Manfred: mlb considering “Golden at bat” rule

[46DidIt]

Sometimes I wonder if Manfred and JR are conspiring to kill my baseball fandom

[Texsox]

3 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

When the DH was first proposed it was about that popular. Now we take it for granted. 

How about making it the offensive closer? It's the last at bat. Walk off or go home. 

 

[Texsox]

27 minutes ago, 46DidIt said:

Sometimes I wonder if Manfred and JR are conspiring to kill my baseball fandom

You don't like seeing a team's best hitter facing their best closer in a high leverage situation? Or are you worried once it becomes common it will lose the magic? To me watching some bottom of the order guy in that situation is just slightly better than watching a pitcher hit. 

Imagine if the defense has to set a rotation of pitchers before the game and couldn't deviate, that's what the offense has to do. 

It's closer to my goal of offense and defense lineups like football. 

[Tnetennba]

56 minutes ago, Texsox said:

You don't like seeing a team's best hitter facing their best closer in a high leverage situation? Or are you worried once it becomes common it will lose the magic? To me watching some bottom of the order guy in that situation is just slightly better than watching a pitcher hit. 

Imagine if the defense has to set a rotation of pitchers before the game and couldn't deviate, that's what the offense has to do. 

It's closer to my goal of offense and defense lineups like football. 

The beauty of this in baseball is that it's random and unpredictable. You can game plan around it hoping to line up your best vs their best, but the stakes are impacted by variables that aren't predetermined. This rule would drastically alter fundamental aspects of baseball chasing a fabricated instant gratification. Walk-off wins are beautiful because any of your 1-9 could be the hero that night, and arbitrarily being able to jump the batting order to insert a star player cheapens those moments, and the game itself.

We don't need to ruin baseball by turning it into football or basketball.

[JoeC]

Instead of a “golden batter,” I’d prefer to see the offensive team be able to choose the pitcher they want to face for one plate appearance each game.

[flavum]

Hopefully Manfred made the comment just to see the reaction. I’m happy baseball fans know it’s dumb and this will just go away.

I’m no Manfred fan, but some of the recent changes- pitch timer and defensive alignment have been helpful for the pace of the game. The runner on second base in extra innings is dumb, and should start in the 12th inning if must be, but I can live with it. This golden at bat idea is garbage. 

[wegner]

I truly enjoyed the Banana ball game that I attended in Iowa this year and I am really looking forward to the games at Sox Park, but to put this in an MLB game is just odd.

[SoxAce]

Manfraud.

[Texsox]

1 hour ago, Tnetennba said:

The beauty of this in baseball is that it's random and unpredictable. You can game plan around it hoping to line up your best vs their best, but the stakes are impacted by variables that aren't predetermined. This rule would drastically alter fundamental aspects of baseball chasing a fabricated instant gratification. Walk-off wins are beautiful because any of your 1-9 could be the hero that night, and arbitrarily being able to jump the batting order to insert a star player cheapens those moments, and the game itself.

We don't need to ruin baseball by turning it into football or basketball.

Except the defense isn't random. Teams can choose who pitches to which batters. Why not allow the offense that same advantage? 

It's another DH and almost another pitch hitter. 

[Texsox]

I would like to see them try it at High A for a season. And like hockey line changes, home team makes the final change of pitcher or hitter. 

 

[WhiteSox2023]

2 hours ago, SoxAce said:

Manfraud.

Great post…

Embarrassing.  Manfraud recycled an idea from some radio tool that he initially said was a waste of time.

[Snopek]

16 hours ago, Texsox said:

Except the defense isn't random. Teams can choose who pitches to which batters. Why not allow the offense that same advantage? 

It's another DH and almost another pitch hitter. 

There’s so much strategy involved on the pitching side with pitch counts, off days, etc that I don’t really see bringing in a reliever as much of an advantage.

On the contrary, for a golden batter/pinch hitter, you don’t have to factor anything else in other than “let’s send our best guy out there to hit.” And it’s not like they’ll be coming into the game cold like a traditional pinch hitter does.

[caulfield12]

18 hours ago, Tnetennba said:

The beauty of this in baseball is that it's random and unpredictable. You can game plan around it hoping to line up your best vs their best, but the stakes are impacted by variables that aren't predetermined. This rule would drastically alter fundamental aspects of baseball chasing a fabricated instant gratification. Walk-off wins are beautiful because any of your 1-9 could be the hero that night, and arbitrarily being able to jump the batting order to insert a star player cheapens those moments, and the game itself.

We don't need to ruin baseball by turning it into football or basketball.

Feels like every time the Mets needed a big hit down the stretch either Iglesias or Lindor were coming up like clockwork...that kind of thing is serendipity in baseball.

[Kyyle23]

Much like Manfred, this idea sucks ass

[southsider2k5]

20 hours ago, Texsox said:

You don't like seeing a team's best hitter facing their best closer in a high leverage situation? Or are you worried once it becomes common it will lose the magic? To me watching some bottom of the order guy in that situation is just slightly better than watching a pitcher hit. 

Imagine if the defense has to set a rotation of pitchers before the game and couldn't deviate, that's what the offense has to do. 

It's closer to my goal of offense and defense lineups like football. 

Why stop there?  Let's let Ohtani face Ohtani for every AB in every game, that way we always have the best vs the best. 

[Texsox]

1 hour ago, Snopek said:

There’s so much strategy involved on the pitching side with pitch counts, off days, etc that I don’t really see bringing in a reliever as much of an advantage.

On the contrary, for a golden batter/pinch hitter, you don’t have to factor anything else in other than “let’s send our best guy out there to hit.” And it’s not like they’ll be coming into the game cold like a traditional pinch hitter does.

Don't most teams send in their best reliever to close? You don't have to factor in anything else other than "here's our best pitcher in this situation. He even has a special title 'closer'"

 

[Texsox]

36 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Why stop there?  Let's let Ohtani face Ohtani for every AB in every game, that way we always have the best vs the best. 

I think that's a little too far out there but wouldn't that be a great matchup at any time, even better with the game on the line. We can't go back to the days before Tony ruined the game with the concept of a closer. So let's allow the offense to catch up. 

I still prefer a full platoon. Have a defense and offense. There are already stoppages in play to make the transition even easier than football. 

[southsider2k5]

3 minutes ago, Texsox said:

I think that's a little too far out there but wouldn't that be a great matchup at any time, even better with the game on the line. We can't go back to the days before Tony ruined the game with the concept of a closer. So let's allow the offense to catch up. 

I still prefer a full platoon. Have a defense and offense. There are already stoppages in play to make the transition even easier than football. 

It is one thing to have specialists.  It is another to be able to reuse the same players.  In the NBA I can't take someone who got fouled out and put Michael Jordan in for him to because he is better.  This isn't even a logic progression of something we already do, such as the pitch clock.  This is an entirely new and made up thing that has no place in the game.

[Texsox]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

It is one thing to have specialists.  It is another to be able to reuse the same players.  In the NBA I can't take someone who got fouled out and put Michael Jordan in for him to because he is better.  This isn't even a logic progression of something we already do, such as the pitch clock.  This is an entirely new and made up thing that has no place in the game.

Actually you can. If a player fouls out you have to replace him. If Jordan is on the bench put him in. It doesn't even have to be a foul out situation. Call a time out and put him in for the final shot.

And have a criteria for whose available to Golden hit . If they played and were pulled, they aren't eligible. Perhaps they have to be on the bench just like the NBA. If you want to use that a an example. 

[southsider2k5]

5 minutes ago, Texsox said:

Actually you can. If a player fouls out you have to replace him. If Jordan is on the bench put him in. It doesn't even have to be a foul out situation. Call a time out and put him in for the final shot.

And have a criteria for whose available to Golden hit . If they played and were pulled, they aren't eligible. Perhaps they have to be on the bench just like the NBA. If you want to use that a an example. 

If a player fouls out, they aren't shooting free throws.

[Texsox]

29 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

If a player fouls out, they aren't shooting free throws.

And they could do the same with the extra DH. If you are out of the game you can't come back. That seems like a reasonable and necessary part of the rule.

I don't see it ever being implemented but if it did those type of issues would have to be worked out. 

I think additional restrictions should also be looked at. Perhaps the player has to be currently on the bench, not a base runner, not rejected. 

Here's a possible benefit. You pull your star in the 5th to get a little rest knowing you can bring him back in the 9th or extra innings. Might cut down on overuse injuries. 

[Texsox]

The logical progression is DH for pitcher.  DH for anyone one time. Maybe you have to use your DH for the "offensive closer at bat". Maybe you have to designate before each game who it is. 

I like other changes more. I think I like the 9th always starts at the top of the order. 

Based on what was said I'm most in favor of not doing it, but I'd like to see the details fully worked out. 

[Texsox]

On 12/4/2024 at 12:06 PM, 46DidIt said:

Sometimes I wonder if Manfred and JR are conspiring to kill my baseball fandom

I'm wondering what the process is. Some owner gets an idea and emails? A suggestion box? $$$$$$ paid to consultants? 

[Tnetennba]

1 hour ago, Texsox said:

Actually you can. If a player fouls out you have to replace him. If Jordan is on the bench put him in. It doesn't even have to be a foul out situation. Call a time out and put him in for the final shot.

And have a criteria for whose available to Golden hit . If they played and were pulled, they aren't eligible. Perhaps they have to be on the bench just like the NBA. If you want to use that a an example. 

Basketball allows for players to sub back in, baseball doesn't. There are also rules that govern when a player can sub in certain situations in those sports, and don't always allow you to put your best player in a big spot arbitrarily. Different sports don't have to follow the same rules, and this idiotic idea cheapens the uniqueness of baseball. I have zero problem with Ohtani or Soto or any other superstar pinch hitting in a big spot if they weren't already in the game, because that falls into the parameters of how game is played. But magically being able to skip multiple batters in a line up just to put your best hitter at the plate is a cheap gimmick that doesn't actually improve the game itself. 

[Texsox]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10145700-mlbs-golden-at-bat-rule-floated-by-rob-manfred-is-wild-enough-to-work

In the end there may be too many obstacles to overcome. I'm always willing to look at crazy new ideas.