Feb 07 2019 07:16 AM
Re: Farewell to LOOGYs?
I guess we should be grateful for the past 46 years that we had without the DH. I think it makes the game less interesting. I remember Art Rust Jr. (remember him?) saying that fans don't want to see "a chess match" but I happen to like that aspect of the game, trying to think along with the managers. In today's game, the DH makes less sense than ever. Is it that much more fun to see a position player strike out instead of seeing a pitcher strike out?
I do agree that the one-batter reliever adds tedium to the game. I kind of like the idea of the three-batter minimum, as it would add a new element of strategy to the game. If Bryce Harper is at bat with two out and runners on, do you bring the lefty in to face him and try to end the inning, knowing that if you don't get him out, your lefty is going to have to face two right-handed hitters in a situation that's gotten even worse? That could be really interesting. But I also like the option of just making pitching changes faster. As Frayed Knot has said, the number of warm-up pitches by relievers entering the game can be reduced or eliminated.
The change to the trade deadline is supposed to somehow deter teams from cashing in their chips. By making the buyer-or-seller decision have to come earlier, I guess they're hoping that fewer teams will opt to be sellers. I'm not so sure that that will have much of an effect, but perhaps we'll see.
There's also talk of the start-the-inning-with-a-runner-on-second-base rules for extra-inning games in spring training and the All-Star Game. I think this rule is extraordinary stupid, but I don't care much about spring training or All-Star games. The main problem is that if it takes root in those venues then there's the possibility that it could end up polluting regular-season games, which would be a travesty.
There's also a proposal about service time, where that trick of bringing up a player in mid-April instead of at Opening Day will be negated if the player ends up having a high-quality rookie season. If, for example, the Mets bring up Alonso on April 15 and he wins the Rookie-of-the-Year (or hits some other targets) he'd get credit for the full year of service time and would be eligible for free agency after 2024. But if they do that and he's just ordinary, he'd have to wait until 2025. It's kind of strange to give preferential treatment to better players, but I can't get too worked up over this suggestion. I don't think it will deter teams from waiting those two weeks or so.
I've wanted to expand the 25-man roster for years now. I'd like to see a 27-man roster, preferably without the limit on pitchers, although my interest in the expanded roster is because I'd like to see more position players on the bench.
And forget about lowering the mound. If they keep doing this every time pitching is ascendant, in a few decades pitchers will be pitching out of a hole in the ground.
http://ultimatemets.com/covers/2019/20190207_NSD_02.jpg>
