game sample of twenty years is a big sample size; it's more than two entire regular seasons worth of games. If what you're arguing is true, there would be obvious evidence of it. So where's the beef?

1) It's a chess move. I love the matchups.
2) What's to say that these true advantages removed wouldn't result in a larger win differential? It's not the AL's problem that the NL is not competitive despite it's built in advantages.

 

[brett05]

Not necessarily because of what you specifically mentioned in your first point.

You're saying that replacing the pitcher with a professional hitter doesn't improve the NL lineup?

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

You're saying that replacing the pitcher with a professional hitter doesn't improve the NL lineup?

I'm saying that specifically budgeting for a DH like an AL team does changes the talent pool left over for the NL teams.

 

[fatbeard]

1) It's a chess move. I love the matchups.

I get that, but there's no need for commercial breaks, is there?

2) What's to say that these true advantages removed wouldn't result in a larger win differential? It's not the AL's problem that the NL is not competitive despite it's built in advantages.

Again, where's the beef? Show your work, as my old math teachers used to say.

 

[brett05]

I'm saying that specifically budgeting for a DH like an AL team does changes the talent pool left over for the NL teams.

I agree. It does allow them to spend more than an AL team on the exact same player thanks to the AL team using some of their budget for a DH

 

[brett05]

I get that, but there's no need for commercial breaks, is there?

It's about money and fans second. Those commercials help us pay less.

Again, where's the beef? Show your work, as my old math teachers used to say.

And they would provide you with an example. So if you wouldn't mind, show me what you would like to see?

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

I agree. It does allow them to spend more than an AL team on the exact same player thanks to the AL team using some of their budget for a DH

Yes, the Cubs can spend more than the A's, Royals, and Rays.

 

[JP Hochbaum]

I don't mind the 3 hitter minimum if they add the amendment of 3 hitter min or finish an inning.

I also don't think it takes the chess game out of it. For one they likely replace a BP arm with another bench guy, so the manager just replaces chess pieces.