Master Index of Archived Threads


Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Gwreck Jul 08 2021 04:24 PM

The originally-scheduled game on Saturday was 4:10, so unlike most twi-night doubleheaders, attendance may well be higher at the start of the first game compared to the second game. 7 inning games remain an embarrassment and blight on the sport.

bmfc1 Jul 08 2021 05:14 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

7 inning games remain an embarrassment and blight on the sport. The fans might think so but the owners and players seem to disagree: https://sny.tv/articles/mlb-exec-seven-inning-doubleheaders-could-stay-attractive-to-owners-players

Ceetar Jul 08 2021 05:16 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

it's Martino, citations needed.

G-Fafif Jul 08 2021 05:23 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

7 inning games remain an embarrassment and blight on the sport. The fans might think so but the owners and players seem to disagree: https://sny.tv/articles/mlb-exec-seven-inning-doubleheaders-could-stay-attractive-to-owners-players Very much a Martino story. Clubs and players are OK with it, who cares what grousing fans think?

Johnny Lunchbucket Jul 08 2021 05:41 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

I'd prefer baseball like God intended but 7-inning DHs to me are a far smaller offense than magic runners. It's a big deal now because the Mets have been so unlucky when it comes to weather and covid. After all in theory any and every game is a 5-inning affair under existing rules and nobody popped a vein calling it an abomination. Also, games are way too long and 2 in one day is a lot. There's no arguing that

kcmets Jul 08 2021 05:49 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

Lotta good stuff buried in IGT's re: 7 inning games. Shame because it's buried. Someone tweet to the media that players should take a 22% cut in pay for these games. That'll get another pot boiling!

Gwreck Jul 08 2021 06:29 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There Edited 4 time(s), most recently on Jul 08 2021 06:32 PM

[CROSSOUT][/CROSSOUT] Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: I'd prefer baseball like God intended but 7-inning DHs to me are a far smaller offense than magic runners. I agree the automatic runner is worse. But just because something else is worse doesn't mean that the first thing isn't also bad. After all in theory any and every game is a 5-inning affair under existing rules and nobody popped a vein calling it an abomination. This isn't a fair comparison, because the 7-inning games have no potential to ever go the full regulation length. 7 inning games are intolerable because: -Customers are being cheated. A ticket is sold with with the potential that 9 innings will be played is clearly more valuable than a ticket that yields 22% less potentiality. (As discussed elsewhere, this problem can be ameliorated by making all split DHes 9 innings) -Short games privilege the weaker teams. The advantage of the Mets' generally excellent bullpen and starting pitching is diminished when the games are shorter. -There is a competitive imbalance when teams start playing by different rules. Also, games are way too long and 2 in one day is a lot. There's no arguing that I personally don't see this as the crisis that others do (and there is an argument to be made here). But say we all agree. There's still no statistically significant portion of the fanbase is affected by two 9-inning games being scheduled on the same day.

Frayed Knot Jul 08 2021 06:30 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

As always, all these problems that seven inning games and curtailing XI games are meant to fix stem from the fact that 3-1/2 hour games are considerably more common than 2-1/2 games. Fix that issue and so many of the other ones go away.

Edgy MD Jul 08 2021 08:07 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

I don't think that's likely so. I think giving people less for their buck is the sort of change that tends to stick.

bmfc1 Jul 08 2021 08:22 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

=Gwreck post_id=70716 time=1625790569 user_id=56] -Short games privilege the weaker teams. The advantage of the Mets' generally excellent bullpen and starting pitching is diminished when the games are shorter. -There is a competitive imbalance when teams start playing by different rules.

Two excellent points, Gwreck. By the end of the season, the Mets will have played 40 doubleheaders which diminishes the effect of putting together a strong bullpen.

bmfc1 Jul 08 2021 08:23 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

Frayed Knot wrote: As always, all these problems that seven inning games and curtailing XI games are meant to fix stem from the fact that 3-1/2 hour games are considerably more common than 2-1/2 games. Fix that issue and so many of the other ones go away. Correct. They won't do anything to seriously fix the problems that lengthen games so they keep picking around the edges.

Edgy MD Jul 08 2021 08:45 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

Dumb question on this topic — I assume we still get the magic runner business in the post-season, right?

G-Fafif Jul 08 2021 08:51 PM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

Edgy MD wrote: Dumb question on this topic — I assume we still get the magic runner business in the post-season, right? I don't believe so. Last year, which birthed this BS, gave us normal extras https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ATL/ATL202009300.shtml

Johnny Lunchbucket Jul 09 2021 06:46 AM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

Edgy MD wrote: I don't think that's likely so. I think giving people less for their buck is the sort of change that tends to stick. That's very true. I can in fact imagine a near-future in which all games are scheduled for 7 innings. People'll howl, but they could soften the blow by positioning it as, you play up to 9 innings of real baseball and the 10th begins the Magic Runner bullshit. That would preserve a modicum of heritage. As I've said I wouldn't recommend this but you could see it. The other radical rules compromise you might consider? 3 balls for a walk. This topic deserves a split

Edgy MD Jul 09 2021 07:58 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Fellow admins, feel free to extract IGT posts about seven-inning slates and magic runners and intentional walks and three-batter minima and such and merge them into this thread.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jul 09 2021 08:11 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

3 Balls for a Walk: Positives: --saves a lot of time (theoretically?) --saves a lot of pitches (probably?) --"levels" the pitcher-hitter confrontation at the heart of the sport (a 2-2 pitch is no longer advantage pitcher) --likely heightens offense --better than increasing the number of strikes for same effect --can be positioned as a "fairness" initiative and accompany the introduction of robo-strike zones --can accompany reversal of other rules changes that aren't as effective and/or stupider Negs: --interferes with tradtition (but only since the 1890s) --likely to result in a shitload more walks which could increase game times --will fuck up every record --might require even more tinkering, for example, 2x "called" strikes

Marshmallowmilkshake Jul 09 2021 08:19 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

My fear with the seven-inning double-header games is that they crack the door open for eliminating nine-inning games altogether. That seems like a radical idea, but I remember ESPN's Karl Ravech talking on Buster Olney's podcast, saying he is all in on seven-inning games, and thinks MLB is headed there in the not-so-distant future. Now, I get that sportswriters tend to like short games. What's a magical evening for us is a daily grind for them, and they want to file their stories and get the heck out. But that would be a fundamental change to the game that would alter stats and everything else. There would be stats for the nine-inning era and the seven-inning era.

Ceetar Jul 09 2021 08:25 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

7 inning games are bad. They just don't flow right. Eventually we'd get a little used to them, but not really. When a game is in the 5th and you're muff a chance and go to the 6th down 2-1, normally you're like "Okay, we're figuring this out, all out players get another shot at least it's just 1 run, we've got 12 outs to play with. But if it's 7 innings, now you've got 6 outs to play with and it might be the back end of your lineup. It's just too short. For a game with as much luck as baseball, it's just not a good look to take away that length. It's like if we went back to a 150 or so game season, or dilluted the playoffs. you're raising the chance a worse team sneaks in. And yes, it's competitively imbalanced. The shorter games are a different strategy, different pitcher usage, might require a 6th starter more often, and the teams that play them are random. The game DOESN'T need more randomness (cc: people looking to ban the shift). The zombie runner is dumb too, for reasons much akin to why people dislike the NHL shootout. It's different rules determining who wins the game, though not as drastically. At least the NHL is roughly putting a harder time limit on a game that's already timed, but the sudden urgency just doesn't fly in baseball. ESPECIALLY in the 10th (or 8th). Also, for a sport that flaps a lot about wanting more balls in play, zombie runners certainly incentive strikeout pitchers who can keep the runner at second. And they also incentive very uninteresting sac bunting and intentional walking. And don't get me started on the stupid 3-batter rule or designated a player a pitcher or a hitter. none of these are time of the game fixes, which baseball doesn't really care about, because their main customer is the TV networks that don't care because more commercials. And it's the networks that are slowing the game down. For a game that's so laden with strategy discussions, they sure do cut away from the game at the most strategic points. Instead of cutting away at key 7th inning pitching changes, sponsor a "strategy session brought to you by Geico" and have the announcers actually talk about the game, the pitcher coming in, the matchup, the reason it might happen.

Lefty Specialist Jul 09 2021 08:26 AM Re: IGT 07/08 - Pirates at Mets - Buccos Here, Buccos There

Edgy MD wrote: I don't think that's likely so. I think giving people less for their buck is the sort of change that tends to stick. (Looks at the 52 ounce bottle of Tropicana Orange Juice that used to be 64 ounces but still costs the same)

Ceetar Jul 09 2021 08:43 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

That's the one argument I don't really buy. You're not paying per inning. You're paying for the successful completion of a competition between two ball clubs. That happens whether it's 5innings of a rain shortened game, 7 inning DH, or 20 marathon. (so no ties!) There used to be more marbles in hungry hungry hippos too, but someone still wins every time.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jul 09 2021 09:17 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Games ARE too long today, and it's not just sportswriters who think so. It's a baseball thing, but it's also a baseball's-place-in-society-over-the-longer-term thing. We have to stop debating that. Rob Manfred may be an asshole but I believe he is trying to act for the longer-term health of the sport by adjusting it to how the society consumes a crowded field of entertainment options within the context of how the game has evolved (players are so good at baseball today it's maxed-out it's gameplay). We wouldn't be talking about any of this if this wasn't the case.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 09 2021 09:39 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

I agree. But shaving the number of innings to shorten the game is like cutting off your leg to lose weight. It will work, but it's probably not the best idea. I'd like to see them increase the pace. The pitcher gets the ball, he throws the ball. Enforce the clock. I don't know what the ideal interval between pitches should be. 15 seconds? 20? Whatever, find a number and make it stick. If the pitcher doesn't throw the ball, it's a ball. If the batter isn't in the box, it's a strike. Reducing the milling about between pitches would go a long way.

Gwreck Jul 09 2021 10:06 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

I'd like to see them increase the pace. The pitcher gets the ball, he throws the ball. Enforce the clock. I don't know what the ideal interval between pitches should be. 15 seconds? 20? Whatever, find a number and make it stick. If the pitcher doesn't throw the ball, it's a ball. If the batter isn't in the box, it's a strike. Reducing the milling about between pitches would go a long way. Ben Grimm is correct. That is easily the best way to speed the game up. And it doesn't require making up new stupid rules to do so.

kcmets Jul 09 2021 10:07 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

I agree, word for word. 20 seconds would do, but 15 is better imo. Pitcher wants to fix his hair, play with his jock strap or just fart around as part of some outdated (or needs to be) routine - air horn goes off, BALL TWO. Same with batters. Readjusting the velcro on batting gloves, lollygaggiing with the helmet or tardiness to step up to the plate - air horn goes off, STRIKE TWO. A strict pitch clock is definitely worth trying out for a full season or two before they just cut all games to 7 innings all willy nilly. Buy a fucking clue, Manfred. PLAY BALL!!

Johnny Lunchbucket Jul 09 2021 10:07 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

I agree with all that, and also, as been advanced here before, curtailing or eliminating on-mound warmups from entering relievers. But even then, is it enough? Is my 3 balls rule too radical? That's a weird change I'd like to see experiments with

dinosaur jesus Jul 09 2021 10:15 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

There is a point at which I'm willing to give up on baseball, to say this isn't baseball anymore and I just don't care. Automatic intentional walks wasn't it. The extra-inning runner wasn't either. The universal DH probably won't be. But seven-inning games, or three-pitch walks, or moving the pitcher's mound back, might just about do it for me. I know, I should have quit back in 1887, when they went from six balls to five for a walk. Or 1893, when they moved the pitching distance back from fifty feet. Or 1920, when they started replacing the ball every time a fly landed on it or something. But every man's got his limits. Yes, just enforce time limits. Every other measure is bullshit, and most of them don't even accomplish anything.

kcmets Jul 09 2021 10:19 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

And media types and announcers with mics and camera face time that applaud the seven inning games can lick fatted sac.

Ceetar Jul 09 2021 10:21 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

3 balls is less baseball. We don't need less baseball we need faster paced baseball. This is why the 7 inning rule and the zombie runner are so dumb. They're just giving us less baseball, but they're not making the baseball any faster. It's the same amount of baseball, but happening over a longer stretch. But Manfred has been focusing on the baseball part, and not that longer stretch part. He's seemingly targeting a segment of sports fandom that's about quick hits, constant drama, etc. more playoffs, more high leverage stuff. If it wasn't so specifically tied to revenue, they'd absolutely try to cut the season shorter.

Edgy MD Jul 09 2021 11:04 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Yeah, agreeing that games are too long is one thing. But (and I don't want to jump to the conclusion that Manfred is a terribly informed non-fan), there's not enough real thought or discussion about what the wheat is and what the chaff is, and that's maddening. Let me put one on the table: The first thing you do to compress the action in baseball — stop expanding the roster. I don't care if it's a double-header and I don't care if there's a plague on. Twenty-five men. Second thing to do — end the merry-go-round call-ups. If you call a guy up, he has to stay for a minimum number of games. If you send a guy down, he has to stay for a minimum number of games. First thing you learn in the study of disarmament is that when a person or a nation has weapons, they are psychologically motivated to use those weapons. Give a manager 27 players and three more in a taxi out in the parking lot, he is going to deploy them. This means longer games, with more substitution, wars of attrition taking longer to play themselves out, and shorter workdays by the pitcher who you came to see.

kcmets Jul 09 2021 11:23 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Is my 3 balls rule too radical? I think it is. I could get behind a four-fouls-your-out thing though. This came up some time ago and that's how we played it growing up in the school yard. I'd really rather no changes, just saying. Four hour games don't bother me in the DVR age.

kcmets Jul 09 2021 11:29 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Takes away the 12-fouls-then-doulbes-battle thing though. All proposed changes ruin the game. I can live with the looming DH. I won't do so happily. But that's it.

Edgy MD Jul 09 2021 11:29 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

I've always been in favor of three balls, but that's a matter for another forum. OHHHHHH!!!

batmagadanleadoff Jul 09 2021 11:38 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

=Gwreck post_id=70777 time=1625846789 user_id=56] I'd like to see them increase the pace. The pitcher gets the ball, he throws the ball. Enforce the clock. I don't know what the ideal interval between pitches should be. 15 seconds? 20? Whatever, find a number and make it stick. If the pitcher doesn't throw the ball, it's a ball. If the batter isn't in the box, it's a strike. Reducing the milling about between pitches would go a long way. Ben Grimm is correct. That is easily the best way to speed the game up. And it doesn't require making up new stupid rules to do so.

I've always been like 100% certain that this is the main reason for why contemporary games are so much longer. Just watch a game from 50 years ago to see for yourself. If you can spare some of the time, pull up a 70's game from the web; they're all over youTube. The pitcher got the ball from the catcher and threw his next pitch like 10 seconds later. No fuss. No muss. And that used to be the pace for the whole game. Now it's a Broadway production in between every pitch with costume changes and adjustments and batters pointing to invisible men up in the sky and make believe reading entire chapters from the bible and dress rehearsals to rehearse the pitch that the pitcher intends to throw when he finally gets around to it. And sometimes, the batter calls timeout and then the whole routine repeats itself before the pitch is finally thrown. Every single pitch. That's where the time goes.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jul 09 2021 11:53 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

I don't know this for sure but it's more than that. I'd bet more way foul balls are hit, and still more harmlessly go into the stands, than at any point in the history of the game, because the pitchers even if they take too long between pitches and the batters have more padding and gloves to adjust between every pitch, are throwing nastier, harder to hit stuff than ever. The game's skills are testing the limits of its rules on every delivery.

Edgy MD Jul 09 2021 12:05 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

The recording of pitch count data has been relatively neglected through history, but I bet there's enough information to be gleaned where we can test that theory.

Edgy MD Jul 09 2021 12:10 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Here you go. This 2019 study supports your thesis.

batmagadanleadoff Jul 09 2021 12:13 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Edgy MD wrote: Here you go. This 2019 study supports your thesis. I remember reading that now that you posted it. That's scary because the only way baseball can fix that specific development is to go to a three-ball walk. (Or, shudder, two-strike strikeout).

metsmarathon Jul 09 2021 12:26 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

i remember reading that too. and coming to the conclusion that if there's about 12% more foul balls per game, that's, what, 6% more pitches? meaning that games are about 6% longer due to more foul balls being hit. which, for a 2 hour game is a whopping 7 minutes. only there's a lot of non-action that happens in and around pitches. so really you might be looking at foul balls adding, what, 3 extra minutes to a game. only that extra time is because of something actually happening - pitch being thrown, and hit, and landing somewhere. and maybe there's a play on it even! or it almost goes fair and generates excitement. unlike, say, adjusting oneself, or practicing ones swing, or looking to the heavens, or reciting declarations of agnosticism, or commercial breaks. foul pitches mean more baseball. i think we want more - or at least as much - baseball in less time, not less baseball in less time.

batmagadanleadoff Jul 09 2021 12:29 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

=metsmarathon post_id=70808 time=1625855205 user_id=83] i remember reading that too. and coming to the conclusion that if there's about 12% more foul balls per game, that's, what, 6% more pitches? meaning that games are about 6% longer due to more foul balls being hit. which, for a 2 hour game is a whopping 7 minutes. only there's a lot of non-action that happens in and around pitches. so really you might be looking at foul balls adding, what, 3 extra minutes to a game. only that extra time is because of something actually happening - pitch being thrown, and hit, and landing somewhere. and maybe there's a play on it even! or it almost goes fair and generates excitement. unlike, say, adjusting oneself, or practicing ones swing, or looking to the heavens, or reciting declarations of agnosticism, or commercial breaks. foul pitches mean more baseball. i think we want more - or at least as much - baseball in less time, not less baseball in less time.

Agree. There are many factors combining to make games longer. I'm putting my money on the time used in between pitches as the biggest factor.

batmagadanleadoff Jul 09 2021 12:32 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

=metsmarathon post_id=70808 time=1625855205 user_id=83] unlike, say ... reciting declarations of agnosticism ....

lol

MFS62 Jul 09 2021 12:37 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=70811 time=1625855574 user_id=68] =metsmarathon post_id=70808 time=1625855205 user_id=83] unlike, say ... reciting declarations of agnosticism ....

lol


You're right. It's all the fault of those damn agnostics. They're all going straight to He... , oh. wait.

Never mind.



Later

batmagadanleadoff Jul 09 2021 12:51 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Edgy MD wrote: Here you go. This 2019 study supports your thesis. I remember reading that now that you posted it. That's scary because the only way baseball can fix that specific development is to go to a three-ball walk. (Or, shudder, two-strike strikeout). Or another way to fix that, and I hope I'm not giving MLB any more crazy ideas, is to count the foul ball with two strikes as a strike.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jul 09 2021 01:03 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Edgy MD wrote: Here you go. This 2019 study supports your thesis. I remember reading that now that you posted it. That's scary because the only way baseball can fix that specific development is to go to a three-ball walk. (Or, shudder, two-strike strikeout). Or another way to fix that, and I hope I'm not giving MLB any more crazy ideas, is to count the foul ball with two strikes as a strike. This would contribute to the defense advantages. Take away a ball!

Edgy MD Jul 09 2021 01:12 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Edgy MD wrote: Here you go. This 2019 study supports your thesis. I remember reading that now that you posted it. That's scary because the only way baseball can fix that specific development is to go to a three-ball walk. (Or, shudder, two-strike strikeout). I don't think baseball necessarily needs to fix it. I'm not sure if more foul balls are a problem or if it's necessarily a trend that won't be offset by the next adjustment. The game is remarkably self correcting. The main thing baseball needs to do for much of this is to get out of it's own way. Retreat from the ongoing centralization and sublimation of the teams' interest in the league. Let a more competitive atmosphere return and much of much of the game will shine again.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jul 09 2021 01:48 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

That may be true. But like your efficiency remark above, centralization is a thing that tends to stay. Now, a competing a big league is what you often describe

Frayed Knot Jul 09 2021 03:47 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

1) Install/enforce pitch time limits. I'm open to different interpretations of exactly how to do it, but do it. I was hoping that having this in the minors leagues for the past few years would slowly infuse the bigs with players who never developed the quirks, tics, yoga poses, and dance steps between each pitch thereby making an actual clock not necessary but it's not happening fast enough so a physical clock with strict enforcement is likely needed. 2) No additional warm-up pitches for incoming relievers Mid-inning pitching changes represent a longer break than the breaks between half-innings (roughly 2-1/2 minutes per) and this for guys who have already warmed up!! I have no idea why this doesn't seem to even a topic for discussion with all the other silliness being discussed, but it doesn't. And if managers truly believe that an incoming reliever is going to take a few pitches to adjust to the "new" mound that's maybe a shade different from the one in the pen, well then that's just something he's going to have to consider when he makes a change. At worst, this beats the hell out of the three-batter minimum requirement. Rules that dictate strategy are bad rules. 3) Die mound conferences, Die! Think about it: if you were designing the sport today no one would permit the game to be stopped while a fat old man waddles out to the mound as often as he wants to talk to players who already know how to play the game. And even with the current limits -- five per team per game -- there's effectively no limit at all considering the exemptions allowed. One of the NYPost writers (I forget which one) has been floating the idea for years about a fixed number of 'time-outs' per game, they can be used for mound conferences OR for replay challenges (you use more of one then you get fewer of the other) but once they're gone, they're gone. If nothing else, this would favor the more prepared team. You brought that pitcher in now stick with him or remove him, those are your choices. Giving him a verbal spanking or a verbal pep talk shouldn't be options.

Edgy MD Jul 09 2021 04:43 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Also, bullpen carts are cool. Get the guy in from the outfield in 15 seconds and let him take two throws. But in fairness, the three-batter rule has shaved off a great many of the mid-inning changes.

Gwreck Jul 10 2021 09:24 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

The Mets have a “suspended game” to make up against the Marlins on August 31. This is the game from April 11 that was stopped after 2 batters in the top of the first inning (one batter reached). They are resuming the suspended game as a regular, 9 inning game at 1:10 PM, as the first game of a separate-admission doubleheader. But then the otherwise regularly scheduled game at 7:10 PM…has been artificially shortened to 7 innings. This is just madness. There is no justification whatsoever for this nonsense.

bmfc1 Jul 10 2021 10:29 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Was "Nu Roolz" the name of an '80s Boy Band?

bmfc1 Jul 10 2021 10:34 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Re: FK's #2... no adjustment period is needed between the BP mound and the game mound because each is pristine. This is a leftover from the olden days when the RP's warmed up on a mound in a cow pasture, or something akin to it. A pitching change is an excuse for a full TV TO but it should be 3 or 4 pitches, let's go, keep it moving.

Ceetar Jul 10 2021 11:49 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Re: FK's #2... no adjustment period is needed between the BP mound and the game mound because each is pristine. This is a leftover from the olden days when the RP's warmed up on a mound in a cow pasture, or something akin to it. A pitching change is an excuse for a full TV TO but it should be 3 or 4 pitches, let's go, keep it moving. They're not though. Zero chance they put as much effort into the bullpen mound as the real mound, especially to the exact radians and like, moisture content. They certainly don't have the (both, all) starting pitcher trek out there and make the same divot/landing holes and all the other stuff they kick around. They could certainly half the pitches, or time it. and shorten that time. Some of these would be resolved perhaps with headsets and instant pitching changes, eliminating mound visits. a minute break would not be onerous, especially if you didn't cut to commercial, you advertised in-stream. But a lot of the time is spent between the last play and the decision to pull the pitcher. That's the 90 seconds you could cut. But I suspect it's not breaks so much as action that's the issue we need to address. time between pitches, between batters. Most fans are used to commercial breaks, they're in everything. You break, you tweet some inane LolMets joke, you get another beer, and then the game's back. Is ending too late a thing? we could be better about starting at 6:40 instead of 7:10. I never understood this. I get that the ratings are better in "prime time" but presumably people would rather miss the beginning than the end, and this makes the prime hours higher leverage too.

Frayed Knot Jul 10 2021 12:35 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

=bmfc1 post_id=70925 time=1625934866 user_id=73] Re: FK's #2... no adjustment period is needed between the BP mound and the game mound because each is pristine. This is a leftover from the olden days when the RP's warmed up on a mound in a cow pasture, or something akin to it. A pitching change is an excuse for a full TV TO but it should be 3 or 4 pitches, let's go, keep it moving.

Although relief pitchers still argue that it's not the same and therefore an adjustment is needed.

My answer to that is that the adjustment period will be known as your first few pitches so you and your manager better hope that they're good ones so you're not watching balls sail over the fence

with all those inherited runners getting charged against the ERAs of your mates.

And if going without additional warmups is considered too radical for them then I'll settle for the current eight being knocked down to two. That'll still save at least a half-minute per change.

MFS62 Jul 10 2021 02:14 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Frayed Knot wrote: 1) Install/enforce pitch time limits. I'm open to different interpretations of exactly how to do it, but do it. I was hoping that having this in the minors leagues for the past few years would slowly infuse the bigs with players who never developed the quirks, tics, yoga poses, and dance steps between each pitch thereby making an actual clock not necessary but it's not happening fast enough so a physical clock with strict enforcement is likely needed. 2) No additional warm-up pitches for incoming relievers Mid-inning pitching changes represent a longer break than the breaks between half-innings (roughly 2-1/2 minutes per) and this for guys who have already warmed up!! I have no idea why this doesn't seem to even a topic for discussion with all the other silliness being discussed, but it doesn't. And if managers truly believe that an incoming reliever is going to take a few pitches to adjust to the "new" mound that's maybe a shade different from the one in the pen, well then that's just something he's going to have to consider when he makes a change. At worst, this beats the hell out of the three-batter minimum requirement. Rules that dictate strategy are bad rules. 3) Die mound conferences, Die! Think about it: if you were designing the sport today no one would permit the game to be stopped while a fat old man waddles out to the mound as often as he wants to talk to players who already know how to play the game. And even with the current limits -- five per team per game -- there's effectively no limit at all considering the exemptions allowed. One of the NYPost writers (I forget which one) has been floating the idea for years about a fixed number of 'time-outs' per game, they can be used for mound conferences OR for replay challenges (you use more of one then you get fewer of the other) but once they're gone, they're gone. If nothing else, this would favor the more prepared team. You brought that pitcher in now stick with him or remove him, those are your choices. Giving him a verbal spanking or a verbal pep talk shouldn't be options. These are good ways to shorten games. #1 is the best. If they just did that, it might diminish the need for #2 or #3. Later

bmfc1 Jul 10 2021 03:26 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

All of these are simple solutions, even if they require some chatter with the Union. The same with losing :30 seconds of commercial time per half inning (less revenue has to be made up elsewhere but it can be done and I fully expect "BET MGM" patches in a year or two). That's why I don't take any of the phony solutions to game length seriously such as 7 inning games.

Frayed Knot Jul 10 2021 06:57 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

And while I'm certainly not going to campaign against shorter inning breaks, a) it's not going to happen. But also b) it's not really the problem While commercial length is up from the 70s & 80s games that many of us grew up with, they haven't extended them in many years now (maybe 20? - and in fact have tried to more rigidly enforce those times in the last 2-3 season) and yet game times continue to climb each year. So the problem must obviously lie elsewhere, and while part of it seems to be pitch counts during this three true outcomes era, the most obvious target needs to be dead time when the ball is theoretically supposed to be in play. It's like baseball has slowly morphed over the years from a game where the ball was assumed to be in play unless stated otherwise, now it almost seems like the ball NOT being live is considered to be the normal state of affairs and 'live time' the exception.

bmfc1 Jul 10 2021 07:02 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Please explain how shaving :30 seconds/half-inning won't help solve the problem. Even it's "not really the problem" and the problem(s) "obviously lie elsewhere", it can and should be part of the solution.

Ceetar Jul 10 2021 07:09 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Please explain how shaving :30 seconds/half-inning won't help solve the problem. Even it's "not really the problem" and the problem(s) "obviously lie elsewhere", it can and should be part of the solution. We don't even have a real solid definition for 'the problem' or what solution we're even looking for. I'll take fewer commercial breaks in everything, for sure, but no one really cares if the games 3:03 instead of 3:10.

Frayed Knot Jul 10 2021 07:09 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

[answering bmfc]: Because the between innings commercials aren't causing longer games or increased dead time. And I'd welcome it but we might as well ask for a 60 or 90 second reduction. The beast needs to be fed and commercial time is its main menu.

bmfc1 Jul 10 2021 07:16 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

FK: I could rebut, refute, and this would continue ad nauseam but there's too much venom in the CPF. I'd rather get mad at Lindor than continue this as it's akin to yelling at clouds so I will step back.

Edgy MD Jul 10 2021 09:15 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Well, duh. We play "God Bless America" every time there's a pitching change, and then the broadcaster won't be allowed to cut to a commercial. Why do I have to solve everything?

Gwreck Jul 13 2021 11:34 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Great development as Manfred tells reporters that the extra runner in extra innings and the 7 inning doubleheader are not long for this world: https://twitter.com/jeffpassan/status/1414992162006048768?s=21 https://twitter.com/bnightengale/status/1414993226843447297?s=21

Ceetar Jul 13 2021 11:41 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

well that's because he heard the players might be okay with them, so he's trying to leverage them in the CBA.

MFS62 Jul 13 2021 12:14 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Edgy MD wrote: Well, duh. We play "God Bless America" every time there's a pitching change, and then the broadcaster won't be allowed to cut to a commercial. Why do I have to solve everything? You don't. You're an editor. They just review other peoples' ideas. They're not supposed to have their own ideas. (J/K) Later

Edgy MD Jul 13 2021 12:20 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

I think you should sometimes pause before hitting submit.

MFS62 Jul 13 2021 03:23 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

Oh, I took my time, re -writing that several times, just to be sure it would be taken as a joke. But right after I hit submit I realized you aren't an editor any more. Later

roger_that Jul 13 2021 04:54 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

The solution to speeding up the game is simple: before each game, you make known the two teams' average game time for the season to date. (For game #1, use last year's average game time.) Let it be known that in the event of a tie after 9, the victory will go to the team with the lower average game-time. Problem solved.

Edgy MD Jul 14 2021 07:27 AM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

With the return of the commissioner and the union president meeting the media during the All-Star Break, Commissioner Manfred indicated that the seven-inning double-header and the magic runner thingie are still considered part of COVID protocols and are not expected to continue past the protocol period.

whippoorwill Jul 15 2021 06:16 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

George Wills had a column in tonight suggesting a timer between pitches. I like it

kcmets Jul 15 2021 07:15 PM Re: Nu Roolz Chatter (split from assorted IGTs)

George Wills owes me a pizza and a bottle of chianti classico reserva. =kcmets post_id=70778 time=1625846826 user_id=53] I agree, word for word. 20 seconds would do, but 15 is better imo. Pitcher wants to fix his hair, play with his jock strap or just fart around as part of some outdated (or needs to be) routine - air horn goes off, BALL TWO. Same with batters. Readjusting the velcro on batting gloves, lollygaggiing with the helmet or tardiness to step up to the plate - air horn goes off, STRIKE TWO. A strict pitch clock is definitely worth trying out for a full season or two before they just cut all games to 7 innings all willy nilly.

(just for thread purposes, I'm not claiming to come up with the idea of a pitch clock --

and nor should George Wills)