Pace Of Play And Increasing Offense

[brett05]

This is my #1 also. It is ridiculous watching guys like Skip Schumaker step out and adjust both gloves after every single pitch, even when he doesn't move the bat. Even Cardinal fans used to get sick of it.

Lowering the mound and limiting pickoff throws and pitching changes profoundly affect the game itself. Limiting the batter stepping out has no negative effect, since there is zero benefit to it anyway.

A pitch clock seems reasonable to me, too. The pitchers won't like it, but there has to be some reasonable amount of time they get to throw a pitch. That is the #1 factor in length of games, to me. A 3-2 game with Rick Sutcliffe on the mound lasted 45 minutes or more longer than a 3-2 game with Greg Maddux on the mound. They should have some leeway. All pitchers don't work exactly alike and they shouldn't be clocked to the point where they are adversely affected, but something has to be done.

I am afraid this new commissioner is interested in doing something drastic to make his mark. I hope that doesn't happen.

Best post in the thread. :clap:

 

[Parade_Rain]

And no one is going to risk a free ball to a batter unless the base runner is dumb by taking too large of a lead. The whole focus would be on the runner instead of the pitcher/batter matchup

LOL. Part of the problem right now is that there is too much focus on the pitcher/runner. My idea removes that issue. You still get 2 throws over. The runner knows that's a threat. If he takes off early after a big lead once the pitcher has thrown over twice, the pitcher can make an inside move to 2B. Make it clear he was making a play at 2B and it wouldn't be a balk. Honestly, it seems you haven't thought this through clearly. There are a lot more weapons available than throwing over to the bag 15 times.

And so what if it adds a little scoring. Fans want to see a bit more action. That's why people turn off baseball. If no one is on base and no runs are being scored, the game is boring. People talk about the length of the game because the game is slow. Have you ever cared about watching a long football game that was 45-38? The OT 3-0 football game is boring. We want the potential to score, the ability to come back at any point. That keeps fans watching. 6 pitching changes in the 6-7-8 innings and 10 throws over to 1B in every steal situation is boring and slow. My proposals increase strategy and speed up the game.

 

[Parade_Rain]

First I understand it well. In the thread you are the one admitting to a comprehension problem.

Second runners take big leads now. The pickoff is what gets a runner back to the base. By penalizing allowing the batter to have a free ball is such a large change that Parade and you have suggested to destroy the game. Neither of you have considered how massive of a change that would be.

You've both allowed your hatred of game length to prevent your brain from thinking. You've thrown the balance out of whack and in attempts to speed the game up I'd be willing to say you'd make it longer with the higher offense that 100% would occur. More than likely it would lead to more pitching changes and more mound visits.

Runners take big leads now? Wow. Thanks for the info. Runners take a lead in which on a pitcher's best move they must dive back in order to get to the bag. This is a baseball standard. The reason players/prospects are timed in the 60 is because it is essentially 1st to 3rd or scoring from 2B. Getting a lead and a solid secondary provide more opportunity. Most leads aren't about base stealing as they are about getting an extra one.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Wrong

Wrong

 

[SilenceS]

The new commissioner wants to add scoring to the game. I watched an interview with him and seems like a very progressive guy.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Hopefully he comes up with something better than the DH.

 

[2323]

Calling a ball for a pick off throw is flat out crazy. Pitchers will almost never throw to first, and slower guys will get "cheap" stolen bases.

You say "trade an out for a throw" like a pickoff when a guy has large lead is a sure thing. It's not that simple.

It's not crazy at all. Also, I don't see how you can say you're ok with a pitch clock and not also be in favor of this. Because without this rule, pitchers will be workng around the pitch clock with throws to first if they're not ready to throw a pitch.

It will be more nuanced, interesting, and exciting than many of you are comprehending. The characterization you and that troll dude are making is woefully simplistic. What's unnatural or artificial is to suppress the running game with infinite throws to first.

I've said this before but you don't get the out back when bunting. You have to make a choice to sacrifice one thing for another. There's absolutely no reason why this shouldn't be the case with pick off throws. There's no reason that the pickoff throw should have a golden halo.

And I've said this before, but everyone seems to still be not processing this, it's not automatic the runners will be stealing. If they're careless, they can stll be picked off. Sometimes they'll take a lead hoping to draw a throw to get the pitcher deeper into a count. And whoe the hitter might have a count with 3 balls, the runner will have to weigh the risk of getting thrown out stealing when the batter is on the verge of being walked. Yeah, there would be bigger leads (though again, not always with idea in mind to steal) and more stolen bases but it will be more organic than what it is now. Because not its being artificially suppressed with endless pick off throws. There are times when the runner has almost no lead off to speak of but the pitcher still throws over numerous times.

The pickoff throw is also being used as a way to avoid throwing a pitch. And so this will happen even more if you implement the pitch clock. This is a way for pitchers to avoid throwing a pitch until they're ready.

 

[2323]

The new commissioner wants to add scoring to the game. I watched an interview with him and seems like a very progressive guy.

I really hope they don't go with the outlawing shifts. There's something that bothers me about telling hitters at the major league level that they don't have to be skilled enough to hit to the other side of the field. And it somewhat penalizes those who can (the more valuable that skill, the more valuable the player is who has that skill).

 

[Parade_Rain]

The shift has been around since the days of Ted Williams. I can't see them doing it. This is why looking at limiting throws over to 1B and allowing fewer pitching moves makes sense to speed the game up and also increase offense.

 

[brett05]

LOL. Part of the problem right now is that there is too much focus on the pitcher/runner. My idea removes that issue. You still get 2 throws over. The runner knows that's a threat. If he takes off early after a big lead once the pitcher has thrown over twice, the pitcher can make an inside move to 2B. Make it clear he was making a play at 2B and it wouldn't be a balk. Honestly, it seems you haven't thought this through clearly. There are a lot more weapons available than throwing over to the bag 15 times.

And so what if it adds a little scoring. Fans want to see a bit more action. That's why people turn off baseball. If no one is on base and no runs are being scored, the game is boring. People talk about the length of the game because the game is slow. Have you ever cared about watching a long football game that was 45-38? The OT 3-0 football game is boring. We want the potential to score, the ability to come back at any point. That keeps fans watching. 6 pitching changes in the 6-7-8 innings and 10 throws over to 1B in every steal situation is boring and slow. My proposals increase strategy and speed up the game.

Your proposal slows the game down drastically with the increase in scoring. There's great intrigue in a low scoring game. Baseball tried for the non-fan. With roids they started to lose their base. Same with this plan. The emphasis would be much greater on the runner than the batter. Sorry you haven't thought this thru

 

[brett05]

Runners take big leads now? Wow. Thanks for the info. Runners take a lead in which on a pitcher's best move they must dive back in order to get to the bag. This is a baseball standard. The reason players/prospects are timed in the 60 is because it is essentially 1st to 3rd or scoring from 2B. Getting a lead and a solid secondary provide more opportunity. Most leads aren't about base stealing as they are about getting an extra one.

Which would increase time with your change

 

[brett05]

Wrong

Sometimes your cool...then your bipolar hits

 

[brett05]

Hopefully he comes up with something better than the DH.

The dh helps. Let's see what he can do

 

[brett05]

I've said this before but you don't get the out back when bunting. You have to make a choice to sacrifice one thing for another. There's absolutely no reason why this shouldn't be the case with pick off throws.

Completely invalid analogy for your awful idea. :clap:

 

[brett05]

The shift has been around since the days of Ted Williams. I can't see them doing it. This is why looking at limiting throws over to 1B and allowing fewer pitching moves makes sense to speed the game up and also increase offense.

And the toss over before that

Reducing pitching changes isn't going to happen either

 

[2323]

Wow, with each post, brett continues to prove how ignorant he truly is.

Would have been better off without the trolls.

 

[brett05]

Wow, with each post, brett continues to prove how ignorant he truly is.

Would have been better off without the trolls.

Whatever helps you get thru your miserable sports existence

 

[Parade_Rain]

Your proposal slows the game down drastically with the increase in scoring. There's great intrigue in a low scoring game. Baseball tried for the non-fan. With roids they started to lose their base. Same with this plan. The emphasis would be much greater on the runner than the batter. Sorry you haven't thought this thru

"Drastically"? What great hyperbole. My proposal does not slow the game down. My proposal speeds the game up while increasing strategy. If there was "great intrigue in a low scoring game" that didn't involve marquee pitching matchups, the new commish wouldn't be looking to increase scoring.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Which would increase time with your change

No. The other factors added in speed the game up.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Sometimes your cool...then your bipolar hits

Here's where you get personal and attack, because you are in above your head. It's why you've ignored all the details provided. You don't understand them strategically.