2023 rule changes
- Thread starter Wingack
- Start date
By defensive shifts are banned, do they mean two infielders must be on either side of second or is it more in depth?
Breaking this out of the “baseball is broken” thread.
Here’s a good summary from Yahoo.
https://sports.yahoo.com/mlb-adding-new-rules-for-2023-including-pitch-clock-and-limits-on-the-infield-shift-164603647.html
And the initial report from The Athletic.
https://theathletic.com/3578254/2022/09/08/mlb-2023-rule-changes-pitch-clock/?source=user_shared_article
Here’s a good summary from Yahoo.
https://sports.yahoo.com/mlb-adding-new-rules-for-2023-including-pitch-clock-and-limits-on-the-infield-shift-164603647.html
And the initial report from The Athletic.
https://theathletic.com/3578254/2022/09/08/mlb-2023-rule-changes-pitch-clock/?source=user_shared_article
- If a third pickoff attempt is made, the runner automatically advances one base if the pickoff attempt is not successful.
Pitcher has 15 seconds between pitches with bases empty but can step off the rubber twice per plate appearance. So you can give yourself another 30 seconds just by stepping off the rubber twice every at bat.
Limiting pick off moves while increasing the size of the bases is going to increase the value of guys who can get on base and run significantly.
I could be wrong (happens a lot) but the step off rule covers only when runners are on base.
That said, having watched a lot of games with the shift, players can still ask for timeout, and the umpires have been pretty liberal about it, as long as they are clearly not just stalling.
Totally. Rickey Henderson’s records are probably still safe, but I expect we’ll see a 100-steal season sometime in the next decade.
I might actually increase the value of guys who are very good defensively and can run a bit, but don't get on base that often, too.
:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/70549728/490058478.0.jpg)
I’d like the game to feature more movement on the base paths. It allows for more different types of players to be successful, and more avenues for teams to build winning rosters.
I think this is Theo's number 1 goal, and I think all of these changes move us toward that in various shapes.
Absolutely love banning the shift. Having second baseman throw out batters from right field looks like something that you'd do in a computer baseball game instead of what a live game should look like.
The onus should be on hitters imo to avoid this. To me it really is like banning a corner blitz or similar. Offense should be forced to adapt. YMMV
The difference is that, in your analogy, the offense controls what it can do offensively to adapt to the defensive alignment. In baseball, though, the offensive play depends in great part in how the defense gives them the ball ... so adapting to the shift is not completely in the offensive player's hands.
How does increasing the size of bases help MLB return the game to its natural rhythm? Sincerely curious.
I'd rather the onus be on hitters to hit the ball really well instead of to make weak contact to the opposite field to scratch out a hit. When a batter hits a wicked line drive up the middle or shallow right, and it goes straight into the glove of an infielder who's simply already standing there, it's disappointing to me. Even if I'm rooting for the team in the field, it doesn't feel right without a highlight worthy athletic effort. If that's something a batter shouldn't do, there's something wrong.
The shift ban is going to feel nice for people aesthetically but not really change the game noticeably. Seems like you could still stand on your side of the base and lean or shuffle in the other direction when the pitch is thrown and there wouldn't be much impact on balls in play. But at least people will stop whining about it.
Pitch clock is a huge win.
Pitch clock is a huge win.
If Carlos Quintana were to make a comeback (he is 57 now and he was slow as a regular) and try to steal 2nd 10 times on Plawecki, he'd likely get thrown out twice.
I agree, but if offenses aren't going to try, and it looks like they haven't tried, then this is all we have.
It doesn't. It's a safety issue with a small effect on increasing stolen bases. The much larger effect is the limit on pitchers stepping off or making a pickoff move to two step-offs/moves. That's going to produce a lot of unintended consequences, a ton of stolen bases, and increase the number of late-count fastballs.
More stolen bases, fewer pickoff attempts, fewer infield shifts, faster play, probably more offense overall. Love it.
Banning the shift is going to create some even weirder defensive positioning.
We could see more pronounced outfield shifts now. For certain lefties, I'd pull the RF in to where the 2B plays in a shift, move the CF over to RF and the LF to center/left. Let the 3B cover chase down the rare flyball to left.
What banning the shift is not going to do is reduce the number of up-the-middle groundball outs. The SS can still play just to the left of 2B.
We could see more pronounced outfield shifts now. For certain lefties, I'd pull the RF in to where the 2B plays in a shift, move the CF over to RF and the LF to center/left. Let the 3B cover chase down the rare flyball to left.
What banning the shift is not going to do is reduce the number of up-the-middle groundball outs. The SS can still play just to the left of 2B.
Analytics departments are going to have a busy winter. The value of speed just went waaay up. Recalculating how to best position players defensively is going to take some work. I don't think we're automatically going back to traditional defensive positioning.
Agreed on all fronts. As referenced above, maybe you start having your RF play super-shallow and then have the other OF shift over to cover CF and RF. There will be guys bunting for doubles.
Trea Turner's contract was already going to be insane, but now that speed is at a premium? Look out.
Is it just me, or does this seem like a much more radical change than anything else we've discussed? I honestly didn't realize that this was part of the pitch clock proposal. I can't imagine a third pick-off throw unless the runner does something incredibly dumb, and it seems like an enormous benefit to the runner to know that pitchers are otherwise limited to two. Is there data somewhere on SB totals in leagues that tried this?
It's a very radical change. Much more radical than the shift ban.
Here's a compromise: Make the penalty for an unsuccessful thrid pick-off (disengagement) a ball.
Not my idea:
https://www.sportingnews.com/ca/mlb/news/mlb-new-rule-runners-second-base/ve5gmikavwvzdknwftiygmwz
I'm sure this has been discussed here ad nauseum - but given how long the shift has been around now / how prevalent it is, if it were reasonably possible to consistently beat the shift while remaining a dangerous power hitter, wouldn't many players have done it? (Maybe I'm missing obvious examples?) There's strong financial and team success incentives for any that do.
I think people ascribe lack of hitting grounders the other way as stubbornness or a moral failing, when it might just be really difficult given modern pitching arsenals (not to mention shift-friendly pitch location) and involve a lot of tradeoffs.
In general outside of the strange pickoff rule, I really like the rule changes. I don't understand the appeal of watching frequent lineouts to short RF, and lefties are unfairly targeted by the shift over righties given that someone has to cover 1B. I think the shift ban is more like goaltending/defensive 3 seconds in basketball than the football analogy
One other thought -- I wonder how many of these changes would be necessary if they got really serious with their PED detection program.
Am I crazy to think that the number of guys throwing 99+ is evidence of widespread juicing, just as having multiple guys breaking the HR record was? I saw a clip on TikTok of a guy talking about this Bonds-Gagne at-bat as the "peak of human performance" because both guys were juiced to the gills. Gagne was hitting 98-99. In 2022, there are 30 guys whose 4-seamers have AVERAGED 98. By comparison, in 2017, there were 19 guys throwing 4-seamers with that kind of average speed.
One other comparison: in 2022, there are 14 guys with a 4-seamer averaging 99+ (rounding up). In 2017, there were 4.
Stats are from here.
Am I crazy to think that the number of guys throwing 99+ is evidence of widespread juicing, just as having multiple guys breaking the HR record was? I saw a clip on TikTok of a guy talking about this Bonds-Gagne at-bat as the "peak of human performance" because both guys were juiced to the gills. Gagne was hitting 98-99. In 2022, there are 30 guys whose 4-seamers have AVERAGED 98. By comparison, in 2017, there were 19 guys throwing 4-seamers with that kind of average speed.
One other comparison: in 2022, there are 14 guys with a 4-seamer averaging 99+ (rounding up). In 2017, there were 4.
Stats are from here.
Maybe this is a dumb question, and probably something I should already know, but is the cutout of the infield dirt standard? I don't suspect the difference is major from park to park, but I thought the specific measurements were determined by the individual aesthetic tastes of the architect/ grounds crew. Otherwise, this could be an opportunity for a little fuckery. Like cutting the grass taller when the home team bunts a lot.
I assume that there will be a memo going out to teams that will require them to standardize it across the league.
Leaving the grass wet and long was SOP for Eddie Stanky and the running White Sox in the early 60’s if I remember correctly.
Don't all sports put artificial boundaries around what teams can and cannot do in order to guide the game in a desired direction? That's what rules are in a nutshell. If you want to make the argument that limiting defensive schemes is somehow different, well, some sports have that too. NBA had illegal defense, which morphed into the defensive 3 second violation of today. NFL has illegal defensive formation on kicking plays. Etc. If you expand it to offense, then there are even more examples of illegal schemes across hockey, soccer, and football. I'm sure most if not all of those rules didn't exist at first, but leagues adjusted as they noticed trends they didn't like.
I was strongly opposed to the extra inning ghost runner, but have flipped completely because it has created tons of excitement in games that would have dragged on in the past. Glad they are keeping that change and hope the rest of the changes pay off to the same degree. Robo balls /strikes calls can’t come soon enough. Great that MLB is finally, finally, finally beginning to wake up in ways that might get kids willing to consider watching.
I've mentioned this before, defensive restrictions in limited-overs cricket seem like a very close analog to the rules MLB will enact to ban the shift (enacted for basically the same reason).