Golden At-Bat "buzz'

[metirish]

Manfred says there is buzz around the Golden At-Bat rule , I just can't imagine this happening, it's awful


https://www.si.com/mlb/rob-manfred-buzz ... e-baseball

[Fman99]

Manfred says there is buzz around the Golden At-Bat rule , I just can't imagine this happening, it's awful


https://www.si.com/mlb/rob-manfred-buzz ... e-baseball

It should be allowed but only if the batter uses his own erection as the bat. And covers it in pine tar first

[Frayed Knot]

They need to send this idea to the golden showers.

iow, it'll probably be implemented by next season with the justification that fan reaction was "overwhelmingly positive".

[Benjamin Grimm]

After the extra-inning runner, I no longer think any idea is too stupid to actually be implemented.

These suggestions just keep getting worse.

[Bob Alpacadaca]

I saw this on Tik Tok and assumed it was a bad joke. I never even considered it was serious. If this is a trial balloon, shoot it down quickly!

[metirish]

Problem is it gets guys like Jayson Stark fleshing it out like this


• Each team gets to pick one at-bat — at any point in the game, but only once — to play its Golden AB card. So would it save that card for The Juan Soto Moment? Or would it play it in the second inning, with the bases loaded and a chance to blow up a game? Strategy alert!

• Or there’s this option: Each team gets one Golden AB per game — except only in the seventh inning or later.

• Or there’s the variation I’d vote for — where only a team that is trailing (or tied) in the ninth or later gets to use a Golden AB. I’m a fan of less is more, and two Golden ABs every game (one per team) might be overkill.

• There’s also this potential wrinkle: The Royals use their Golden AB to let Bobby Witt Jr. lead off the ninth. He makes an out. But who’s batting second? Whaddaya know, it’s Witt’s turn in the lineup. So here he comes again. Yes, that could be a thing.

So what variation will actually end up happening (if any of them do)? We have many golden miles to travel before we can answer that.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/596101 ... ed-article

[MFS62]

(In best Don Corleone voice)
"What have they done to my game? I don't want his mother to see him like this"

Later

[Edgy MD]

Manfred has already announced the slowest of marches to his retirement in 2029, which sets him up with coverage to do all sorts of insane things.

[Benjamin Grimm]

So four years of insanity coming from both the Commissioner's office and the White House.

Yeesh.

[metirish]

Hopefully Manfred is seeing the feedback on this and is taking note

[Frayed Knot]

I think the only feedback Manfred is looking for is of the top-down variety.

[G-Fafif]

Longtime fans universally hate this idea, so Manfred will take that as a green light.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

"Longtime fans hate change" is true, mostly--and all MLB needs to dismiss opposition. They will base decisions on what young fans think.

This is a stupid idea the game doesn't need

[Marshmallowmilkshake]

I was just a kid when the DH was introduced, and I don't remember the announcement or the buildup. Wonder how people responded then.

This is a terrible idea. One of the (many) cool things about baseball is the randomness of it. In basketball, you know LeBron is always going to get the last shot. But Tommy Edman becomes a Dodger hero - and Mets villain -- because he produced great things from the nine-hole. With this, someone like him migt not get that shot if Mookie Betts gets the golden treatment there. And that's just and example from the last season.

[Frayed Knot]

The move MLB really needs to make in order to increase star power is to have Ohtani pitch to himself.
It'll be the greatest Mano-a-mano sporting event since the time that Rocky fought Rambo.

[Frayed Knot]

I was just a kid when the DH was introduced, and I don't remember the announcement or the buildup. Wonder how people responded then.

Some liked it, some didn't. Pretty much the same as now.
It came on the heels of an offensive drought although the depths of that drought was a half decade in the rearview by that point so it was kind of an answer to a problem that was already solving itself (with the help of the post-'68 mound/strike zone tweaks).

But what the DH was Really all about was that the AL was in a attendance and competitive slog due to several factors:
- much slower on the whole in signing black and Latin players they had less young talent, less exciting talent, and more aging players who would fit the DH mold
- the AL spent so long being a one-team dependent circuit (you either loved the Yanx or loved to hate them) it's not a coincidence that the rule was implemented following the decade long crash of their main meal ticket. Mantle, Berra, and Ford, the team stunk, and the draft prevented them from stocking all the future stars as they had for decades.
Think about it: by the late-'60's/early '70s the NL had the better (on field and at the turnstiles) New York team, Los Angeles team, Chicago team, Missouri team, and Ohio team. That's half the league and most of the big markets with the rest of the markets being, at best, a draw meaning the AL had the advantage virtually nowhere.

It was an 'experimental rule' which was supposed to expire if it wasn't constantly renewed every so often. Remember when the NFL killed instant replay after having it for a short time? ... same idea (the NFL later re-voted it back into existence after a few years without). But it then just sort of became permanent without ever officially being designated as such like some government program that keeps going on just out of sheer momentum and the lack of anyone wanting to be the one to kill it.

[batmagadanleadoff]

If this golden at-bat was implemented 125 years ago, nobody today would question the rule. The golden at-bat would be viewed as normal a tactic as the double-switch. And the poets would be waxing poetic about how perfect the game of baseball is with this golden at-bat.

And if the Commissioner then decided today, to suddenly eliminate the golden at bat after 125 years of uninterrupted use and tradition and history, youse would all be going apeshit over the rule's removal.

[MFS62]

I still hat the DH rule, and I've told that to Ron Blomberg (the first ever DH).
Since then he has written on his Facebook page that he hates the rule himself and wished it had never become a rule. He then (jokingly) asked forgiveness from all true baseball fans.

Later

[batmagadanleadoff]

I still hat the DH rule, and I've told that to Ron Blomberg (the first ever DH).
Since then he has written on his Facebook page that he hates the rule himself and wished it had never become a rule. He then (jokingly) asked forgiveness from all true baseball fans.

Later

But if the DH was instituted 125 years ago in both leagues, and DH baseball was the only version of baseball you ever knew, you, very likely, wouldn't hate the rule today.

[TransMonk]

Yeah, I might be done with baseball if this comes to pass.

[Edgy MD]

But it then just sort of became permanent without ever officially being designated as such like some government program that keeps going on just out of sheer momentum and the lack of anyone wanting to be the one to kill it.

Me. I'll do it.

I want to be the one to kill it.

[Fman99]

If this golden at-bat was implemented 125 years ago, nobody today would question the rule. The golden at-bat would be viewed as normal a tactic as the double-switch. And the poets would be waxing poetic about how perfect the game of baseball is with this golden at-bat.

And if the Commissioner then decided today, to suddenly eliminate the golden at bat after 125 years of uninterrupted use and tradition and history, youse would all be going apeshit over the rule's removal.

This idea is too stupid to have existed 125 years ago, same as the 10th inning ghost runner. You just kept playing until the game ended and you hit in order. Because duh

[TheNextMetsManager]

Worth remembering with these things that

A. Rob Manfred Hates Baseball

and

B. This is something he can get sponsorship money for.

[Marshmallowmilkshake]

I was just a kid when the DH was introduced, and I don't remember the announcement or the buildup. Wonder how people responded then.

Some liked it, some didn't. Pretty much the same as now.
It came on the heels of an offensive drought although the depths of that drought was a half decade in the rearview by that point so it was kind of an answer to a problem that was already solving itself (with the help of the post-'68 mound/strike zone tweaks).

But what the DH was Really all about was that the AL was in a attendance and competitive slog due to several factors:
- much slower on the whole in signing black and Latin players they had less young talent, less exciting talent, and more aging players who would fit the DH mold
- the AL spent so long being a one-team dependent circuit (you either loved the Yanx or loved to hate them) it's not a coincidence that the rule was implemented following the decade long crash of their main meal ticket. Mantle, Berra, and Ford, the team stunk, and the draft prevented them from stocking all the future stars as they had for decades.
Think about it: by the late-'60's/early '70s the NL had the better (on field and at the turnstiles) New York team, Los Angeles team, Chicago team, Missouri team, and Ohio team. That's half the league and most of the big markets with the rest of the markets being, at best, a draw meaning the AL had the advantage virtually nowhere.

It was an 'experimental rule' which was supposed to expire if it wasn't constantly renewed every so often. Remember when the NFL killed instant replay after having it for a short time? ... same idea (the NFL later re-voted it back into existence after a few years without). But it then just sort of became permanent without ever officially being designated as such like some government program that keeps going on just out of sheer momentum and the lack of anyone wanting to be the one to kill it.

This is an awesome breakdown. I learned a bunch. Thanks.

[metirish]

Michael Kay