Thoughts? Personally, I hate it. Just doesn't seem like baseball to me and it seems like its effectiveness is largely overrated. I'm usually not a fan of most rule changes but I'd love to see it outlawed.

Hate it, but love it when dumbass Managers shift against our righties

Fair enough.

Agree that outlawing shifts would be stupid (and unenforceable), but I've got not problem with the pitch clock if for nothing else as a threat to get the game moving faster.

Guys that like watching baseball will always like watching baseball, but if MLB wants to increase exposure to the masses they have to make it a shorter game.

I think I'm most intrigued with how they will use the new stats engines to make the game more interactive.

And agree with Danny -- talk about a quick way as a player to endear yourself to the local diehard baseball fanbase... bunt/tap a ball down the baseline away from the shift for a single. Put team above ego.

I'm okay with the pitch clock. Human rain delays are a problem.

Back to the shift, there isn't much that pains me more than watching a 20HR guy like Mitch Moreland pull balls into the shift. Seriously, you aren't the great Bambino where dropping one down is taking a lethal weapon out of your hands. Take the gift and go take one of the bases they are giving you, and before long, you'll stop seeing that shift altogether.

If you care about broadcast and viewership -- which is the lifeblood of any sports league -- then yes there absolutely is.

I don't think this was just all of a sudden dropped on the players -- MLB made an effort to have the pitchers speed up the game and overall they didn't make a big enough effort, thus the pitch clock idea was born.

I don't like it, but I understand why it exists.

I don't see adding a pitch clock as abandoning what has made baseball great. I see it as trying to get back to what helped make it great, when it moved at a quicker pace.

quote:

---

I'm okay with the pitch clock. Human rain delays are a problem.

Back to the shift, there isn't much that pains me more than watching a 20HR guy like Mitch Moreland pull balls into the shift. Seriously, you aren't the great Bambino where dropping one down is taking a lethal weapon out of your hands. Take the gift and go take one of the bases they are giving you, and before long, you'll stop seeing that shift altogether.

---

The problem is the hitter's logic will line up with what they want to do... I imagine Moreland isn't against the "free base", but he convinces himself that he's not a very good bunter or slap hitter and trying to do so will give him less of a chance of reaching base than just his normal approach.

And he may be correct... I've seen good bunters fail to get a bunt down at all quite often.... Not a stretch to think that guys who dont bunt at all won't be able to do it.

quote:

---

If you care about broadcast and viewership -- which is the lifeblood of any sports league -- then yes there absolutely is.

I don't think this was just all of a sudden dropped on the players -- MLB made an effort to have the pitchers speed up the game and overall they didn't make a big enough effort, thus the pitch clock idea was born.

I don't like it, but I understand why it exists.

---

It's not a pitcher only problem, though. Hitters go through stupid routines between every pitch that waste time too. I'm certainly fine with efforts to speed up the game but do it without adding a clock element.

Agree. It's not a sure thing and would take some dedication to working on the skill to beat it. I just think a hitter like Moreland with poor man's power is a textbook case of a guy that should be working on beating it.

I understand the reason for using it, it just irritates me to no end to have half the team on one side of the field. As long as it's around I do wish more guys would work on going around it.

As far as enforceability, I don't see it as much different than the catcher being the only player allowed to line up in foul territory.

As far as pitch clocks go, I hate it. I get what you're saying hayden and you're right, it just sucks.

I think the pitch clock would get to a point where no one even notices. And yeah, there would need to be something done regarding hitters too.

Isn't there a rule about keeping a foot in the box at the lower levels? I can't remember the specifics but that might cut down some on the readjusting every piece of equipment they have thing.

MLB has it now. Have to keep one foot in the box as of last year. Average game time in the first half of last season dropped about 10 minutes after they implemented it, but then it crept back up after the ASB.

Is it just not being enforced? They sure all seem to get way out of the box a lot.

They are apparently fined for doing it. Not sure how much, but I would guess it's not much.

quote:

---

I think the pitch clock would get to a point where no one even notices. And yeah, there would need to be something done regarding hitters too.

---

Handle it like the 10-second violation in basketball if you need to. Let the home plate umpire keep the time manually.

So you're not against the actual time restraint, just the actual clock?

The pitch clock was borne from player's not adhering to the rule change. They weren't making the effort to police themselves, so the rule was created. Their next excuse was to say "well how can we be expected to know exactly how much time we have if the umpire is just counting in his head?".

So the pitch clock was implemented.

Agree. Baseball has been giving them years of opportunity to fix it on their own, and they aren't.

Correct. I am only against the adding of a clock. I'm all for them eliminating a bunch of unnecessarily wasted time in games.

The home plate umpire can count out loud so the batter can hear. it's not very difficult to figure out.

I'd much rather it be a clock that back on a stadium wall that mostly goes unnoticed than the umpire barking out a count on the field for 3 hours. That would be more disruptive to the player's concentration IMO.

Put a visible clock on it, players will get with the program, and in the end it will just be another glowing board in the background of the rest of the lit-up info that encircles a MLB stadium.

I also wouldn't change the rules of the game for it. But I would have a guy (or two) monitoring every game, and I'd fine players an escalating amount - make them substantial enough that being a frequent violator is painful. Probably requires one clock in the background behind home for the pitcher and a separate in the OF bleachers for the hitter.

An umpire counting would be more distracting than a forcing a batter to take concentration away from a pitcher to look at a pitch clock?

Wait, my bad. We are talking PITCH clock here.

Sorry, it's Friday and I didn't sleep much last night.

I love the shift...

It gives managers an additional tool to affect the outcome of a game. I've never been a fan of guys that can only pull the ball...probably not fair of me but WGAS.

I love when a batter forces the defense to defend the entire field.

I think it would be interesting to see if the era of the prevalent use of the shift will limit the number of day-to-day pull hitters that make it to the big leagues.

Went to a minor league game in Durham last year. They had a pitch clock. It worked great. Took less that 3 innings for me not to notice it.

How different is moving into double play depth or moving up to try and take away a hitter's ability to bunt for a hit from "the shift"?

In all cases the defense is putting itself into a hopefully better position to succeed. Albeit some more drastic than others, it's the same principle in my mind.

The same principle taken to an extreme.

I think the shift will work itself out in the next few seasons as batters and managers adjust to take advantage of it.

If you can get a bunt down, that's a free single they're giving you. Once batters continually outmaneuver the shift, I think it will gradually go away.

How can someone be against the shift??! Have each player in the field be touching a mound when a pitch is thrown?

It is definitely mind numbing they cant bunt on

I don't know all the statistics about the effectiveness of shifts--I'm sure its team, player, and situational specific.

But I am quite curious why the OP, Lucky#07, thinks the shift "isn't baseball."


As far as players bunting or dropping one opposite field against a shift, I understand and agree that its mind-numbing to watch guys hit right into a shift.

But, I would say you cannot forget about the possible reward of Moreland trying to knock a home run, or maybe dropping a double in the alley, against a shift.

A player can bunt their way on, but that's far from guaranteeing they'll score.

I'm sure the odds for most players still favor trying to bunt or single your way on base against a shift, but that's something to consider there.