SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Baseball rule changes you'd like to see happen
|
Post by melvinhoggs on Jul 24, 2023 13:26:45 GMT -5
1. Automated Strike Zone 2. Automated Strike Zone 3. Automated Strike Zone
Yes, I've seen the challenge system. I don't want that.
Two weeks after making a big stink about losing "the human element" everyone will let it go and it will be just as out of mind as the pitch clock. Just get the calls right. I don't care about any "skill" that involves tricking umpires into getting a call wrong. Pitchers get rewarded for pinpoint control, batters get rewarded for keen awareness of the strike zone without the day-to-day variability (or irritability) of the umps.
The umpires still have their jobs – they get a beep in their ear or whatever and still have plenty of other responsibilities/judgements on the field. I think I said this in another thread about it, but I still stand by my belief that if the automated strike zone is implemented over challenges, literally nobody is going to be sitting at home a few months into the season thinking to themselves "man, I really wish we had gone with the system where a bunch of calls are still wrong – we really missed out!"
Edit: I should also add that while I'm 100% in favor of the automated strike zone, I would accept the challenge system as a stepping stone. I can see that it might be an easier sell, and I would prefer more correct calls to less.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Jul 24, 2023 13:39:50 GMT -5
1. Automated Strike Zone 2. Automated Strike Zone 3. Automated Strike Zone Yes, I've seen the challenge system. I don't want that. Two weeks after making a big stink about losing "the human element" everyone will let it go and it will be just as out of mind as the pitch clock. Just get the calls right. I don't care about any "skill" that involves tricking umpires into getting a call wrong. Pitchers get rewarded for pinpoint control, batters get rewarded for keen awareness of the strike zone without the day-to-day variability (or irritability) of the umps. The umpires still have their jobs – they get a beep in their ear or whatever and still have plenty of other responsibilities/judgements on the field. I think I said this in another thread about it, but I still stand by my belief that if the automated strike zone is implemented over challenges, literally nobody is going to be sitting at home a few months into the season thinking to themselves "man, I really wish we had gone with the system where a bunch of calls are still wrong – we really missed out!" Edit: I should also add that while I'm 100% in favor of the automated strike zone, I would accept the challenge system as a stepping stone. I can see that it might be an easier sell, and I would prefer more correct calls to less. When it comes to balls and strikes the "human element" is exactly what needs to be lost. There is something of an argument that it would remove pitch framing which is a skill but it's a skill which isn't in the rule book and shouldn't be part of the game. I mean pickpockets have a skill also. The challenge system just brings the human element back in. How many times have we seen calls in football go what looks to be obviously wrong when the human element reviews the film?
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,017
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 24, 2023 13:57:43 GMT -5
On zombie runner, I don't despise it like others here do, but would prefer if it started in like, the 11th or 12th. Ideally, it kicks in (at the start of an inning) after each team has had 9 PA in extras. That will usually be the 12th or 13th.
Give every hitter on each team a chance to hit with regular baseball rules. Right now if one team has 1 to 4 due up and the other 6 to 9, that's a huge advantage and it pure luck. (It's luck to begin with, but the ghost runner amplifies it hugely.) And you really have to go through both lineups before you make it crazy easy to score.
You also put off the point in time where a cheap single (completely luck) can decide the game.
Now, in practice this is probably just an argument for 12 (although I would go for 13). But the more complicated rule would make things more interesting.
|
|
mparker
Rookie
Enter your message here...
Posts: 95
|
Post by mparker on Jul 24, 2023 14:04:21 GMT -5
This isn’t really mlb relevant but I think a universal performance bonus system for milb would be cool. Like every hitter gets a $500 bonus if they hit 10 home runs or if a starter gets 100 strike outs. Something like that would help make the minor league wage more livable.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,017
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 24, 2023 14:16:55 GMT -5
- No extra inning ghost runner - I'd be willing to adopt the automated strike zone, if and only if, it takes pitch framing into account somehow; it's an art for a catcher, and I don't want it to go away There's a way to do something like this.
There are pitches that are 100% strikes and 100% balls, but the accuracy of the system isn't infinite, so there will be pitches that were 60% strikes and 40% balls, etc., based on the plus or minus of the calculated position.
Track the catcher's glove, not from the initial position but a bit after the pitch is released.
Factor in the amount of movement of the catcher's glove into the uncertain results.
Part of this is attending to intent. A 50/50 pitch where the catcher was set up for just that spot should obviously be a strike, while the same pitch withe catcher lunging across the entire plate should obviously be a ball.
The skill included here would not be framing, but the ability to quickly recognize and respond to an errant pitch.
And I bet that skill correlates with framing.
Gather a year of data, all the uncertain pitches, and spend the winter constructing an algorithm that produces results that seem right.
|
|
|
Post by ixnayexxus on Jul 24, 2023 14:19:07 GMT -5
- No extra inning ghost runner - I'd be willing to adopt the automated strike zone, if and only if, it takes pitch framing into account somehow; it's an art for a catcher, and I don't want it to go away There's a way to do something like this.
There are pitches that are 100% strikes and 100% balls, but the accuracy of the system isn't infinite, so there will be pitches that were 60% strikes and 40% balls, etc., based on the plus or minus of the calculated position.
Track the catcher's glove, not from the initial position but a bit after the pitch is released.
Factor in the amount of movement of the catcher's glove into the uncertain results.
Part of this is attending to intent. A 50/50 pitch where the catcher was set up for just that spot should obviously be a strike, while the same pitch withe catcher lunging across the entire plate should obviously be a ball.
The skill included here would not be framing, but the ability to quickly recognize and respond to an errant pitch.
And I bet that skill correlates with framing.
Gather a year of data, all the uncertain pitches, and spend the winter constructing an algorithm that produces results that seem right.
This sounds promising
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Jul 24, 2023 14:42:12 GMT -5
I'd like to see the Central division removed from each league, just merge those teams into the East and West. With two divisions it's tough to have a division winner that otherwise wouldn't make the playoffs. Add a couple expansion teams and it'd be eight teams per division. Keep the schedules fairly balanced.
Not a rule, but I want old timer games, with the location alternating each year. Make it a double header with the retired players opening the day with 7 innings or whatever, then play the real game at night. Make sure the pitcher/batter matchups accurately reflect age and current shape, go for entertainment over sticking to traditional rules for the game, and try to include as many generations as possible. Make it a charity game and raffle off all the jerseys and equipment at the end of it. Fans and players may get bored with it after a while, but only hosting two games every four years seems like the right balance to start. There's a huge pool of former players to pull from obviously. Could possibly do a quick home run derby too.
|
|
|
Post by reasonabledoubt on Jul 24, 2023 16:39:46 GMT -5
I'm sure this is going to be unpopular, but I've never been a fan of the balk rules. And I was never a pitcher so I'm not coming from that angle. I know why they exist, but I wish some of them could be eliminated, or that umpires could use some discretion in calling them. My reasons:
They seem so fluky and in a lot of cases the runners on base were not actually deceived. There is something like 13 ways to balk. Honestly, how many fans (who were never pitchers) know what they are? I'm sure there are many, but it is certainly not most. When a balk is called, often most fans watching the game, announcers, players, even some umpires don't know what the balk was about and have to have it explained to them. Most of the time the runners on base seem just as puzzled as to what the pitcher did, as they gladly take the free base without doing anything to earn it. Just this weekend JT appealed for a obvious balk that was not called that apparently none of the umpires even saw!
Recently Kenley got called for a balk because he dropped the ball while on the rubber. Was it really that deceiving to the runners who were on base at the time? Let the runners advance at their own risk if it happens. Don't just give them the base when there was no intended deception. If that is a balk, why isn't it a balk if the first baseman mishandles the ball on a throw over and it rolls several feet away? Couldn't the first baseman potentially be trying to deceive the runner? And why is deception by the pitcher viewed so negatively? Infielders do this all the time on ground balls or popups when runners are moving. Sometimes they position themselves to intentionally let easy popups drop in order to force out a speedier runner or start a double play. Outfielders do it too in an attempt to freeze runners. Catchers try to deceive on every pitch when they frame.
When I say the umpire should have discretion, I mean when there are instances where it's an obvious base stealer taking a lead then by all means invoke the balk rules if there are clear violations. But for the majority of the runners who are not base stealing threats why give them an extra base when they have a short lead and the pitcher flinches or his hands come apart? Someone once explained to me that it is less about deception and more about enforcing standards for delivery of the baseball to home and to the bases when runners are on base. That kind of makes sense. But it seems that calling balks are always explained as being necessary so that the pitcher can't deceive the runners. I always thought it was a great skill that guys like Carlton and Pettitte (even though he was a MFY) had in picking off guys. A skill that should be admired for their deception.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jul 24, 2023 16:44:25 GMT -5
No caps on the draft or International signings.
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Jul 24, 2023 17:21:20 GMT -5
- on ground-rule double, runner scores from first if there are two outs (would be running on contact)
- agree w Chris on ghost-runner starting in the 11th
- some version of trading draft picks
- some system of strike review (but baby steps please)
- multiple tiers of restricted free agent (QO's) for different $ value and draft rounds.
- more money for third year MLB players
- allow AAAA players to to negotiate another option year to increase their employability (might need some qualifiers or thresholds to keep teams from colluding on this)
|
|
|
Post by rizdog on Jul 24, 2023 18:38:56 GMT -5
Interesting subject, and a lot of good proposals. I really like adding an extra year until players are Rule 5 eligible, if there signed before they're 18. I'd add to that, to also expand the 40 man roster to 42. Jumping the active roster from 25 to 26 has created more of a crunch down roster.
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Jul 24, 2023 19:03:34 GMT -5
One of my biggest issues with the zombie runner, other than the obvious, is the scoring. I feel like if there was a pitching change at the start of the inning, then the runner should be responsible to the pitcher beginning the inning, not the pitcher that ended the previous inning. I get that it's unearned, but I'm still bitter that my MLB the Show pitcher threw 12 perfect innings AND STILL LOST because a reliever came out to start the 13th and allowed the runner to score.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 24, 2023 19:06:57 GMT -5
Interesting subject, and a lot of good proposals. I really like adding an extra year until players are Rule 5 eligible, if there signed before they're 18. I'd add to that, to also expand the 40 man roster to 42. Jumping the active roster from 25 to 26 has created more of a crunch down roster. Agree on both of these.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 24, 2023 22:01:20 GMT -5
Not necessarily a rule change (since the rule already gives umpires some discretion), but would love to see more judgment on ground rule doubles (runner on first scoring, mostly). Not just with two outs, either. That one always drove me crazy.
Oh, and bring back the shift.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jul 24, 2023 22:23:07 GMT -5
Are we stuck with the zombie runner? Im kind of surprised the owners signed off on keeping it and got nothing in return.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,017
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 24, 2023 23:04:26 GMT -5
- on ground-rule double, runner scores from first if there are two outs (would be running on contact)
- agree w Chris on ghost-runner starting in the 11th
- some version of trading draft picks
- some system of strike review (but baby steps please)
- multiple tiers of restricted free agent (QO's) for different $ value and draft rounds.
- more money for third year MLB players
- allow AAAA players to to negotiate another option year to increase their employability (might need some qualifiers or thresholds to keep teams from colluding on this)
I've been saying that for years. Extra clause; only if the ball leaves the playing field in fair territory.
(Can you think of a moment in Sox history that would have been crushing if the rule, without that clause, had been in place?)
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,484
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 24, 2023 23:11:12 GMT -5
- on ground-rule double, runner scores from first if there are two outs (would be running on contact)
- agree w Chris on ghost-runner starting in the 11th
- some version of trading draft picks
- some system of strike review (but baby steps please)
- multiple tiers of restricted free agent (QO's) for different $ value and draft rounds.
- more money for third year MLB players
- allow AAAA players to to negotiate another option year to increase their employability (might need some qualifiers or thresholds to keep teams from colluding on this)
I've been saying that for years. Extra clause; only if the ball leaves the playing field in fair territory. (Can you think of a moment in Sox history that would have been crushing if the rule, without that clause, had been in place?)
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the question, but I think back to when Reuben Sierra would have scored the go ahead run in the 9th inning of Game 5 2004 ALCS when Tony Clark's double climbed up the short RF wall for a ground rule double that wound up holding Sierra at 3b when he would have scored easily. Foulke got Miguel Cairo to pop up to Mientkiewicz (all 3 outs that inning were pop ups to Mienkiewicz) to get out of the jam unscathed.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Jul 24, 2023 23:15:57 GMT -5
- No extra inning ghost runner - I'd be willing to adopt the automated strike zone, if and only if, it takes pitch framing into account somehow; it's an art for a catcher, and I don't want it to go away There's a way to do something like this.
There are pitches that are 100% strikes and 100% balls, but the accuracy of the system isn't infinite, so there will be pitches that were 60% strikes and 40% balls, etc., based on the plus or minus of the calculated position.
Track the catcher's glove, not from the initial position but a bit after the pitch is released.
Factor in the amount of movement of the catcher's glove into the uncertain results.
Part of this is attending to intent. A 50/50 pitch where the catcher was set up for just that spot should obviously be a strike, while the same pitch withe catcher lunging across the entire plate should obviously be a ball.
The skill included here would not be framing, but the ability to quickly recognize and respond to an errant pitch.
And I bet that skill correlates with framing.
Gather a year of data, all the uncertain pitches, and spend the winter constructing an algorithm that produces results that seem right.
Am I wrong in assuming the catchers glove is not in the strike zone? I suppose part of framing is a ball which passed through the zone being caught wide, low or high of the zone and the catcher pulling it subtly back into an area more likely to be called a strike. A hammer curve with a 12 to 6 drop could bounce in to the catcher but have clipped the front bottom edge of the strike zone. However automated balls and strikes would eliminate where the catcher receives a pitch because the device is only looking at the ball and the strike zone. I have no idea how accurate the machines are or how they are calibrated by there should not be any 50-50 balls. A pitch either passes through some part of the strike zone or it does not. As in tennis if any part of a ball so much as touches any part of the line (chalk or digital) then it's a strike.
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Jul 24, 2023 23:19:17 GMT -5
I've been saying that for years. Extra clause; only if the ball leaves the playing field in fair territory. (Can you think of a moment in Sox history that would have been crushing if the rule, without that clause, had been in place?)
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the question, but I think back to when Reuben Sierra would have scored the go ahead run in the 9th inning of Game 5 2004 ALCS when Tony Clark's double climbed up the short RF wall for a ground rule double that wound up holding Sierra at 3b when he would have scored easily. Foulke got Miguel Cairo to pop up to Mientkiewicz (all 3 outs that inning were pop ups to Mienkiewicz) to get out of the jam unscathed. Kiermaier's ground-rule double in the 2021 playoffs too, the one that bounced off of Renfroe into the bullpen.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,017
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 24, 2023 23:49:32 GMT -5
Expand the roster to 27 (see another post for September), keeping a cap on 13 pitchers. That's right: 27 outs, 27 players. The extra player makes a surprising difference.
When I stared watching baseball, a team had 10 pitchers, 8 regulars and seven bench players.
There was more platooning, more pinch hitting and pinch running ... more strategy.
. Admittedly, the 25th guy often got little PT, and the DH means you don't need a pinch-hitter (usually just 1 in the old days). That yields 5 bench guys as the equivalent.
Or another angle: excluding P and C, there are five distinct positions in terms of defensive skills and desired offense: 1B, 3B, CF, middle infielder, and corner outfielder. Right now you are covering those 5 roles with 3 guys, so you need 2 guys out of 3 who are covering two different roles. Most often, you have a 1B covering either 3B or corner OF, plus either a CF covering the corners or a skill infielder covering 3B.The result is subpar defense by the backup 1B in his secondary role and subpar offense from the backup CF or middle infielder in theirs.
Add just one bench guy and it flips the whole picture. Now you have two guys who only back up one position (and can platoon) and just one guy who's extra-versatile.
With the current 4-man benches, it sure seems that half the guys who are good enough to back up or platoon at a single MLB position are stuck in AAA. They lose their spot to a guy not as good who can play somewhere else as adequately. Since when is that a good idea for game quality?
How many extra tickets does the average team have to sell, per game, to pay one guy earning the minimum? About 85.
Yes, 85 extra fans to see the better (but less versatile) players coming off the bench, and the extra strategy that goes with it I think that's a win..
|
|
|