Ken Rosenthal's stupid idea

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
53,171
Random question that popped in my head - is it possible the greater length between pitches leads to more injuries? When I watch old games, it seems the pitchers are basically getting the ball back then heading straight into their windups. Maybe doing so kept them looser than taking additional time between each pitch?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,030
Maine
Football has more dead time between plays, I can fast forward through a football game and watch all the action much faster than I can a baseball game, especially college football.
Isn't that likely because the dead time is still restricted by a clock, such that you can be extremely efficient with your FF button? Like hit it 2-3 seconds after a tackle and it jumps exactly 30 seconds so the offense is back at the line as the play clock is at 4 or 5 seconds. No real guess work, no having to bump it back 5-10 seconds because you over-shot and missed some action?
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
62,236
Isn't that likely because the dead time is still restricted by a clock, such that you can be extremely efficient with your FF button? Like hit it 2-3 seconds after a tackle and it jumps exactly 30 seconds so the offense is back at the line as the play clock is at 4 or 5 seconds. No real guess work, no having to bump it back 5-10 seconds because you over-shot and missed some action?
I don’t use the skip button for sports, I fast forward directly. I just find it a little strange that no one complains about college football games that routinely last four hours with maybe an hour of active play. I do think baseball has many many many issues to deal with (and have started multiple threads to that effect) but I also don’t think fixing them is very simple.
 

8slim

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
18,638
Unreal America
I don’t use the skip button for sports, I fast forward directly. I just find it a little strange that no one complains about college football games that routinely last four hours with maybe an hour of active play. I do think baseball has many many many issues to deal with (and have started multiple threads to that effect) but I also don’t think fixing them is very simple.
You must not talk to many college football fans, because I hear endless complaints about the length of games. I hear the same about the NFL. The difference, of course, is that there is only one game each week for one’s favorite team. So spending an extra 30-45 minutes watching the game than one might prefer is not the end of the world.

When baseball games last 3.5+ hours every single night, and the pace feels glacial while watching, it’s a problem of volume *and* frequency.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,028
Why is having AL pitchers hit a good idea exactly? Why is this exciting? What does it add?

Oh, the whole pinch hitting strategy thing. Wouldn't that slow the game down even more?
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
5,982
Boston, MA
I don’t use the skip button for sports, I fast forward directly. I just find it a little strange that no one complains about college football games that routinely last four hours with maybe an hour of active play. I do think baseball has many many many issues to deal with (and have started multiple threads to that effect) but I also don’t think fixing them is very simple.
There's a lot more happening in an average football play than an average baseball one. TV broadcasts fill the time by showing replays from a couple different angles. There's only so much you can show with a fastball outside for ball one.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
31,462
As mentioned above, football games once/week is a huge difference
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
62,236
Those are all valid points, but I was under the impression that most reasonably serious football fans watched probably 5-6 games a week between their own team/s and college and pro, so time per week is I would guess roughly the same (the football season is shorter, so it is less of an overall time commitment per year).
 
Last edited:

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
5,250
Football games are pretty consistent too- you know when they are going to end and they move at the same pace each time. They also are usually played in the afternoon on a Sunday and never start at 10pm. And every game is the equivalent of 10 mlb games.
 

8slim

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
18,638
Unreal America
Those are all valid points, but I was under the impression that most reasonably serious football fans watched probably 5-6 games a week between their own team/s and college and pro, so time per week is I would guess about the same (the football season is shorter, so it is less of an overall time commitment per year).
Very few fans watch 5-6 games in their entirety each week.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
19,823
Rogers Park
Are pitchers being pulled early because of lack of endurance, or because of the third time through the order thing, which was hardly a thing a few years ago? It seems like starters are pulled quickly because teams have a ton of hard throwing relievers they can deploy. If they weren’t allowed as many of those guys, I think it would lead to a better, more watchable but reasonable minds can disagree on this one - doing nothing could be the best move, the pendulum can swing quickly and if the Rays start doing something different, I’m sure everyone else will follow.
I think that’s a good point, what’s annoying about the recent trend with the third time through the order thing and all the relievers is that it seems like every team simultaneously started doing the same thing.
I don't know, man. The Mitchell Lichtman articles coining "TTOP" were from 2013. See them here and here.

I assume most Front Offices have a Baseball Prospectus subscription.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
15,035
Litchtman's analysis is fine for what it is, but he too easily dismisses Lester's ability to get through the order the 3rd time as "luck". Nothing will convince me that pulling Snell was the right move, but I'll admit that could be a "me" problem.

Back on topic: If baseball was to become a game where the 3 outcomes were the only possible outcomes from an at-bat, with everything else being as common a missed FG from the 2 yard line, then the game will become even more unwatchable. So I don't consider rule changes that prevent that outcome as necessarily gimmicks. Rules have changed before and baseball survived. Walks used to require 8 balls, and batters would get 4 strikes at one point. Over the course of the decade of the 1960's, OPS declined by over 70 points, which resulted in the mound being lowered. No need for a 5-4 9 inning regular season game to take over 4 hours.

So, implement a pitch clock to move things along and let the David Price's moan and groan. Pitchers get limited number of throws to 1B per batter. Limiting the number of pitchers on a roster is fine, but seems more like tinkering. Not necessarily in favor of removing the DH after a pitching change, not because it's a stupid idea, but because I doubt it has the intended affect; the novelty of relievers batting or being removed for a pinch hitter will wear off after a while.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
4,922
Football has more dead time between plays, I can fast forward through a football game and watch all the action much faster than I can a baseball game, especially college football.
I agree, but pointing out that something else is also bad (or even worse, perhaps) is not much of a defense.
 

Adirondack jack

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 24, 2008
1,542
The easiest way to have starters pitch more innings and not endanger their health is to move to 3 balls and 2 strikes. It would also speed up the game a lot.

Otherwise, anything that artificially forces pitchers to throw more pitches is a threat to health. If staffs are limited to 11 pitchers, we'll see a lot more position players pitch.

I agree dumb ideas.
Have they ever given this idea (reducing the allotted balls and strikes) a trial run in the minor leagues and/or exhibition games? This idea seems to have some merit, without knowing the unintended consequences of trying something like this to speed up the game a little.

I myself do not mind the pace of the game, but will admit to not enjoying, or appreciating the east coast games that run from 8 PM to 12 AM.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
26,758
Have they ever given this idea (reducing the allotted balls and strikes) a trial run in the minor leagues and/or exhibition games? This idea seems to have some merit, without knowing the unintended consequences of trying something like this to speed up the game a little.

I myself do not mind the pace of the game, but will admit to not enjoying, or appreciating the east coast games that run from 8 PM to 12 AM.
Apparently the Atlantic League tried something like it in a game in 2015: https://nypost.com/2015/04/18/3-ball-walks-how-a-radical-baseball-experiment-speeds-up-game/
They went to 3 balls is a walk but a foul bowl on strike 2 was a K. The game was o er in 2:15.

In this day and age where pitchers make hundreds of millions of dollars, you think owners would embrace a rule that reduces wear and tear on the investment. And in my opinion, most people watch baseball for action, not for the multiple pitches that doesn't result in contact.

I think it would be a more enjoyable game to watch.
 

splendid splinter

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
1,032
Greenville, SC
Apparently the Atlantic League tried something like it in a game in 2015: https://nypost.com/2015/04/18/3-ball-walks-how-a-radical-baseball-experiment-speeds-up-game/
They went to 3 balls is a walk but a foul bowl on strike 2 was a K. The game was o er in 2:15.

In this day and age where pitchers make hundreds of millions of dollars, you think owners would embrace a rule that reduces wear and tear on the investment. And in my opinion, most people watch baseball for action, not for the multiple pitches that doesn't result in contact.

I think it would be a more enjoyable game to watch.
Certainly faster, although I don’t know how long your typical Atlantic League game takes. But 10 walks (probably the most boring outcome in baseball) and 8 guys who fouled out (probably the most disappointing outcome)? I’m not sure people would find that kind of game enjoyable.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
26,758
Certainly faster, although I don’t know how long your typical Atlantic League game takes. But 10 walks (probably the most boring outcome in baseball) and 8 guys who fouled out (probably the most disappointing outcome)? I’m not sure people would find that kind of game enjoyable.
I wouldn't add the foul ball after strike 2 is a K. I suppose the walks would stabilize after guys got used to it. I don't see a reason why reducing walks to 3 balls would make them more prevalent.

This article - https://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/7533.html - says that in 1988, teams averaged 136.2 pitches per game. Now we are up to 150 or so. I think the sport would in much better place if that number came down.