More of Manfred's Bullshit

[YourWhatHurts]

I'm not sure if analytics has much to do with it.  Analytics say to shift on defense when playing defense, and (probably) to try not to hit into the shift on offense by BBing, hitting the ball in the air, or going the other way, and maybe with a bunt depending on the type of player.

The way I see it, the commissioners office for decades now -- at least-- has had a serious problem with pitching and defense.  Nowhere in Manfred's bullshit is anything about raising the mound or increasing foul territory or pushing fences back, etc.  It's all anti-anti-defensive nonsense.  They want a faster game on clock time with more offense, more home runs, etc.  .

But a pitching and defense-based game, for me as a fan, is the most appealing form of baseball.  I also have an attention span longer than a chihuahua which allows me to still pay attention even if the game exceeds 3 hours in length.  I know I am not the only one.  It seems, actually, that most hardcore fans -- not necessarily some idiot in a suit in the press box or a kid in front of the tv with a video game controller -- actually prefer pitching and defense-based baseball. 

With Manfred it's not "missing the forest for the trees" because there is no forest.  He lives in the moment, cares only about $$$ now, and short-term objectives as they may be worked or completed now, and doesn't give a shit about the long-term best interests of the game, or the history of the game.  He'll pay lip service to topics like minorities and diversity because he's looking for the cash that can come with it.  But he's a morally and ethically-empty prick who doesn't know a thing about baseball and doesn't deserve his position in baseball or even being included in baseball any more than any qualified person in baseball history has ever deserved being excluded from baseball.  He's a nitwick fuck who can go pound sand / lay face-down under a horny rottweiler and bite MyPillow.

But yeah, it's been anti-defense for a long time.  Manfred is just making it worse.  He's trying to flush the game down the toilet faster than anyone else.

[YourWhatHurts]

19 hours ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

The analytics say the best way to beat the shift is to hit the ball over the shift so FO's dont want hitters adjusting to the shift.  As long as there is a shift this thinking will never change. 

Baseball seems to evolve in eras.  Every change to the game changes the way people approach it and ultimately the way youth instructors also approach it.  I can see, over the long haul, maybe the shift results in the development of a different kind of hitter and a different kind of approach.  Everyone playing now is in their 20's 30's and 40's.  Baseball 20-40 years ago when they were born was a very different game.  

The reason I love the shift is because it is a natural defensive answer to the offensive challenge which doesn't involve changing the rules of the game.  The sport should always be allowed to be played differently in different eras with different datasets so long as the core rules don't have to be adjusted.  There's no good argument against the shift IMO that supports such rigid positioning rules.  And just from a sports comparison / optics standpoint, baseball has long been chastised for what is really its fixedness, where people watching really have a hard time understanding how talented the athletes can be because they don't seem them moving around enough.  People love movement in other sports like basketball and football and that movement is what makes defensive schemes so interesting and makes fans take such a deep interest.  The idea of further restricting movement on the field in order to make baseball more "fixed" is a good idea why?  It just adds offense, at the further expense of defense.  And ultimately it does nothing IMO to make baseball look more interesting or requisite of strategy on defense.

[CentralChamps21]

Baseball needs to do something to shorten games. Banning the shift doesn't really do that. Limiting throws to first sounds like it might but if it leads to a huge increase in steal success then probably not. I've heard the idea of making the 3rd foul ball after 2 strikes a strikeout to cut down on long at bats but that may be too far outside the box. I do like the rule limiting pitching changes to between innings or after 3 batters.

[poppysox]

By the end of TL's first tour of duty with the WS I was glad to see him go.  He was big on slowing the game to move a fielder a step or two over left or right in what seemed small potatoes to me.  Little did I know he was a trendsetter for the massive shifting in today's game.  I think many on this board will be surprised at just how aware TL is with today's game.  Trust me...he is an analytics guy.

[Perfect Vision]

There are dozens of rule changes they could experiment with to shorten the game, but if they're serious about it, I hope they understand the actual root cause of why games are longer now:  A generation of hitters has been taught to "be selective," to only swing at "good" pitches, and to take a lot of pitches in general and work deep into counts, with a walk being seen as a very good outcome for an at bat.  These days, the worst thing you can do as a hitter isn't strike out, it's swing at the first pitch and make an out.  There's an emphasis on getting the pitch count up.  Meanwhile, a generation of pitchers has been taught that a "power arm" is the best thing you can be.  So pitchers train and develop with a focus on increasing velocity, even if it means sacrificing control.  Which in turn leads to a generation of MLB pitchers who throw really hard and have spotty control, which means more balls, which means more total pitches thrown.  The interplay of these two things is the root cause of longer games, not all the tangential stuff (like pitchers throwing over to first base or mound visits). 

[JoshPR]

23 hours ago, YourWhatHurts said:

MLB To Experiment With Rule Changes In Minor Leagues - MLB Trade Rumors

So now he's trying to eliminate the shift and stop a pitcher from controlling the running game.

There is no way I can state my feelings on this asshat without getting banned, so I won't even bother.  Worst commissioner ever.

Seriously. What an asshat. He needs to go

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

20 hours ago, Perfect Vision said:

There are dozens of rule changes they could experiment with to shorten the game, but if they're serious about it, I hope they understand the actual root cause of why games are longer now:  A generation of hitters has been taught to "be selective," to only swing at "good" pitches, and to take a lot of pitches in general and work deep into counts, with a walk being seen as a very good outcome for an at bat.  These days, the worst thing you can do as a hitter isn't strike out, it's swing at the first pitch and make an out.  There's an emphasis on getting the pitch count up.  Meanwhile, a generation of pitchers has been taught that a "power arm" is the best thing you can be.  So pitchers train and develop with a focus on increasing velocity, even if it means sacrificing control.  Which in turn leads to a generation of MLB pitchers who throw really hard and have spotty control, which means more balls, which means more total pitches thrown.  The interplay of these two things is the root cause of longer games, not all the tangential stuff (like pitchers throwing over to first base or mound visits). 

Sounds like we need to move it to a 3-2 final count! 3 balls = walk. 2 strikes = K.

 

I'm only kidding.

[TheFutureIsNear]

On 3/11/2021 at 6:53 PM, Balta1701 said:

More hits and fewer outs increases the time of the game.

Is the length of the game REALLY the problem? On average, NFL games are longer. 
 

Personally I think just trying to press fast forward on the game isn’t the right way to attack the issue. The amount of dead time where nothing is happening is what loses most casual fans. Need more balls in play, defense, and activity on the base paths. The “3 true outcome” mentality has been the bigger issue IMO. Not saying it’s wrong or should change, but If we’re talking about fixing baseball viewership I’d start with figuring out how to pick up the action. Not just speed up the same game. 
 

 

[CentralChamps21]

7 minutes ago, TheFutureIsNear said:

Is the length of the game REALLY the problem? On average, NFL games are longer. 
 

Personally I think just trying to press fast forward on the game isn’t the right way to attack the issue. The amount of dead time where nothing is happening is what loses most casual fans. Need more balls in play, defense, and activity on the base paths. The “3 true outcome” mentality has been the bigger issue IMO. Not saying it’s wrong or should change, but If we’re talking about fixing baseball viewership I’d start with figuring out how to pick up the action. Not just speed up the same game. 
 

 

Your favorite NFL team plays once a week, your favorite MLB team plays 6-7. NFL games are mostly on weekends when we have all day to watch football. For people who have to get up on weekday mornings for work or school, MLB games running longer start to cut into your sleep, especially if you're watching a game in a time zone west of where you live. I don't know what the best way to do it is, but something has to be done to get the average game length down to 2:50 or so.

[TheFutureIsNear]

1 hour ago, WhiteSoxFan1993 said:

Your favorite NFL team plays once a week, your favorite MLB team plays 6-7. NFL games are mostly on weekends when we have all day to watch football. For people who have to get up on weekday mornings for work or school, MLB games running longer start to cut into your sleep, especially if you're watching a game in a time zone west of where you live. I don't know what the best way to do it is, but something has to be done to get the average game length down to 2:50 or so.

Fair enough, the time of game is indeed a problem as well. But I just don’t know how to make a significant impact on that without literally shortening the game. Maybe you can cut 15-20 mins, but is that really going to make a big difference? I feel like for baseball to be a daily weekday watch for casual fans they’d have to shorten the game at least a full hr. Not saying I’m against it, just don’t see it as feasible. Which is why I think trying to infuse more action into the game is a better bet 

Edited March 13, 2021 by TheFutureIsNear

[RagahRagah]

I understand some minor changes to try to speed up the game or make it fairer but once you start with one thing you end up going down a slippery slope and it turns into a clusterfuck. See: the current state of the NFL.

[YourWhatHurts]

On 3/13/2021 at 2:01 PM, WhiteSoxFan1993 said:

Your favorite NFL team plays once a week, your favorite MLB team plays 6-7. NFL games are mostly on weekends when we have all day to watch football. For people who have to get up on weekday mornings for work or school, MLB games running longer start to cut into your sleep, especially if you're watching a game in a time zone west of where you live. I don't know what the best way to do it is, but something has to be done to get the average game length down to 2:50 or so.

Here's what I do: I DVR the game, get things done, start watching it like an hour and a half or so into the game, and watch the game on fast forward x1 to see the pitches and plays (stopping to play when something good or interesting happens) and then I FFx2 or FFx3 through commercials, Sox math, and other forms of televised bullshit.  I get through the game quickly and I still get to see everything that happens.  If it's the playoffs or I'm just chillin' I'll watch the whole game.  But I don't mind the length.  

As far as other people go, all you have to do is move the start time up an hour.  But they won't do that because they want the best chance possible to put people in the stands.  But that's an easy answer.

Otherwise, do this to shorten the game:

-Raise the mound

-Take a little more of the bounce out of the baseball

-Let the fielders be positioned anywhere on the field the manager wants, so long as there is a P and a C.

-Force a mandatory 20 feet of foul territory on both sides of the line from home plate to the wall

-Force a mandatory 6' minimum height wall on all sides of the playing field, which is heavily padded, so that the players can freely chase down flyballs without worrying about hitting brick or concrete, or falling into the stands or dugout, etc.

That will encourage P to work more in the zone and keep them healthier.  It will also force a lot of balls which are normally going out of play and extending ABs to be kept in play, and it will make it easier for defensive players to catch foul balls.  Innings will go much quicker and games will have lower scores.

Of course none of these ideas will ever be up for discussion because it's not just about shortening the game, its about shortening the game AND diminishing pitching and defense in favor of more offense.

[Kyyle23]

 

[Quin]

56 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

 

Oh sweet lord. 

[Kyyle23]

11 minutes ago, Quin said:

Oh sweet lord. 

This has the makings of another Jim McMahon vs Pete Rozelle

[ScootsMcGoots]

1 hour ago, Kyyle23 said:

 

I am so glad we didn't sign him.

[greg775]

I love the fact four infielders must be in the infield and not on the outfield grass at all times. I despise the shift so much it has almost ruined baseball for me. Players won't bunt to beat the shift. I despise when a lefty slams the ball in the hole between first and second and the outfielder throws him out.

I despise when a player rocks what should be a single up the middle but there's an infielder right over second base. Anything please to get rid of shifts.

I also hate when a player does the Paul Konerko unflipping the velcro on the batting glove after every pitch. Call me insane and in need of help but I can't take it. Yet I of course loved Konerko.

I'm not crazy about Manfred's ruining the playoffs but please please get rid of shifts and please start calling the belt high fastball a strike. I can't take it.

Edited March 18, 2021 by greg775

[ShoeLessRob]

On 3/15/2021 at 9:21 AM, ScooterMcGee said:

I am so glad we didn't sign him.

I understand if you don’t like him personally or his previous Twitter feuds/rants. But what’s wrong with what he posted this time? He’s exposing the ridiculousness of the MLB.

[flavum]

2 hours ago, ShoeLessRob said:

I understand if you don’t like him personally or his previous Twitter feuds/rants. But what’s wrong with what he posted this time? He’s exposing the ridiculousness of the MLB.

You mean MLB (not the MLB) is protecting the companies that actually pay them money for advertising? Bauer is a whining baby. 

Edited March 18, 2021 by flavum

[ScootsMcGoots]

6 hours ago, ShoeLessRob said:

I understand if you don’t like him personally or his previous Twitter feuds/rants. But what’s wrong with what he posted this time? He’s exposing the ridiculousness of the MLB.

No he's not. I'm sure MLB has contract with certain companies for sponsorships that are allowed to be shown on TV, and they have agreements to respect those partnerships. It's clear by that letter that Bauer violated something that he agreed to, and it's probably not a great idea to put your own team in a bad light like that. Especially one that just paid you an enormous amount of money. I guarantee you whatever deals he has, none is more lucrative than the one he has with the dodgers. He should honor that one above all the others.

Edited March 18, 2021 by ScooterMcGee

[ShoeLessRob]

5 hours ago, flavum said:

You mean MLB (not the MLB) is protecting the companies that actually pay them money for advertising? Bauer is a whining baby. 

Sorry for my grammar sir.

2 hours ago, ScooterMcGee said:

No he's not. I'm sure MLB has contract with certain companies for sponsorships that are allowed to be shown on TV, and they have agreements to respect those partnerships. It's clear by that letter that Bauer violated something that he agreed to, and it's probably not a great idea to put your own team in a bad light like that. Especially one that just paid you an enormous amount of money. I guarantee you whatever deals he has, none is more lucrative than the one he has with the dodgers. He should honor that one above all the others.

And it was a “B”... you know for Bauer. If Anderson had a “T” or “TA” and received the same response would you be singing the same tune?

[ScootsMcGoots]

1 hour ago, ShoeLessRob said:

Sorry for my grammar sir.

And it was a “B”... you know for Bauer. If Anderson had a “T” or “TA” and received the same response would you be singing the same tune?

Sure would. Except Tim didn't. And probably won't.

[ScootsMcGoots]

On 3/14/2021 at 10:53 PM, YourWhatHurts said:

Here's what I do: I DVR the game, get things done, start watching it like an hour and a half or so into the game, and watch the game on fast forward x1 to see the pitches and plays (stopping to play when something good or interesting happens) and then I FFx2 or FFx3 through commercials, Sox math, and other forms of televised bullshit.  I get through the game quickly and I still get to see everything that happens.  If it's the playoffs or I'm just chillin' I'll watch the whole game.  But I don't mind the length.  

As far as other people go, all you have to do is move the start time up an hour.  But they won't do that because they want the best chance possible to put people in the stands.  But that's an easy answer.

Otherwise, do this to shorten the game:

-Raise the mound

-Take a little more of the bounce out of the baseball

-Let the fielders be positioned anywhere on the field the manager wants, so long as there is a P and a C.

-Force a mandatory 20 feet of foul territory on both sides of the line from home plate to the wall

-Force a mandatory 6' minimum height wall on all sides of the playing field, which is heavily padded, so that the players can freely chase down flyballs without worrying about hitting brick or concrete, or falling into the stands or dugout, etc.

That will encourage P to work more in the zone and keep them healthier.  It will also force a lot of balls which are normally going out of play and extending ABs to be kept in play, and it will make it easier for defensive players to catch foul balls.  Innings will go much quicker and games will have lower scores.

Of course none of these ideas will ever be up for discussion because it's not just about shortening the game, its about shortening the game AND diminishing pitching and defense in favor of more offense.

I like all of these ideas

[The Grinder]

And I thought Gary Bettman was bad....

[Texsox]

On 3/11/2021 at 7:01 PM, raBBit said:

Manfred sucks. Nobody likes Manfred. Not the players, not the owners, not the fans, etc. I don't know how the most traditionalist game in the world ended up with this Ivy League stiff who is constantly trying to change the game that has been played with the same rules for 100+ years.

It's all been downhill since they changed the height of the mound in 1968.