December 5, 2018 at 7:46 pm #76162
So are they going put additional lines on the field or are they going to be imaginary and left up to the umpires? Stop changing the freaking rules and stop looking for solutions where there is no problem.December 5, 2018 at 8:25 pm #76169
So many occurrences in Manfred’s tenure make me wonder how he sets his priorities and why.December 5, 2018 at 10:22 pm #76189
So are they going put additional lines on the field or are they going to be imaginary and left up to the umpires? Stop changing the freaking rules and stop looking for solutions where there is no problem.
Umps, no doubt. And it’s not that hard to judge whether a defender is lined up past a bag. They move defenders all the time when they’re in the way of pitches coming in and things like that.
Personally, I dislike the shift, but it’s a part of the game now. I wouldn’t care if it stayed or was banned, and agree with others that the solution is to learn to bunt. There are some horrible bunters in the big leagues right now.December 6, 2018 at 11:25 am #76283
bicyclemikeModeratorPaid - Annual
Not a fan of banning shifts. Competitive athletics is a constant evolution of offense creating new ways to be successful, and defense adapting, and vice versa.
If you allow the natural forces to work, and shifts become more common in MLB, you will see more hitters expand their game and learn to hit the opposite way, or bunt. Speed will become more valuable. Future hitters will adapt, and the shifts will be less common until some other technique is used.
Trying to force the game to play the way you think it should is never good.
Having said all that, a rule where each side of the infield must have two players until a pitch is thrown is probably okay. But you do not want to go much further than that.December 6, 2018 at 3:55 pm #76327February 5, 2019 at 10:57 pm #81307
Ken Rosenthal reports via The Athletic (subscriber) article:
On 1/14, MLB owners submitted a proposal to the players.
The players came back with their own proposal.
All pitchers will face at least three batters.
20 second pitch clock.
Reducing mound visits from six to four in 2019 down to three in 2020.
When tie score in 10th inning or later, put runner on 2B – Spring training and All-Star Game only.
Expanded roster to 26 players in 2020.
Reduction of September players from 40 to 28 in 2020.
Increase DL time and option out time from 10 to 15 days.
Universal DH starting in 2019.February 5, 2019 at 11:21 pm #81308
Cardinals27ParticipantPaid - Annual
Maybe it’s a good thing we kept Jmart. But I hate putting a runner on second. Terrible idea, but at least not in games that count.February 6, 2019 at 12:45 am #81309
Nice to see MLB is finding solutions to a problem that doesn’t exist.February 6, 2019 at 6:12 am #81310
Interesting list of proposals from the owners. I would think that the roster expansion would be popular. Some of the others, like the batter minimum, pitch clock and September reduction, I could get behind. I’m semi-neutral on DH at this point, although I’d still prefer it not to be in the NL. The “man on 2nd” proposal should die before it even gets off the ground unless they can guarantee it never makes it to the real games.February 6, 2019 at 6:26 am #81312
heck no to DH, and not a fan of a 3 batter min for a pitcher that is kind of stupid toFebruary 6, 2019 at 7:23 am #81319
A slightly different list of items apparently under discussion.
Major League Baseball and the MLBPA are discussing a variety of potential rules changes that could drastically alter multiple facets of the game, including a three-batter minimum for pitchers, universal DH and a single trade deadline. The details at ESPN: https://t.co/Oylh4ET2Gb pic.twitter.com/fqaEMsPx8p
— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) February 6, 2019February 6, 2019 at 7:29 am #81320
Anyone going into negotiations will bring in a long list of items, knowing some will eventually be taken off the table as compromises are made. For MLB, we don't know which proposed rule changes each side will not give up on. That is what will really matter, IMO.
— Brian Walton (@B_Walton) February 6, 2019February 6, 2019 at 7:38 am #81322
The anti-tanking rules would be very welcome, for me. Purposefully losing should never be incentivised, IMO.February 6, 2019 at 7:45 am #81323
Players report to spring training camp in six days. It would seem highly optimistic to think this could get hammered out in time for 2019.February 6, 2019 at 7:52 am #81327
Agreed, they should take time to make things right and implement it for 2020.February 6, 2019 at 8:00 am #81332
Hopefully they can continue right into working on the bigger issues for the next CBA.February 6, 2019 at 8:04 am #81333
1 other area I heard union had common ground with MLB was in shortening half innings by going to the split screen of advertisement and game action in about the last 30 seconds.
— Joel Sherman (@Joelsherman1) February 6, 2019
Joel Sherman has a series of about 10 tweets with further details on proposals, but rather than copy them all here, if you are interested, you can go read his time line.February 6, 2019 at 9:20 am #81346
gscottarParticipantPaid - Annual
If you recall the new Mets GM cited the likelihood of the NL adopting the DH relatively soon as a justification of the acquisition of Robinson Cano.February 6, 2019 at 9:22 am #81347
Then again, the Mets may have two of them if Cespedes can no longer play in the field! Of course, that assumes he can even hit, which seems to remain in doubt. BTW, it is yet another one of the many bad contracts out there ($29 MM this season as part of a 4 year/$110 MM deal) that some Cardinals fans don’t seem to notice.February 6, 2019 at 9:25 am #81349
gscottarParticipantPaid - Annual
I don’t know about that but it would certainly justify the Cardinals hanging onto JMart.February 6, 2019 at 9:42 am #81352
Yes what a boost to his career. I’m happen for him and the team. 2.027 years of service. Can he be optioned for a week? While he’s down there feeling bad for a week, we could offer him a contract covering a few extra years. I guess he would still be a super-two but we’d get the extra year before free agency. He will be a star with 15 more DH’s.February 6, 2019 at 10:04 am #81362
CariocaCardinalParticipantPaid - Monthly
I thought the owners were good businessmen. No way I give in on 2 of the players’ main items (DH and expanded roster) without getting some type of cost certainty and a minimum of 5 more years of labor peace. Just bad business on the owners part.February 6, 2019 at 3:47 pm #81388
1. Universal DH…I could live with it.
2. Fewer mound visits…NO!
3. Three batter minimum…NO!
4. 20 second pitch clock…NO!
5. Trade deadline before the All-Star game…I could live with it.
6. Expanded roster..Okay but why would the owners want that?
7. Lower the mound!!! NO,NO,NO!!!!! It should be raised to fifteen inches where it belongs. It should have never been lowered. At fifteen inches we’d have baseball and not homerun derby.February 6, 2019 at 3:53 pm #81390
mspaid, if we had the mound at 15inches we would not have baseball we would have strike out centeral like 27 a game and alot of 1-0, or 2-1 games and fans these days would say that is boring and stop watching and it would die offFebruary 6, 2019 at 4:25 pm #81394
CC, you hit on a very important point that so many do not seem to understand. Twitter is afire with people upset about various individual line items, without knowing if there is even close to an agreement by both sides. All kinds of stuff was thrown against the wall, but what will stick? We do not know.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.