The Case to Eliminate Two Strike Foul Balls

[Texsox]

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/texas-rangers-doctor-proposes-radical-mlb-rule-change-to-help-prevent-pitching-injuries/amp/

[Pants Rowland]

There is definitely an argument to be made for capping the number of pitches per at bat not only for pitcher's health but also to keep the game moving.

Right now, the maximum not counting fouls is 6. I think a max of 8-10 could be reasonable. I suspect the history of balls and strikes were to give a hitter a reasonable chance to put a ball in play. The pitcher needs to throw it within a zone that gives hitters that chance. If they just keep spoiling off good pitches, though, it seems to defeat that rationale.

[Milkman delivers]

1 hour ago, Pants Rowland said:

There is definitely an argument to be made for capping the number of pitches per at bat not only for pitcher's health but also to keep the game moving.

Right now, the maximum not counting fouls is 6. I think a max of 8-10 could be reasonable. I suspect the history of balls and strikes were to give a hitter a reasonable chance to put a ball in play. The pitcher needs to throw it within a zone that gives hitters that chance. If they just keep spoiling off good pitches, though, it seems to defeat that rationale.

Not sure what the argument is here exactly, but it’s harder for the batter to hit the ball than for the pitcher to throw it past him. So if anything, a batter that stays alive that long should earn a walk rather than the pitcher earn an out.

[Pants Rowland]

3 hours ago, Milkman delivers said:

Not sure what the argument is here exactly, but it’s harder for the batter to hit the ball than for the pitcher to throw it past him. So if anything, a batter that stays alive that long should earn a walk rather than the pitcher earn an out.

Your point about the difficulty of hitting is valid, but if a hitter wants to take a walk, I suspect there will be the opportunity to earn it by not swinging. There could be a benefit to not always rewarding a hitter for constantly spoiling off pitches close to the zone until the pitcher is worn out and gives in. 

[Timmy U]

This is already a radically run-starved environment. You eliminate 2-strike foul balls, no one will score and the sport will die. Why not raise the roster size to 30 and make 17 of them pitchers? That would also limit the number of pitches thrown.

[kitekrazy]

The glass arm era.  Maybe they should ditch the trend of throwing thru a wall for 5 innings and pitch to contact, or better mechanics.

Why not shorten games to 7 innings to prevent  all injuries.  Ugh!

BTW there are no shortage of bonehead doctors.  You'd think by now someone would figure out injuries are not predictable.

 

[Balta1701]

5 hours ago, kitekrazy said:

The glass arm era.  Maybe they should ditch the trend of throwing thru a wall for 5 innings and pitch to contact, or better mechanics.

Why not shorten games to 7 innings to prevent  all injuries.  Ugh!

BTW there are no shortage of bonehead doctors.  You'd think by now someone would figure out injuries are not predictable.

 

Yeah who would ever think that a parade of relievers throwing at 98 could be effective? You’ll never see a team put up 33 straight scoreless innings in the playoffs doing that.

Seriously, these guys are throwing this hard all the time because it works. Hitters today are at a level they weren’t at 15 years ago either, most pitchers can’t be effective throwing 91-92 for most of a game. Pitching and hitting have evolved together here, as the training  and preparation have evolved, both sides are pushing the physical envelope further and further.

If you want to succeed throwing 91 all game, you better have some pinpoint control, a ton of movement, and great offspeed stuff that you throw the majority of the time. Hitters are too good today to sit down against a 91 mph fastball otherwise. And in that case, the stress on your elbow comes from throwing 40% of your pitches as sliders, same problem.

[Dick Allen]

On 10/10/2024 at 7:56 PM, Timmy U said:

This is already a radically run-starved environment. You eliminate 2-strike foul balls, no one will score and the sport will die. Why not raise the roster size to 30 and make 17 of them pitchers? That would also limit the number of pitches thrown.

I agree.If you want to kill the sport, this is a move to make. I don't think adding to the roster that much is feasible. The rich teams would only get better. If the goal is to keep pitchers healthy, get out of the max effort every pitch era.

[Balta1701]

10 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I agree.If you want to kill the sport, this is a move to make. I don't think adding to the roster that much is feasible. The rich teams would only get better. If the goal is to keep pitchers healthy, get out of the max effort every pitch era.

How? Things are moving progressively more and more in this direction with time because it's effective. How do we do this? Move the fences back everywhere and add in 2 more outfielders?

[southsider2k5]

11 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

How? Things are moving progressively more and more in this direction with time because it's effective. How do we do this? Move the fences back everywhere and add in 2 more outfielders?

Forcing starting pitchers to go 6 innings would be an interesting balance to this.

[Dick Allen]

11 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

How? Things are moving progressively more and more in this direction with time because it's effective. How do we do this? Move the fences back everywhere and add in 2 more outfielders?

It's effective, but it makes for shorter careers. I like the idea of making starters go 5 innings or 100 pitches or if they are getting battered, you could say they have to allow at least 5 run. If they came out before that, they would have to go on the IL,  It's a brilliant idea that makes way too much sense so it will never happen. 

Eventually something has to be done about the offense.

[kitekrazy]

8 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Yeah who would ever think that a parade of relievers throwing at 98 could be effective? You’ll never see a team put up 33 straight scoreless innings in the playoffs doing that.

Seriously, these guys are throwing this hard all the time because it works. Hitters today are at a level they weren’t at 15 years ago either, most pitchers can’t be effective throwing 91-92 for most of a game. Pitching and hitting have evolved together here, as the training  and preparation have evolved, both sides are pushing the physical envelope further and further.

If you want to succeed throwing 91 all game, you better have some pinpoint control, a ton of movement, and great offspeed stuff that you throw the majority of the time. Hitters are too good today to sit down against a 91 mph fastball otherwise. And in that case, the stress on your elbow comes from throwing 40% of your pitches as sliders, same problem.

Like that Mark Buerhle dude,

Throwing hard is overrated.  It also comes off the bat much quicker.  The reason why Bobbu Molinaro parked one off Gossage.

Modern day baseball sucks.

No more true HoF pitchers.

No shortage of hard throwers in the minors that can't get the ball over.

Unfortunately this new philosophy is starting with 10 year old kids.

 

 

[Balta1701]

6 hours ago, kitekrazy said:

Like that Mark Buerhle dude,

Throwing hard is overrated.  It also comes off the bat much quicker.  The reason why Bobbu Molinaro parked one off Gossage.

Modern day baseball sucks.

No more true HoF pitchers.

No shortage of hard throwers in the minors that can't get the ball over.

Unfortunately this new philosophy is starting with 10 year old kids.

 

 

Mark Buehrle pitched over 10 years ago now. There is a reason we don’t see guys like that commonly any more, hitters have gotten better too. The stuff the white Sox eschew - electronic tools, launch angles, exit velocities - hitters are way more  primed to take advantage of guys like that. Guys like that wind up with ERAs over 5 and are put in the bullpen and told to throw as hard as they can for an inning since throwing 89 as a starter doesn’t work any more.

Thats the reality if you try to force starters to throw 100 pitches each outing too, every starter is going to have an ERA of 5 because hitters for most teams have gotten better.

[joejoesox]

On 10/14/2024 at 11:31 AM, Dick Allen said:

I agree.If you want to kill the sport, this is a move to make. I don't think adding to the roster that much is feasible. The rich teams would only get better. If the goal is to keep pitchers healthy, get out of the max effort every pitch era.

is it the max effort fastballs or the heavy use of splitters and sweeper/sliders that causes elbow injuries?

[Balta1701]

54 minutes ago, joejoesox said:

is it the max effort fastballs or the heavy use of splitters and sweeper/sliders that causes elbow injuries?

Yes.

It is all of the above. Every pitch is a max effort pitch whether it is offspeed or straight. Different people have to deal with this in their own ways, but you can’t waste pitches any more. The 8th and 9th place hitters can hit the ball out of the park if you are careless.

If you aren’t doing this, then you will wind up in the minor leagues. 

[greg775]

On 10/14/2024 at 1:14 AM, kitekrazy said:

The glass arm era.  Maybe they should ditch the trend of throwing thru a wall for 5 innings and pitch to contact, or better mechanics.

Why not shorten games to 7 innings to prevent  all injuries.  Ugh!

BTW there are no shortage of bonehead doctors.  You'd think by now someone would figure out injuries are not predictable.

 

Folks you've got to watch Goose Gossage, the Hall of Famer discuss pitcher injuries on here and the babying of players!!! Goose has it right. Great post, kitekrazy.