MLB News & Notes (other than Cubs or Sox)

[Butcher]

How about Harvey? He's been pretty bad this year.

I'm a petty bitch, but this makes me happy.

[Auz]

https://twitter.com/thekapman/status/733473319786283009


Mark Prior would like to know too...

[Kid]

A new strike zone could be on baseball's horizon and the old-fashioned intentional walk could be a thing of the past after both were agreed to by the competition committee at Major League Baseball's owners meetings this week, sources said.
 

The potentially dramatic changes could be in effect by next season.

 

The committee agreed on a motion to effectively raise the lower part of the strike zone to the top of the hitter's knees, sources said. The current rules stipulate that the zone begins at "the hollow beneath the kneecap," but the change is a reaction to a trend by umpires to call strikes on an increasing number of pitches below the knees.

 

The change in the intentional-walk rule would end the traditional practice of requiring the pitcher to lob four balls outside the strike zone. Instead, a team could signify it wants to issue an intentional walk, and the hitter would be immediately sent to first base, sources said.

 

The two changes can't go into effect unless they are approved by baseball's playing rules committee. Sources said the changes would also be presented to the MLB Players Association as part of negotiations for a new labor agreement. However, the playing rules committee isn't required to have the union sign off on the changes. So they could take effect next season whether or not the union agrees to them.

 

Both changes are designed to address concerns by commissioner Rob Manfred and others about pace of play and one of the commissioner's favorite terms, "pace of action." The end of the traditional intentional walk would eliminate dead time. However, the adjustment in the strike zone is designed to produce more balls in play, more baserunners and more action at a time when nearly 30 percent of hitters in the average game either walk or strike out, the highest rate of "non-action" in history.

 

Link

[jstraw]

I'm sure eliminating the traditional intentional walk will be good for shortening the time of an average game by a good four or five seconds.

[1984]

Low hanging fruit.  Trivial but, might as well.  

[jstraw]

Might as well? Why? It's stupid.

[jstraw]

How about eliminating rounding the bases on home runs? The batter and runners on base can just return to the dugout as soon as the umpire rules a homer.

[1984]

Might as well? Why? It's stupid.

 

To show they're trying to do something? Anything else is going to be really difficult and will be met with a storm of protest.  As it turns out, even this one is being protested.

[jstraw]

Because it's fucking stupid.

[rok]

I don't have a problem with any of that.

[jstraw]

Over the course of a season, there's an average of something around .2 IBB per game. POINT TWO...one for every five games. So we're really talking about something like six second per game (if an IBB takes all of 30 seconds).

[rok]

Eliminating throwing IBB's is not really about reducing reducing actual length of games but more about speeding the pace of games up. IBB's slow the game down, and going through the motions is incredibly pointless.

[jstraw]

Eliminating throwing IBB's is not really about reducing reducing actual length of games but more about speeding the pace of games up. IBB's slow the game down, and going through the motions is incredibly pointless.

 

I don't know what that means. In 1/5 of all MLB games it will speed up the pace of a half-inning by 30 seconds. Pitchers routinely take that long between individual pitches.

 

Manfred is concerned that the game times are rising again...so he's going to fuck with something that will have no effect on that. NO EFFECT. Nothing should ever...ever...ever be changed for no effect. Once in a blue moon, an IBB goes wrong and it's interesting as hell. Don't throw that away for *nothing*.

 

What is the purpose of a home run trot? It's equally a formality. Eliminating them would be very stupid too, but it would represent many more seconds of saved time.

[Kid]

But Manfred has also talked about things that don't really affect the speed of the game, but the pace of it.  For example, replays.  He's said he doesn't think replay is really having an effect on how long games are taking, but he does have some concern that individual replays make the game seem slow.  I can understand how intentional walks - the formality of which is pretty pointless - would create the same issue, albeit to a lesser extent.

[rok]

Pace doesn't always equal time saved. Watching an entire team stand around waiting for a pitcher to lob 4 pointless pitches over the plate is boring. It isn't necessary at all. Why do you care?