It would mean current close plays would be safe. Yes, there would still be close plays but the overall steal rate would improve for runners.
Baseball Is Broken (on the field, proposed rule changes, attendance, etc.)
- Thread starter jon abbey
- Start date
It's probably career-endangering for a couple of players. Like when the NFL cracked down on violent hits over the middle— a couple guys became obsolete for whom that was the main skill on their resume.
Yes, and that would likely mean more attempted steals (I suspect it would ultimately result in an equilibrium where we'd see more attempts overall at roughly the same success rate, but I'm just speculating).
It would be a good thing for the game if you think more stolen bases is good, though.
I honestly did a double take when I saw the O’s and Pit payroll total when compared to other teams.
View: https://twitter.com/travis_sawchik/status/1505347379767226371?s=21
Like it’s impossible to believe there are individual players in MLB who currently make more than an entire teams payroll
View: https://twitter.com/travis_sawchik/status/1505347379767226371?s=21
Like it’s impossible to believe there are individual players in MLB who currently make more than an entire teams payroll
Not that it changes a ton but one of the twitter replies points out that #s does not includebpre-arb players. For the Pirates, that's 18 pre-arb players adds $12.6M.
View: https://twitter.com/BenKaspick/status/1505355056706514946
These are not counting pre-arb players. Not defending these teams at the bottom, but this does misrepresent what payrolls will be. Only eight players are counted in that $22.25M figure for the Pirates, for example. Adding 18 pre-arb players adds $12.6M.
It's incredibly profitable to have a shitty team with a bunch of min salary players.
Between national/local TV deals and revenue sharing alone, every team gets a minimum of $200m+ in revenue per year.
Between national/local TV deals and revenue sharing alone, every team gets a minimum of $200m+ in revenue per year.
2nd base will be moved in most minor league games in the 2nd half of the year. Will be closer to 1st and 3rd by 13.5 inches. Had not heard of this and it may eventually make it to the majors.
https://theathletic.com/3212654/2022/03/28/why-baseball-is-moving-second-base-and-what-this-experiment-could-mean-for-the-game/
https://theathletic.com/3212654/2022/03/28/why-baseball-is-moving-second-base-and-what-this-experiment-could-mean-for-the-game/
So it's shorter because they're moving it closer to home but I'm curiously trying to grasp at the impact to throwing out runners. This would seem to favor runners who steal regardless, but moving it closer to home would maybe offset that just a little?
Offsets it a bit if you’re stealing 2nd, not if you’re stretching a single into a double or stealing third, etc
Then we could reasonably expect the following, I think.
Compared to today's basepaths, throws from
CF to 2B, delayed
LF to 2B, delayed if throwing from a position close to CF, but likely unchanged or slightly quicker arrival time from normal positions
RF to 2B, delayed if throwing from a position close to CF, but likely unchanged or slightly quicker arrival time from normal positions
3B or 1B to 2B, unchanged but either the SS or 2B covering 2B would need to take an extra step to arrive
From 2B to 1B or 3B, shorter throw but longer arrival to base time
C to 2B, quicker arrival to 2B
P to 2B, quicker arrival to 2B
Wow. I'm all for tinkering with the base size and even the mound location, but the shape of the diamond is pretty intense. Very interested to see how it works.
The Federal League had a second set of foul lines, where past first/third base they added an extra few feet (I think) of fair territory. I wish I could remember the details -- I learned about it from this book:
View: https://www.amazon.com/Outlaw-League-Battle-Forged-Baseball/dp/1589799542/ref=sr_1_3
The Federal League had a second set of foul lines, where past first/third base they added an extra few feet (I think) of fair territory. I wish I could remember the details -- I learned about it from this book:
View: https://www.amazon.com/Outlaw-League-Battle-Forged-Baseball/dp/1589799542/ref=sr_1_3
I had no idea that second base was just slightly off until I read this piece. The little diagram makes it plain as day, though.
Weird!
A) 2nd base has been centered in the basepath; when 1st and 3rd were moved to tuck into the corners of the basepath it didn't move with them, and this remedies that.
B) it encourages more aggressive baserunning and that's exciting baseball.
I apologize if this has been discussed (likely in this thread if anywhere) but I don't have the time to get into the 11 pages to check... but I think it's high time for the leagues to change to 2 divisions with 6 total games against each team in the same league, other division and a single rotating home/away 3 game series every other year against every team in the other league. I just can't express how boring it becomes playing the MFY's, O's, Rays, Jays so many damn times. It would still keep the divisional matchup/traditional rivalries intact (really we only have a few of those- Sox/Yankees, Cubs/Cardinals, Dodgers/Giants... maybe Mets/Phillies?).
6 teams from each league get into the playoffs. Each division winner gets a bye (buy?). 4 WC teams play best of 5 series to advance.
6 teams from each league get into the playoffs. Each division winner gets a bye (buy?). 4 WC teams play best of 5 series to advance.
They’re not doing this but as of 2023, teams will play divisional opponents 14 times a year, down from 19.
Well it makes it like the nfl - now the crowd will know what they are reviewing and what they saw/didn’t see.
Scary news for the future of MLB:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tiktok-brain-explained-why-some-kids-seem-hooked-on-social-video-feeds-11648866192
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tiktok-brain-explained-why-some-kids-seem-hooked-on-social-video-feeds-11648866192
Scary news for the future of MLB:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tiktok-brain-explained-why-some-kids-seem-hooked-on-social-video-feeds-11648866192
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tiktok-brain-explained-why-some-kids-seem-hooked-on-social-video-feeds-11648866192
Anybody else read this Op-Ed in the NYT? "Baseball is Dying. The Government Should Take It Over."
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/opinion/baseball-nationalize.html
It's clearly a satirical take, but I'm at a loss to understand what the point of the satire is.
The author presents a lot of "facts" to support his argument, but without sources so it's unclear whether the "facts" are true or made up. And without knowing that, I can't tell if the "baseball is dying" argument is tongue-in-cheek or if the satirical target is something else.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/opinion/baseball-nationalize.html
It's clearly a satirical take, but I'm at a loss to understand what the point of the satire is.
The author presents a lot of "facts" to support his argument, but without sources so it's unclear whether the "facts" are true or made up. And without knowing that, I can't tell if the "baseball is dying" argument is tongue-in-cheek or if the satirical target is something else.
On a rare positive note, PitchCom seems like hopefully a big step in the right direction for the quality of the product, let pitchers worry about throwing better pitches and not constantly changing pitch signs. It of course won't go perfectly right away, I saw one team struggling with it today in a big AB and go back to regular signs, but I think this is potentially a big quality of play thing if it works as expected, so that is one in the positive column.
On the negative side, it sure seems like MLB has been signing lots of new television rights deals since the CBA was finally agreed on. It was a little confusing a few months ago why MLB had started announcing deals for new revenue sources while the negotiations were still going on, but now it seems like they have so many new deals with different services that they had to start announcing them to spread out the announcements a little. That new money will all go to ownership, I believe, until they make the MLBPA beg for something closer to their fair share again in five years. Rinse, repeat...
On the negative side, it sure seems like MLB has been signing lots of new television rights deals since the CBA was finally agreed on. It was a little confusing a few months ago why MLB had started announcing deals for new revenue sources while the negotiations were still going on, but now it seems like they have so many new deals with different services that they had to start announcing them to spread out the announcements a little. That new money will all go to ownership, I believe, until they make the MLBPA beg for something closer to their fair share again in five years. Rinse, repeat...
"Rob Manfred has said he needs to repair his relationship with MLB players following the lockout. Here’s a small gesture from Opening Day. Each player had a gift box waiting at their locker with Bose headphones and this “note of appreciation” from Manfred inside. "
View: https://twitter.com/stephenjnesbitt/status/1513202098355195908?s=21&t=LgyFEDlUfSQbT47sm7k5cQ
View: https://twitter.com/stephenjnesbitt/status/1513202098355195908?s=21&t=LgyFEDlUfSQbT47sm7k5cQ
That piece is totally bizarre and I have no idea what the point is.
Reds team president says the only way to be more profitable is to move the team
View: https://twitter.com/DavidWysong_/status/1513910805099597835
View: https://twitter.com/DavidWysong_/status/1513910805099597835
The giveaway here is that he's talking about making the team more profitable. I doubt upset fans care about how much profit this s*itwad is making. They likely want the team to put whatever profits there are into the product on the field.
Really interesting article on the Athletic about how the 3 True Outcomes have all decreased so far this year:
https://theathletic.com/3434355/2022/07/21/mlb-three-true-outcomes/
Strikeouts are down, but a big part of it is the spider tack crackdown and the NL DH:
It looks like some of the changes baseball has made are starting to have the impact they were hoped to, with the spider tack enforcement and NL DH reducing strikeouts. If the small changes outlined here continue, shifting should be reduced/become less effective because more hitters are beating it. The more important rule changes to make IMO are the pitch clock and the robot strike zone.
https://theathletic.com/3434355/2022/07/21/mlb-three-true-outcomes/
Offense is down more than it seems from just the overall numbers:
Walks and homer rates tend to follow each other:
Strikeouts are down, but a big part of it is the spider tack crackdown and the NL DH:
Have some hitters started changing their approach this year?
Hitters are swinging at more pitches than in recent years. More swinging with total strikeouts actually falling a bit seems like a formula for more action on the field.
Summary:
It would be extremely aggravating if they change the rules to ban the shift right as hitters finally start to change approach to take advantage of it. If they change the rules next year, hitters will never have to adapt away from the swing-for-the-fences approach. The progress made this year in the reduction of the 3 true outcomes might be washed away if the rules change again.
It looks like some of the changes baseball has made are starting to have the impact they were hoped to, with the spider tack enforcement and NL DH reducing strikeouts. If the small changes outlined here continue, shifting should be reduced/become less effective because more hitters are beating it. The more important rule changes to make IMO are the pitch clock and the robot strike zone.
It doesn't sound like they're making adjustments because of the shift – they've had years to do that – they are quickly making adjustments because of the deadened baseballs, which was a much newer change. Cutting down on defensive shifts should only help open up more holes in that approach.
QO likely remaining, international draft proposals far apart
View: https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/1551374319590178817
View: https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/1551374319590178817
It probably wouldn't have mattered but it was insanely poor planning for MLB to set up this schedule:
July 16-18: MLB draft
July 25: arbitrary deadline set in the CBA to agree on an international draft or not
Aug 1: deadline for all draftees to be signed
Aug 2: trading deadline
July 16-18: MLB draft
July 25: arbitrary deadline set in the CBA to agree on an international draft or not
Aug 1: deadline for all draftees to be signed
Aug 2: trading deadline
Pretty clear the lockout/strike in 5 years is going to be longer than this year's at this point. Unless something major changes between now and then.
MLB is apparently about to vote on fixing baseball, with the primary goal of closing this thread or getting @jon abbey to rename it. ESPN article:
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/34551389/major-league-baseball-competition-committee-vote-rules-changes-friday-eye-quickening-pace-play-sources-say
Specific proposals:
(more details in article, obviously)
The ban on the shift feels... moderate. I don't love it, because it feels like the kind of thing you should leave up to the defense on how they want to play, but if the SS is positioned right on the 2B bag and moves a few steps to his left as the pitch is thrown, while the 2B moves back a few steps, it's really not that big an imposition. The only part that I'm unsure about is this note from the article: "Infielders cannot switch positions within an inning unless one of them is replaced." Seems to me that notifying the ump should be sufficient. And, I'm assuming that just means a distinction between an infielder and an outfielder, i.e. that you need to have at least 4 infielders + catcher at all times, and that if the 3B and SS "switch spots", it doesn't matter. But could you bring in an OF as a 5th infielder for "prevent a groundout from scoring a guy on third" situations, and have him play anywhere?
Anyway, I led with that one because I'm 100% on board with everything else, particularly the pitch clocks.
The thing I don't quite get is the "max 2 disengagements by pitcher per PA". I'm not opposed in principle, I just don't quite follow how it'll work. If there's a runner on, and you throw over once, and a few pitches later you try to get him again and fail, the runner now knows you can't attempt another pickoff, at least not without penalty. Right? I immediately wondered: As soon as the pitcher comes set, can the runner then take off, and the pitcher has to deliver to the catcher before an attempt can be made to put the runner out? And that answer is "no", with a "but". Here's the bit on this one in particular from the ESPN article:
Seems to me the easier thing to do is to exclude situations from penalty where the runner is actually trying to steal a base, as opposed to just taking a lead. If the runner was on first, and the rubber disengagement led to a play or call at second, balk does not apply, and the throw-over count resets. Or something.
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/34551389/major-league-baseball-competition-committee-vote-rules-changes-friday-eye-quickening-pace-play-sources-say
Specific proposals:
- A 15-second pitch clock with the bases empty and a 20-second clock with runners on
- Two disengagements from the rubber -- including pickoff attempts -- per plate appearance
- A requirement by hitters to be in the batter's box and "alert" with eight seconds to go on the clock. Hitters are allowed one timeout per plate appearance
- Only two infielders will be allowed on each side of second base, with all four required to be on the dirt (or inner grass)
- Infielders cannot position themselves on the outfield grass before the pitch is thrown
- Bases will increase in size from 15 inches squared to 18
(more details in article, obviously)
The ban on the shift feels... moderate. I don't love it, because it feels like the kind of thing you should leave up to the defense on how they want to play, but if the SS is positioned right on the 2B bag and moves a few steps to his left as the pitch is thrown, while the 2B moves back a few steps, it's really not that big an imposition. The only part that I'm unsure about is this note from the article: "Infielders cannot switch positions within an inning unless one of them is replaced." Seems to me that notifying the ump should be sufficient. And, I'm assuming that just means a distinction between an infielder and an outfielder, i.e. that you need to have at least 4 infielders + catcher at all times, and that if the 3B and SS "switch spots", it doesn't matter. But could you bring in an OF as a 5th infielder for "prevent a groundout from scoring a guy on third" situations, and have him play anywhere?
Anyway, I led with that one because I'm 100% on board with everything else, particularly the pitch clocks.
The thing I don't quite get is the "max 2 disengagements by pitcher per PA". I'm not opposed in principle, I just don't quite follow how it'll work. If there's a runner on, and you throw over once, and a few pitches later you try to get him again and fail, the runner now knows you can't attempt another pickoff, at least not without penalty. Right? I immediately wondered: As soon as the pitcher comes set, can the runner then take off, and the pitcher has to deliver to the catcher before an attempt can be made to put the runner out? And that answer is "no", with a "but". Here's the bit on this one in particular from the ESPN article:
OK, so if you've thrown over twice without result, and he takes off next pitch and the pitcher throws over to get in a rundown, maybe he's put out. But if he's not, and he (say) takes second, is he then awarded third on the balk, for not having been put out by the third attempt?
Seems to me the easier thing to do is to exclude situations from penalty where the runner is actually trying to steal a base, as opposed to just taking a lead. If the runner was on first, and the rubber disengagement led to a play or call at second, balk does not apply, and the throw-over count resets. Or something.
Last edited:
1. The pitch clock is awesome. Life changing, really. They use 14/18 in AA right now, but I think 15/20 is a decent compromise. Our games here went from 3:20+ last year to mostly 2:30 or less this season. On top of that, it has made the action more non-stop. If you glance away or get distracted for a moment now, you might actually miss something.
2. I am a big fan of the shift adjustments. I know we have discussed it at length here, but there is so much more in-game action when the line drives that have been getting caught in short right field by a second baseman who is 40 feet on the grass fall in instead. The game is simply more fun when runners are getting on base, and the shift adjustments help accomplish that. The research I have seen has shown that ground balls are largely the same in XBA, but the lines drives have shown a drastic increase. It is a way better adjustment than people think.
3. The step off rule, I get in theory, I just don't know how well it will work in practice (I have not been at a stadium where they have been testing it). I do think that it gives runners a decided advantage, which may actually be what they are going for, and again, more running is more action is more excitement, so if that's what they are trying to do I am willing to see how it plays out.
2. I am a big fan of the shift adjustments. I know we have discussed it at length here, but there is so much more in-game action when the line drives that have been getting caught in short right field by a second baseman who is 40 feet on the grass fall in instead. The game is simply more fun when runners are getting on base, and the shift adjustments help accomplish that. The research I have seen has shown that ground balls are largely the same in XBA, but the lines drives have shown a drastic increase. It is a way better adjustment than people think.
3. The step off rule, I get in theory, I just don't know how well it will work in practice (I have not been at a stadium where they have been testing it). I do think that it gives runners a decided advantage, which may actually be what they are going for, and again, more running is more action is more excitement, so if that's what they are trying to do I am willing to see how it plays out.
I don't see how anyone (beside David Price) can complain about the pitch clock. I'm very excited about that and might actually attend some Sunday night games again when that's in place.
Taking away the short fielder rewards good contact, which is an improvement. If you smoke a line drive over the infield, it should be a hit.
I'd need to see the step off rule to get the full impact of it. All I know is Ricky didn't need a rule to steal 130.
Taking away the short fielder rewards good contact, which is an improvement. If you smoke a line drive over the infield, it should be a hit.
I'd need to see the step off rule to get the full impact of it. All I know is Ricky didn't need a rule to steal 130.
Having been to a few minor league games with the pitch clock my opinion is it is the bestest thing ever and I love it. Pitchers get the ball and then they throw it. It's great.
This was so different it was legitimately shocking to me, when I watched that recently-unearthed footage of the 1960 WS Game 7. The pitcher appeared eager to throw the next pitch, as if any delay would not accrue to their advantage.
And despite being arguably the most important and exciting game in baseball history, with 5 lead changes and 9 pitchers and a final score of 10-9, the game completed in 2 hours 36 minutes.
I would assume that means he's awarded second if the pickoff/rundown attempt ends up with him safe back at first.
But it's MLB, who knows?
Some further details on pre-arb bonus pool
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/09/mlb-pre-arbitration-bonus-pool-payouts.html
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/09/mlb-pre-arbitration-bonus-pool-payouts.html
The "two disengagements" rule raises a lot of questions.
What if there are runners on 1st and 3rd? Does the runner on third also advance, i.e. score, if the 3rd-disengagment pick-off attempt to 1B fails? If so, there's no incentive to hold a runner at first after two pick-off attempts when there's also a runner on third.