Is the point to have each game at a different Spring Training facility? Having several games at 9 am and 9 pm local time isn’t ideal but it would get the job done. Throw in some doubleheaders too. Then three other games can start at noon, 3, and 6 with the roof up at Chase Field.
I briefly had a coworker from AZ whose daughter was a HS track athlete. She had track practice and meets at 4am.
If baseball is serious about speeding up the pace up play, an abbreviated calendar and multiple games at single sites is the perfect "cover" to be able to try out new ideas that you might not otherwise. For starters I'd go with 5 instead of 8 warm-up pitches; top/bottom of the inning alone would cut 54 pitches, plus relievers coming in could=another 15-20.Originally Posted by PhDeac
I'd have games on all damn day while working from home.
Double headers (that may be 7 innings) and expanded rosters will mean more teams try bullpen games. Inevitably one pitcher will suck in every game and that inning will be long as shit.
Maybe I missed it, but why PHX? Why not SoCal or Florida? Using spring training facilities I presume.
If talking rule changes to speed up the game, they could go with the younger Little League rule and cap offensive innings at 5 runs unless you are down, in which case you can go up by 5. It keeps the games quicker, closer, and more competitive than when one team just mails in a game to save pitching and you see those really big blowout innings.
Out of curiosity, in what percentage of half-innings of MLB games last year were more than 5 runs scored? 1%, maybe?
Guessing the following factors led to PHX:
1. 11+ MLB ready fields and top level training facilities within 50 mile radius (Florida's are more spread out among the East and West Coast of the State); so, easier for MLB to create it's own bio-sphere.
2. Essentially doesn't rain at all between May and July
3. AZ hasn't been hit as severely by the current crisis as FL, CA; so the State is not as tapped out as many other states.
Gonna be some serious heat stroke playing games in July. There's a reason the Dbacks have a retractable roof.
The baseball fan in me is absolutely giddy about this.
The rest of me is pretty damn skeptical that they can pull this off without some serious consequences. Eireann Dolan tweeted some pretty valid comments on the idea.
No idea, but the other advantage of it is that the manager knows there is the 5 run limit, so if has already given up 3 or 4 is more likely to leave the current pitcher out there and save a new pitcher for the next inning or game. It gives a known limit to manage against, which speeds up the game.
That's a good point. I was just thinking how rarely a team scores 6 or more runs in an inning. A full day's slate of 15 games would have 270 half-innings. If you had one instance of a team scoring 6+ runs in its half-inning that day it would be 0.37% of 270 half-innings. This is purely anecdotal, but it seems to me like you have more days when nobody scores 6+ runs in an inning than days when a team does.
Can Folty have a do-over of Game 5 of the LDS?
Implement a mercy rule as well.
Yeah, but it's a dry heat.
Has any one been paying attention to The Athletic's "best 100 players" countdown? They're about to post #1, who I'm assuming is Willie Mays. Here's the top 20:
2. Ruth
3. Bonds
4. Aaron
5. Oscar Charleston
6. Ted Williams
7. Walter Johnson
8. Cobb
9. Musial
10. Paige
11. Mantle
12. Honus Wagner
13. Clemens
14. Gehrig
15. Josh Gibson
16. A-Rod
17. Hornsby
18. Speaker
19(t): Schmidt
19(t): Frank Robinson
Assuming Mays is #1, they are saying A-Rod is the 3rd best player in baseball in the last 50 years? Where is Ken Griffey Jr? He's the best player that I've seen in my lifetime. Bonds is 2nd.
The electronic strike zone (I admit I'm a purist and don't like it anyway) will only add to the game length problem. You think MLB umpires miss balls and strikes today, go back and watch these games from the 70s and 80s. If anything umpires have to be too tight with the zone today. The zone was much bigger in previous decades and good pitchers could "earn" pitches and expand the zone. It's a huge part of the game. The modern zone (actual, not rulebook) is so tight it wears pitchers out, leading to an average of around 9 pitchers per game. That's what adds time to games. That and more balls being called and batters taking a lot of pitches.
It's really clear when you look at the averages from the 1950s through 80s. Games were around 2:30 hours long and averaged fewer than 5 pitchers per game. Now game times are over 3 hours and average 9 pitchers per game. That's ridiculous. Using the electronic zone (which is so much smaller than the effective zone has been for the rest of the history of baseball) drags the game on. It also makes the game more boring to watch. Lots of taken pitches, less swinging.
Talk to any pitcher and he will say the same thing. Pitchers, catchers, batters, umpires, all working together to establish a balance is the centerpiece of the game. Pitchers have to be able to earn strikes and expand the zone. It's part of the competitive balance. Otherwise we can just put the ball on a tee and let weightlifters try and hit the ball 600 feet every time.
And on a related note, in the past when umpires called a wider zone, it didn't destroy the offensive side of the game. The total runs per game in the 60s-80s is within a run of what it is now. Batters were just better at batting and not weightlifters looking for the ball in a solo cup-sized zone to tee off on.
Where is Mike Trout on that list?
Where is Cy Young? If he's not Top 20, change the name of the award. Johnny Bench over A-Rod any day. The man revolutionized catching.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote