|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 25, 2015 15:04:34 GMT -5
The interaction between fielders and batted balls is one of the primary appeals of baseball. It's what highlight reels are made of. So let's make rules that prevent that from happening while not addressing that balls in play themselves are at an all-time low.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jan 25, 2015 15:39:24 GMT -5
A solution in search of a problem. It's the strike zone, stupid. Not sure whether you want to widen or narrow the strike-zone....... A wider zone would mean even more strike-outs and less balls in play while a narrower one would likely lead to more walks and long counts slowing the pace of the game. I believe that offensive stats will continue to decline unless substantive change is made. Without some tweaking, the game will then hold less interest for me. Sabermetrics has played a large part in that decline and stronger pitching arms have as well. Somewhere along the line I had mentioned restricting the defensive shifts, lowering the mound again or even moving the mound back some. To the purist all that sounds heretical but offensive and defensive balance is also part of baseball's fabric and lure. From time to time a little titration is needed to keep that balance within historic parameters.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 25, 2015 15:55:38 GMT -5
The defensive shifts aren't the problem. Average on balls in play is still pretty high. The problem is that batter are less able to make contact now than at any point in baseball's history, which is caused at least in part by a strike zone that has expanded in recent years. Tightening it up addresses that problem. As far as slowing the game down, increased offense is going to do that by definition, but I think the real issue there is pitchers working extremely slowly and batters stepping out of the box constantly. Make some rules to tamp those things down (they're already experimenting with a pitch clock which I support) and the pace of play issues go away.
Oh yeah, and the universal DH. It's at least fifty years overdue.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 25, 2015 16:01:11 GMT -5
A solution in search of a problem. It's the strike zone, stupid. Not sure whether you want to widen or narrow the strike-zone....... A wider zone would mean even more strike-outs and less balls in play while a narrower one would likely lead to more walks and long counts slowing the pace of the game. I believe that offensive stats will continue to decline unless substantive change is made. Without some tweaking, the game will then hold less interest for me. Sabermetrics has played a large part in that decline and stronger pitching arms have as well. Somewhere along the line I had mentioned restricting the defensive shifts, lowering the mound again or even moving the mound back some. To the purist all that sounds heretical but offensive and defensive balance is also part of baseball's fabric and lure. From time to time a little titration is needed to keep that balance within historic parameters. A narrower strike zone would force pitchers to throw pitches that are easier for batters to hit. It would also lead to batters hitting in more favorable counts. The simplest fix for me is getting rid of the extra 4-6 inches that LH batters have to cover on the outside corner.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 25, 2015 16:10:45 GMT -5
Not sure whether you want to widen or narrow the strike-zone....... A wider zone would mean even more strike-outs and less balls in play while a narrower one would likely lead to more walks and long counts slowing the pace of the game. I believe that offensive stats will continue to decline unless substantive change is made. Without some tweaking, the game will then hold less interest for me. Sabermetrics has played a large part in that decline and stronger pitching arms have as well. Somewhere along the line I had mentioned restricting the defensive shifts, lowering the mound again or even moving the mound back some. To the purist all that sounds heretical but offensive and defensive balance is also part of baseball's fabric and lure. From time to time a little titration is needed to keep that balance within historic parameters. A narrower strike zone would force pitchers to throw pitches that are easier for batters to hit. It would also lead to batters hitting in more favorable counts. The simplest fix for me is getting rid of the extra 4-6 inches that LH batters have to cover on the outside corner.
That's absolutely a factor but most of the growth of the strike zone recently has been downward, possibly as a result of an increased understanding and focus on pitch framing. What I find fascinating about pitch framing is that there are very strong arguments that it is both A) cheating and B) hurting the quality of the game, but no one seems to have any problem with either of those things. Very interesting in contrast to PED hysteria.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 25, 2015 16:16:46 GMT -5
Can we agree to not talk about PEDs? There is no comparison between them and pitch framing. If my son was a catcher, I'd rather he work on pitch framing than take steroids.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 25, 2015 16:38:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by charliezink16 on Jan 26, 2015 4:02:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Jan 26, 2015 13:02:23 GMT -5
So we're faulting the guy for finding out exactly how much insurance he needs, and if he actually needs insurance? isn't that just prudent buying?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 26, 2015 13:07:46 GMT -5
So we're faulting the guy for finding out exactly how much insurance he needs, and if he actually needs insurance? isn't that just prudent buying? More like faulting him for getting insurance 5 days after an accident and then saying the accident happened at a later date.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 26, 2015 13:23:36 GMT -5
So we're faulting the guy for finding out exactly how much insurance he needs, and if he actually needs insurance? isn't that just prudent buying? More like faulting him for getting insurance 5 days after an accident and then saying the accident happened at a later date. So then the issue isn't Progressive instead of Geico ?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 26, 2015 13:42:03 GMT -5
This story makes no sense at all. How does one file a $210,000 claim when there is $4600 in damage? I thought you file a claim to get your car/RV fixed and the insurance company determines whether it is totaled or not. This is outside the fraud of claiming the accident happened after buying insurance instead of a long time ago.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 26, 2015 16:06:21 GMT -5
Ortiz's batting average would spike again, that's for sure. Banning shifts is moronic, it's been a part of the game since before the 1940s. Does he go a step farther and say an outfielder he can't play so shallow that he can cover second base (like Tris Speaker in the 1920s) or a left fielder come in occasionally to cover on bunts (like King Kelly in the 1890s)? It would be an enforcement nightmare. If they had a rule like this, at least twice a game there would be a 15 minute long discussion as to where a fielder was standing when the ball was hit, and weather it was legal or not. I'm a huge baseball fan, but I'd rather watch paint dry, and I'd just assume change the channel. Innovative teams use technology to try to figure out where the ball is most likely to be hit. Why would you want to punish that? Stop complaining about where the fielders are placed, and try to figure out ways to beat the shift.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jan 26, 2015 16:42:41 GMT -5
Not to pick on jmei - this time - but that phrase and "it's worth noting" should be banned, along with "should be banned". Or else mandate that every stupid comment begin with a corresponding warning: "not worth mentioning". It's not worth mentioning that ball deflation has yet to be ruled out as a culprit.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 26, 2015 17:00:25 GMT -5
Good point....if you are mentioning it, I would hope it's worth mentioning....if it isn't worth mentioning than why are you mentioning it? . Cafardo does that all the time and it drives me up a wall.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jan 26, 2015 17:09:46 GMT -5
Doesn't being driven up the wall drive you up the wall?
I'm in agreement that legislating against shifts would be a total disaster. What would baseball do, chalk in a dotted line out from home plate to each side of second base, one that shouldn't be crossed? You might laugh but how else would you legislate it? Short of that, ESPN and the MLB network would be hiring analysts whose sole job would be to parse the inconsistent calls by umpiring crews - over and over and over again. That is watching paint dry.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 26, 2015 17:13:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jan 26, 2015 17:45:20 GMT -5
This part had me falling off my chair, laughing: The new comish needs a proofreader right off the mark, no?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2015 17:27:51 GMT -5
Baseball is swinging for the financial fences:
www.cbsnews.com/news/why-major-league-baseball-is-poised-to-hit-a-financial-home-run/
"University of Michigan sports economist Rodney Fort argued that baseball will catch the NFL (in revenue) in the next two to three season because of BAM (Baseball Advanced Media) and the growth of regional sports networks. 'They have been closing in on football for the past five or six years,' Fort told CBS MoneyWatch. 'Baseball is definitely going to catch football in the next few years."
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 28, 2015 20:44:36 GMT -5
Insurance Rep: "I gotta dollar for ya but ya gotta be quick"
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 31, 2015 10:27:31 GMT -5
Ken Rosenthal ?@ken_Rosenthal 50m50 minutes ago From David Aardsma’s agent, Jamie Murphy: “David is going to throw a bullpen for interested teams next Monday in Tempe…
Ken Rosenthal ?@ken_Rosenthal 50m50 minutes ago …(Aardsma) is looking to showcase added velocity after a change in mechanics and an extremely intense offseason workout regimen.“
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jan 31, 2015 14:44:25 GMT -5
A couple of interesting moves this week. Viciedo DFA'd and Hunter Morris outrighted. There were some people here interested in Viciedo before the Panda trade.
Morris has hit a ton of HRs in the minors and, looking at his record, it isn't clear what is wrong with him. However, if he had signed with the Sox, he wouldn't be high on the prospect list now, if the Sox still had him.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Jan 31, 2015 14:50:45 GMT -5
A couple of interesting moves this week. Viciedo DFA'd and Hunter Morris outrighted. There were some people here interested in Viciedo before the Panda trade. Morris has hit a ton of HRs in the minors and, looking at his record, it isn't clear what is wrong with him. However, if he had signed with the Sox, he wouldn't be high on the prospect list now, if the Sox still had him. Interested in Viciedo in what capacity? He's a terrible player, with his only usefulness being his ability to hit LHP's, and he even stunk at that in 2014. He's a horrible defender in the outfield and can't play third anymore. Bryce Brentz is a better player.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Jan 31, 2015 14:56:22 GMT -5
What was the 'Panda trade'?
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jan 31, 2015 16:10:55 GMT -5
What was the 'Panda trade'? A brain freeze. Happens to us old folks now and then.
|
|