White Sox Interactive Forums
Talking Baseball

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Talking Baseball
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 03-15-2019, 02:31 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 10,194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog
Limiting pitching changes isn't going to reduce the time it takes pitchers to get hitters out, which is the problem that needs to be addressed. Make hitters swing and you can let managers manage.
Walks are nowhere near as boring as the complete inaction that will be reduced by having fewer pitching changes.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemaster Fred
This is the major leagues so get it how you live and let’s fight tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 03-15-2019, 03:48 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
Walks are nowhere near as boring as the complete inaction that will be reduced by having fewer pitching changes.
Of course, it isn't a question of one or the other. It's a question of advancing the game. Baseball's clock, as it were, is outs. Walks don't advance the game. Leaving pitchers in the game who do not efficiently record outs does not advance the game. The problem is the pace of the game, that the game isn't advancing. This isn't football where the clock continues to wind down during inaction of a huddle or a quarterback taking a knee.

There's an old joke about a scientist experimenting with a frog he has trained to jump on command. He measures its jump, cuts off a leg, commands it and measures it again. He cuts off the second hind leg, and the frog won't jump no matter how loud he shouts the command. He concludes that frogs with no legs are deaf. Such is the logic that baseball is using to come up with rules to speedup the game.

Before I was born, managers were bringing hitters to face only one batter. In the 1954 World Series, in the top of the 8th in a 2-2 game, Leo Durocher brought in Don Liddle to face Vic Wertz with two on and none out. Wertz flied to to center, and Durocher brought in Marv Grissom to get the last two outs. Legend has it that Liddle told Grissom, "I got my guy" as he left the mound. The story is repeated because that one hitter produced one of the most celebrated plays in baseball history. You never hear anyone complaining that the game took more than three hours to finish. They were talking about a team that went 111-43, seemingly invincible against an inferior National League team, getting beaten. And they were talking about one or two remarkable things that happen after hitters swing the bat.

Everything baseball has done in the last 50 years has slowed the pace of the game. Requiring pitchers to face three batters isn't going to improve the pace of the game. Why not limit each team to five total pitchers in regulation? That won't speed up the game either.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 03-15-2019, 03:55 PM
Mr. Jinx Mr. Jinx is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Of course, it isn't a question of one or the other. It's a question of advancing the game. Baseball's clock, as it were, is outs. Walks don't advance the game. Leaving pitchers in the game who do not efficiently record outs does not advance the game. The problem is the pace of the game, that the game isn't advancing. This isn't football where the clock continues to wind down during inaction of a huddle or a quarterback taking a knee.

There's an old joke about a scientist experimenting with a frog he has trained to jump on command. He measures its jump, cuts off a leg, commands it and measures it again. He cuts off the second hind leg, and the frog won't jump no matter how loud he shouts the command. He concludes that frogs with no legs are deaf. Such is the logic that baseball is using to come up with rules to speedup the game.

Before I was born, managers were bringing hitters to face only one batter. In the 1954 World Series, in the top of the 8th in a 2-2 game, Leo Durocher brought in Don Liddle to face Vic Wertz with two on and none out. Wertz flied to to center, and Durocher brought in Marv Grissom to get the last two outs. Legend has it that Liddle told Grissom, "I got my guy" as he left the mound. The story is repeated because that one hitter produced one of the most celebrated plays in baseball history. You never hear anyone complaining that the game took more than three hours to finish. They were talking about a team that went 111-43, seemingly invincible against an inferior National League team, getting beaten. And they were talking about one or two remarkable things that happen after hitters swing the bat.

Everything baseball has done in the last 50 years has slowed the pace of the game. Requiring pitchers to face three batters isn't going to improve the pace of the game. Why not limit each team to five total pitchers in regulation? That won't speed up the game either.
You are using an example of the 8th inning of a World Series game. That's a little bit different than a random Tuesday night game against the Royals.

All things equal, I would rather see a walk than another pitching change if they are going to take the same amount of time. Neither of them advance the game any, but it does improve the pace of the game. There are plenty more things that can and should be done, but I don't see how this negatively impacts things in any way.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 03-15-2019, 05:07 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Jinx View Post
You are using an example of the 8th inning of a World Series game. That's a little bit different than a random Tuesday night game against the Royals.

All things equal, I would rather see a walk than another pitching change if they are going to take the same amount of time. Neither of them advance the game any, but it does improve the pace of the game. There are plenty more things that can and should be done, but I don't see how this negatively impacts things in any way.

Walks don't improve the pace of the game. They grind down the pace of the game. Even if you don't consider them periods of inaction (and MLB apparently does because hitters are waved to first now on intentional walks, which were accomplished more quickly than unintentional walks), putting a runner on first slows down the pitcher for the next batter. Pitchers slow down when you have runners on base because they have runners on base to worry about. The difference in pace between a pitcher who is walking hitters while working to limit the contact hitters make, pitching deep in the count, pitching behind in the count, and pitchers who give up singles while pitching to contact is substantial.

This rule change doesn't address the problem. The change will be felt, but it will have little effect on the pace of the game. More managers will be labeled with increasingly more colorful obscenities for bullpen handling, but it won't speed up games.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 03-15-2019, 07:56 PM
Mr. Jinx Mr. Jinx is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Walks don't improve the pace of the game. They grind down the pace of the game. Even if you don't consider them periods of inaction (and MLB apparently does because hitters are waved to first now on intentional walks, which were accomplished more quickly than unintentional walks), putting a runner on first slows down the pitcher for the next batter. Pitchers slow down when you have runners on base because they have runners on base to worry about. The difference in pace between a pitcher who is walking hitters while working to limit the contact hitters make, pitching deep in the count, pitching behind in the count, and pitchers who give up singles while pitching to contact is substantial.

This rule change doesn't address the problem. The change will be felt, but it will have little effect on the pace of the game. More managers will be labeled with increasingly more colorful obscenities for bullpen handling, but it won't speed up games.
Well we have different opinions on pace of the game if you feel someone taking a walk after taking live pitches is the same as completely dead air while a pitcher is coming in from the bullpen and warming up.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 03-15-2019, 10:26 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Jinx View Post
Well we have different opinions on pace of the game if you feel someone taking a walk after taking live pitches is the same as completely dead air while a pitcher is coming in from the bullpen and warming up.

Watching Kyle Schwarber hit live generally includes as much dead air as a pitching change. As long as baseball is more about strikeouts, walks and home runs than stealing bases, executing the hit-and-run and playing great defense, most who don't enjoy statistics for the sake of statistics will find the game moves at an incredibly slow pace.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 03-17-2019, 07:06 PM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 4,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Watching Kyle Schwarber hit live generally includes as much dead air as a pitching change. As long as baseball is more about strikeouts, walks and home runs than stealing bases, executing the hit-and-run and playing great defense, most who don't enjoy statistics for the sake of statistics will find the game moves at an incredibly slow pace.
I love the trend of wild pitches (1,847)/passed balls (370).

"Let's be clear that this is not an indictment of the skills of catchers, who have probably the toughest job in team sports."

Did you ever hear of the goaltender position in the NHL?

"This is about how much the responsibilities of the role have changed, in terms of velocity, emphasis on framing, increasing numbers of pitchers handled and so on. It's so hard to be a catcher. It's never been harder."

Right, it's never been harder. But it's not about their current skills correct? Like lateral movement? Blocking balls in the dirt?


https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-trends-...019-c304007856
__________________
“There were a few hard rules, but everybody was unique, and he understood that. George’s great strength was he didn’t overcoach. There’s no place for panic on the mound.” - Jim Palmer on George Bamberger “Arms and the man,” Sports Illustrated, April 19, 2004

Last edited by Grzegorz; 03-17-2019 at 07:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old Yesterday, 01:10 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,017
Default

I resent changing the rules of the game, which go to the fabric of the checks and balances of baseball to shorten the game because hitters are taking more pitches to work pitchers to get them out of the game and reach base without putting the ball into play.

Roll back some of the things MLB has been doing to increase the offense, which has resulted in slowing down the game. Leave the checks and balances in place, and the game will be fine. A manager with a 25-man roster and the pitcher in the lineup who frequently changes pitchers wouldn't have to have a rule limiting his ability to change pitchers.

Of course, pitching changes aren't as tiresome as instant-replay reviews, because you don't know how long the reviews will take.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old Yesterday, 01:34 PM
WhiteSox5187 WhiteSox5187 is offline
Winner 2016 WSI Preseason Prediction Contest
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southside
Posts: 15,998
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
I resent changing the rules of the game, which go to the fabric of the checks and balances of baseball to shorten the game because hitters are taking more pitches to work pitchers to get them out of the game and reach base without putting the ball into play.

Roll back some of the things MLB has been doing to increase the offense, which has resulted in slowing down the game. Leave the checks and balances in place, and the game will be fine. A manager with a 25-man roster and the pitcher in the lineup who frequently changes pitchers wouldn't have to have a rule limiting his ability to change pitchers.

Of course, pitching changes aren't as tiresome as instant-replay reviews, because you don't know how long the reviews will take.
Seriously, the way they handle replay reviews is the worst. I'd rather they have an extra ump in the booth who can review the video and make the call then and there.
__________________

Go Sox!!!
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old Yesterday, 02:23 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 10,194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog
Of course, pitching changes aren't as tiresome as instant-replay reviews, because you don't know how long the reviews will take.
I don’t like replay review, either, but compared to pitching changes, it’s six of one vs. a half-dozen of the other.

Pitching changes—especially the third or fourth change in the same half-inning—blow chunks. The sooner the frequency of them decreases, the better.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old Yesterday, 04:19 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,017
Default

Of course, you could make a rule that anyone coming into a game during an inning (as opposed to between innings) would have to come in off the bench, making an exception for injured catchers. Any pitchers coming into the game would have to be pre-warmed. Maybe they wouldn't be loose, but the important thing is you wouldn't want to be boring people with pitching changes.

Apparently, there is no rule change coming into effect that would change the fact that when a pitcher is injured, his replacement gets as much time as he wants to warm up.

A lot of hitters are going to take the first couple of pitches anyway, so you could just do away with the warmups. Forget the fact that you ware changing the way the game is played and managed to speed up a game that was slowed down by analysts who changed the definition of offensive success.

As long as we can keep people from being bored without addressing the real problem with the game's pace, everything will be fine.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old Yesterday, 04:50 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 10,194
Default

As long as it gets rid of a lot of these awful pitching changes, it’s a welcome sight.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old Yesterday, 05:32 PM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is offline
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 56,039
Blog Entries: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Of course, you could make a rule that anyone coming into a game during an inning (as opposed to between innings) would have to come in off the bench, making an exception for injured catchers. Any pitchers coming into the game would have to be pre-warmed. Maybe they wouldn't be loose, but the important thing is you wouldn't want to be boring people with pitching changes.

Apparently, there is no rule change coming into effect that would change the fact that when a pitcher is injured, his replacement gets as much time as he wants to warm up.

A lot of hitters are going to take the first couple of pitches anyway, so you could just do away with the warmups. Forget the fact that you ware changing the way the game is played and managed to speed up a game that was slowed down by analysts who changed the definition of offensive success.

As long as we can keep people from being bored without addressing the real problem with the game's pace, everything will be fine.
You're suggesting they cut into commercial time? What are you, mad?

Honestly that wouldn't be a horrible idea give the network a 30 second break while the reliever is coming in then resume the game immediately once he's on the mound. The NFL did this when they shortened TO length a while back. Then the network can run commercials in the corners of the screen like soccer does to make up for any lost revenue. There would be time to show those types of ads between batters or even between pitches occasionally.
__________________

Riding shotgun on the Sox bandwagon since before there was an Internet...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:25 AM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.