MLB considering 6IP minimum for starters

[chitownsportsfan]

10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I honestly was trying to think of a rule around sports that was similar, but I cannot think of one.

I can't think of anything even close. Maybe like some NFL substitution rules but that doesn't even begin to extend into requiring players to play a certain designated amount of plays.

[southsider2k5]

9 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

I can't think of anything even close. Maybe like some NFL substitution rules but that doesn't even begin to extend into requiring players to play a certain designated amount of plays.

Yeah, like there is no rule that you have to have your starting line up on the field for more than one play, or your PG has to play the entire first half.

[JoshPR]

More Manfred stupidity

[nrockway]

Changing the rules in an attempt to reproduce some sort of nostalgic feeling is misguided and stupid. Nostalgia is pleasant specifically because it's something that only exists in our minds and "mandated nostalgia" seems like a perfect way to destroy that. "hmm maybe it isn't so much fun watching that AAA injury call-up struggle through a complete game. maybe baseball games weren't actually more entertaining in 1936..."

Pitchers don't throw 9 innings anymore because there are A TON more good pitchers now than 100 years ago. The players are better at the game and so they don't play it exactly the same way. What are they gonna do next, you get suspended if you hit too many homers? You get punched in the nuts every time you take a walk? Shorten the base paths because guys used to get more infield singles and steal more bases? Pitchers get penalized for taking too much time before throwing a pitch?

Baseball is in a fine place. It's a good sport because of how well it has stood the test of time and how it has evolved and stayed relevant over its 150+ year history. Who does this rule even appeal to, people who will be dead in the next 20 years (no offense)? I'm not so sure about basketball, that sport probably needs a serious overhaul.

Edited August 15 by nrockway

[Quin]

New rule: No 100 mph pitches cause analytics says faster pitches go brrrr

[WhiteSox2023]

3 minutes ago, Quin said:

New rule: No 100 mph pitches cause analytics says faster pitches go brrrr

Yep, hitters are putting up too many “sword” stats.  Ban fastballs above 99 mph!

[JoeC]

For every early pitching change, the opposing team reserves the right to force an "early exit" of a subsequent reliever of their choice.
So if some team uses a pitching change in the 3rd inning, the opposing team can force that team to pull their closer in the 9th inning after 1 hitter.

[JoeC]

16 minutes ago, Quin said:

New rule: No 100 mph pitches cause analytics says faster pitches go brrrr

Limit the numer or 100mph pitches, as measured by StatCast, to no more than 6 per game per team.

You get an extra one in each extra inning.

Additionally, just to f*** with people, for every 5 pitches you get to exactly 99.9 mph, you get an extra 100mph pitch. Because we want to make things more confusing.

We'll also make this a reviewable play. Managers will be able to challenge the speed of a pitch, and we'll get a live look-in to some data scientist double checking something on Google Cloud to verify the exact pitch speed.

MLB wants to bring data analytics to the forefront, so this is clearly the best way to do so.

[Tnetennba]

I can't image this would go over well with the MLBPA.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

Every other sport has changed rules plenty of times due to technology and change in speed/skill/etc.

The idea that baseball should never change rules to accommodate the games changes is short sighted imo.

[southsider2k5]

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Every other sport has changed rules plenty of times due to technology and change in speed/skill/etc.

The idea that baseball should never change rules to accommodate the games changes is short sighted imo.

But this would be closest to saying you can't change hockey lines for 90 seconds than anything else.  It really isn't technology,  it's just not liking how they play the game 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

But this would be closest to saying you can't change hockey lines for 90 seconds than anything else.  It really isn't technology,  it's just not liking how they play the game 

Correct. The game is too analytical. It's too max effort. It's not enough endurance and it's not situational enough anymore. It promotes a game that lacks action. 

I think there's probably plenty in the baseball and baseball analytics community who agree. 

[chitownsportsfan]

3 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Every other sport has changed rules plenty of times due to technology and change in speed/skill/etc.

The idea that baseball should never change rules to accommodate the games changes is short sighted imo.

sure, change the rules, don't dictate who you can play. 

[zisk]

Wouldn't limiting pitching staffs to 11 guys accomplish the same thing? I must admit I hate

all the strike outs and pitching changes. Training your pitchers to throw as hard as possible 

all the time is why there are so many pitcher injuries. Starters are a stud if they pitch 200

innings now. Usually cutting 30-35% off a guys work load should reduce injuries. 

[Chisoxfn]

I love it!!! 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

8 hours ago, chitownsportsfan said:

sure, change the rules, don't dictate who you can play. 

Other sports dictate this. 

[Texsox]

Why go backwards? That's like last century thinking. Next they will want them to bat. 

Go forward. Expand the pitching staffs, have all relief. Some guys may be first inning specialists. Others mid game. Put a little strategy back in the game.

Get this game out of the last century. 

[Falstaff]

14 hours ago, Tnetennba said:

I can't image this would go over well with the MLBPA.

That was the first thing I thought when I heard of this.  I would rather see MLB play around setting up a rule where pitchers are designated as either starters or relievers, so the "bullpen" start is eliminated. 

[46DidIt]

I’m guessing the 30% of major leaguers who earn their bread pitching in relief wouldn’t be too thrilled with this proposal 

[southsider2k5]

5 minutes ago, 46DidIt said:

I’m guessing the 30% of major leaguers who earn their bread pitching in relief wouldn’t be too thrilled with this proposal 

But think of all of the washed up utility players Getz could roster instead of another AA reliever!

[JoeC]

6 minutes ago, 46DidIt said:

I’m guessing the 30% of major leaguers who earn their bread pitching in relief wouldn’t be too thrilled with this proposal 

Maybe this is the start of the standard 6-man rotation.

[southsider2k5]

4 hours ago, Falstaff said:

That was the first thing I thought when I heard of this.  I would rather see MLB play around setting up a rule where pitchers are designated as either starters or relievers, so the "bullpen" start is eliminated. 

It does probably mean a lot more roster churning for scratched starts and such.  Say a guy pulls something during warm ups and a bullpen guy is forced to start.  Does that guy have to go six, even if he isn't conditioned for it?

[46DidIt]

1 minute ago, JoeC said:

Maybe this is the start of the standard 6-man rotation.

I just don’t see how you can have a rule where a player can’t be removed from the game. I thought the three batter rule was questionable to begin with, but six innings? That’s ludicrous

[JoeC]

Just now, 46DidIt said:

I just don’t see how you can have a rule where a player can’t be removed from the game. I thought the three batter rule was questionable to begin with, but six innings? That’s ludicrous

Do I think it’s stupid? Yes. You can hopefully gather that by looking at my sarcastic offshoot rules in the rest of the thread.

Do I think it’ll ruin the game irreversibly? No. The game will adjust. It’s stupid, but we’ll all move on after some bellyaching in the first year.

I’d actually be interested to see the number of “early” hooks (fewer than 6IP) that don’t meet one of the three exceptions (injury resulting in IL stint, 4ER, or 100 pitches). I’d guess that it’s not going to be a huge impact, and I would even predict that the player’s union would talk ‘em down to 5 innings as a minimum, rather than 6.

[Dick Allen]

Its a real cool idea that will never happen.