Here comes the three-batter minimum...

Salem's Lot · Dec 9, 2019

They seem to want to do everything except fix the actual problem. The pitchers hold on the ball too long. That’s the issue.

Green Monster · Dec 9, 2019

Hopefully this will be as effective, and save as much time as they saved with the intentional walk

YTF · Dec 9, 2019

Who voted it down? Did the owner have a vote or say on this or were they told it wasn't happening. If the former, why on earth would they do that?

SirPsychoSquints · Dec 9, 2019

There's a better way to figure this out, but I can find 875 appearances in 2019 in which a 1) Reliever 2) faced 1 or 2 batters 3) these batters were in the same inning 4) the pitcher did NOT get a GF.

Some huge number of them will certainly have completed an inning. Ignoring that, you're talking about 875/30 = 29 appearances per team per year, or one every 5.5 games per team.

180 of them did not retire a batter. 41 pitched 2/3 of an inning. 654 pitcher 1/3 of an inning.

I randomly picked 5 of the 41 2/3 inning outings. All 5 completed the 7th inning for their team, and wouldn't be affected by this rule.

I randomly picked 10 of the 654 1/3 inning outings. 9 completed an inning. 1 started an inning (does this rule apply to relievers starting innings clean?).

So using really bad extrapolation, I'd say about 250 such appearances would be eliminated, or around 8 per team per year, once every 20 games. This is what we're trying to legislate away?

SumnerH · Dec 9, 2019

Salem's Lot said:
They seem to want to do everything except fix the actual problem. The pitchers hold on the ball too long. That’s the issue.

It's more that the batters step out of the box too long, isn't it? At least that's what I remember reading as being the biggest culprit time-wise.

Two sides of the same coin, really.

DeadlySplitter · Dec 9, 2019

we were so excited when Selig left, but Manfred really has been a nothingburger of a commissioner.

Yaz4Ever · Dec 9, 2019

SumnerH said:
It's more that the batters step out of the box too long, isn't it? At least that's what I remember reading as being the biggest culprit time-wise.

Two sides of the same coin, really.

That's improved since Nomar retired, no?

Green Monster · Dec 9, 2019

SumnerH said:
It's more that the batters step out of the box too long, isn't it? At least that's what I remember reading as being the biggest culprit time-wise.

Two sides of the same coin, really.

Having trouble hearing the trash can.

InstaFace · Dec 9, 2019

Salem's Lot said:
They seem to want to do everything except fix the actual problem. The pitchers hold on the ball too long. That’s the issue.

Yes it is, but this will at least make a dent, and I think reduce the farce that is the batter-by-batter pitching matchups.

I don't watch a game to see LaRussa or Maddon try to show us how smart they are. I don't enjoy endless commercial breaks for pitching changes, and I certainly don't enjoy top batters getting removed from the game for a brief and minor tactical advantage, only for it to bite a team in the ass later. It used to be "my nine against your nine", and while that hasn't been precisely true in a long time, this improves the extent to which the game is a test of all one team's batters against all the other team's pitchers (and vice-versa), rather than microscopic cherry-picked matchups seeking to decide the highest-leverage opportunities.

Also, there are plenty of funky, idiosyncratic relievers who would still maintain effectiveness and a role in the league. I love funky, idiosyncratic pitchers, but if your shit literally cannot work against one of lefties or righties, you probably deserve to get hammered accordingly on occasion.

edit: For context, I also think that PATs in gridiron football should be required to be a true conversion, i.e. that the player scoring the touchdown should have to kick the extra point. I generally think the emergence of specialists in team sports (to any degree more than, say, a soccer or hockey goalkeeper) is a consequence of bad rule design or league incentives, rather than something that is both predestined and good.

Cesar Crespo · Dec 9, 2019

With rosters expanding, I could see even more pitching changes happening as a result. I kinda like the rule, kinda don't. I'm with Instaface that this change will definitely make a dent.

Lose Remerswaal · Dec 9, 2019

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:
This seems like it would fundamentally alter roster construction and potentially spell the end of the LOOGY. I think most of us would like to see games speed up a bit, but this ain't it. This isn't baseball. You've got 25 guys on a team and I think managers should be able to use them as they see fit. I also worry this brings phantom injuries and other nonsense.

Why can't we just have the damn pitch clock?

26 players in 2020

staz · Dec 13, 2019

SumnerH said:
It's more that the batters step out of the box too long, isn't it?

And the enforcement of that lasted like 6 weeks, IIRC.

At least with a 3 batter minimum, there's no interpretation. Fake injury or illness might work once or twice, but it's not a strategy that can sustain. This could also succeed more subtly, by rebalancing roster construction. With the death of the LOOGY/ROOGY, some of those spots might slide over to hitters, forcing the distribution of OOGY innings on the arms of traditional relievers. The problem is, of course, there will be times when a reliever comes in and clearly doesn't have it. We've all seen it. The 3 batter rule could turn a game in a hurry if problems aren't identified in the bullpen during warmups.

Not sure devising ways to shave minutes off a 3.5 hour game is the right strategy though. Baby steps I know, but it seems younger casual fans don't have the attention span to sit through a 3 hour or even 2.5 hour game either where the ball is in play like 5% of that time, and where 80% of their view is the static CF camera shot of pitcher, batter and umpire only. I've been doing some color commentating in the booth for a low level team the past few summers and have rediscovered just how much is going on when the ball's not in play and you have the best seat in the house: the game speeds up remarkably all by itself. If MLB could figure out a way to bring that immersive element to a flat screen, the hours would literally fly by. Maybe expand the Statcast Broadcast model, bring in VR technology, or at least expand access to multiple cameras (which is already offered during select MLB.TV games). If MLB Advanced Media could figure out a way to stream a live sporting event 17 years ago, there's no reason why they can't bring a much broader range of user-selectable tools to market today.

Sad Sam Jones · Dec 13, 2019

It's such an ill-conceived change... why create a rule that can easily do just the opposite of its intended purpose? The only time it will speed up the game is when the reliever would otherwise have been pulled before 3 batters but instead gets the 3rd batter out. How often will a pitcher be forced to face a third batter, allow him to reach base, and then the manager will go to the bullpen anyway and actually make the game longer... possibly even significantly longer because the inability to match up led to a rally? If they enforced the rules already in the book about the hitter staying in the batter's box and the pitcher coming to the plate, much of the problem would be solved.

Marciano490 · Dec 13, 2019

Just more societal prejudice against left handers.

Lose Remerswaal · Dec 14, 2019

They are gauche.

koufax32 · Dec 14, 2019

Lose Remerswaal said:
They are gauche.

tims4wins · Dec 14, 2019

Ford Frick's Asterisk said:
It's such an ill-conceived change... why create a rule that can easily do just the opposite of its intended purpose? The only time it will speed up the game is when the reliever would otherwise have been pulled before 3 batters but instead gets the 3rd batter out. How often will a pitcher be forced to face a third batter, allow him to reach base, and then the manager will go to the bullpen anyway and actually make the game longer... possibly even significantly longer because the inability to match up led to a rally? If they enforced the rules already in the book about the hitter staying in the batter's box and the pitcher coming to the plate, much of the problem would be solved.

This is a great point

The Mort Report · Dec 14, 2019

Ford Frick's Asterisk said:
It's such an ill-conceived change... why create a rule that can easily do just the opposite of its intended purpose? The only time it will speed up the game is when the reliever would otherwise have been pulled before 3 batters but instead gets the 3rd batter out. How often will a pitcher be forced to face a third batter, allow him to reach base, and then the manager will go to the bullpen anyway and actually make the game longer... possibly even significantly longer because the inability to match up led to a rally? If they enforced the rules already in the book about the hitter staying in the batter's box and the pitcher coming to the plate, much of the problem would be solved.

I totally agree with your point, but I’m guessing the MLB’s view is if the game is longer due to more scoring that’s ok. If there is a higher chance of scoring later in the game it keeps the eyeballs longer if a team is say down 4 heading into the 7th. If a guy comes in cold, gives up 2 walks, suddenly there is more drama since he has to face a third batter. I think it will help the game just a bit two ways

uncannymanny · Dec 15, 2019

I would guess it’s not about total time, but rather flow of broadcast. I’ve experienced several innings over the last couple of years that were just excruciating to watch due to pitching changes (a commercial break attached to each one). If I wasn’t a huge baseball fan I assure you I’d have moved on to other programming. My guess is that they’ve focused group this to death and it’s been identified as a real problem for average and casual viewers (which we on this board tend to forget we absolutely are not).

teddywingman · Dec 15, 2019

I've said this before, but if they really wanted to fix the problem, the team at bat would be allowed a limited number of step-outs from the batter's box. It would force hitters to consider their teammates, and stepping out of the box would become limited to legit something in my eye.

That and pitchers being called for a ball if they don't deliver a pitch in reasonable time.

stepson_and_toe · Dec 15, 2019

The Mort Report said:
I totally agree with your point, but I’m guessing the MLB’s view is if the game is longer due to more scoring that’s ok. If there is a higher chance of scoring later in the game it keeps the eyeballs longer if a team is say down 4 heading into the 7th. If a guy comes in cold, gives up 2 walks, suddenly there is more drama since he has to face a third batter. I think it will help the game just a bit two ways

June 29, 1950: Red Sox--22, PHA--14 with a total 34 hits and 21 walks in 9.0 innings played in 2:50. There were nine pitchers used with five of the changes coming mid-inning.

Try May 1, 1920 when Brooklyn at the Braves was called because of darkness, a 26-inning 1 to 1 tie, with 24 hits and 9 walks and both starters going the route. TOG? 3:50.

You go back in time and you can find a lot of games with high scores or many innings, even a fair number of pitching changes in some. You probably will also see players hustling on an off the field and from the bullpen when changes occur. What you probably didn't see was outfielders doing dances on their way back to the dugout when the inning ends on a flyball. You probably also didn't see players going to the mound, followed by the pitching coach, and finally the manager as he tries to keep his reliever warming up in the pen as long as possible. You didn't see batters stepping out of the box after every pitch to adjust their batting gloves. While the average fastball today is much faster than in earlier days, you don't see the high and tight fastball that you once did. Early Wynn, who was once supposed to have said that he'd throw at his own grandmother if she dug in, was told early in his career by Manager Bucky Harris that he'd be fined $25 every time he didn't brush batters when he got two strikes on them (if you really go back, then pitchers threw underhanded and batters could ask for a low, middle or high pitch)..

Philip Jeff Frye · Dec 15, 2019

stepson_and_toe said:
You go back in time and you can find a lot of games with high scores or many innings, even a fair number of pitching changes in some. You probably will also see players hustling on an off the field and from the bullpen when changes occur. What you probably didn't see was outfielders doing dances on their way back to the dugout when the inning ends on a flyball. You probably also didn't see players going to the mound, followed by the pitching coach, and finally the manager as he tries to keep his reliever warming up in the pen as long as possible. You didn't see batters stepping out of the box after every pitch to adjust their batting gloves. While the average fastball today is much faster than in earlier days, you don't see the high and tight fastball that you once did. Early Wynn, who was once supposed to have said that he'd throw at his own grandmother if she dug in, was told early in his career by Manager Bucky Harris that he'd be fined $25 every time he didn't brush batters when he got two strikes on them (if you really go back, then pitchers threw underhanded and batters could ask for a low, middle or high pitch)..

You also didn't see an hour or more of TV commercials. That's the biggest factor changing length of game but one they're never going to change.

Papelbon's Poutine · Dec 15, 2019

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:
Obviously, the stakes are much lower, but I find it remarkable how fast the game moves at a Sea Dogs game with the pitch clock. I’m a broken record on this, but what about the minor league tests of the pitch clock have been unsuccessful?

Why hasn’t it been brought to MLB yet?

Is it the pitch clock or that they don't take commercial breaks? I've noticed the same attending minor league games, even before the clock and I always wrote it up to the games generally not relying on ad revenue so much.

stepson_and_toe · Dec 15, 2019

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:
I dunno, but they still do kiddie games and relay races and stuff between innings.

Yes, but they are very punctual about getting the participants and gear off the field so the innings start on time.

Red(s)HawksFan · Dec 15, 2019

Papelbon's Poutine said:
Is it the pitch clock or that they don't take commercial breaks? I've noticed the same attending minor league games, even before the clock and I always wrote it up to the games generally not relying on ad revenue so much.

I think part of it is the commercial breaks in MLB. Even if they account for an extra 30 seconds between innings compared to a minor league game with no media concessions made, that's an extra 9-10 minutes added to the length of the game right there.

I'd go further in terms of blaming TV coverage in that the presence of cameras might contribute a bit to the between pitch delays like stepping off the mound or stepping out of the box. Wouldn't shock me at all to find out that players primp and pimp a bit knowing the cameras are on them...more camera time might mean more marketability, at least for the better players. I mean, I'm willing to bet that David Ortiz didn't go through his whole step out to tighten-and-spit-in-the-gloves routine when he was in AA. Minor leaguers stay in the box more because there's no reason not to.

And it probably goes without saying that the absence of too many TV cameras (I think all the minor league games have some cameras even if they're not broadcasting) cuts down on the need to have elaborate pitch signals. The only time they might have to worry about the catcher's signals being seen is if there's a runner on second. Otherwise, they can probably keep them fairly simple.

stepson_and_toe · Dec 20, 2019

Moved to correct thread

jungleboy · Jan 23, 2020

Well-researched article on The Athletic suggesting, among other things, that the three-batter minimum might lengthen games rather than shortening them.

The new 3-batter-minimum rule won’t speed up games — but will have negative, unintended consequences

Some key parts:

The average major-league game lasted three hours and 10 minutes in 2019, breaking the record set in 2017. The number of pitches required to complete the average plate appearance reached a record high in each of the last four years, topping out at 3.93 pitches per plate appearance last year. The frequency of balls in play reached a record low for the eighth year in a row in 2019, with nearly a third of all plate appearances failing to produce a fair ball.

The clear culprit in the latter two cases is the ever-increasing strikeout rate. Yet rather than make a common-sense adjustment to the strike zone that would align with historical precedent and address the problem head-on, MLB has opted for rule changes, and their intrusion upon in-game strategy has been increasingly out of balance with their potential to speed up the game.

There were 38,982 strikeouts in the majors in 2016. The following February, MLB instituted the automatic intentional walk, a rule that impacted just 970 plays in 2017, which set a record for average time of game. There were 40,104 strikeouts in 2017. The following February, the league placed a limit on mound visits, then lowered it the next year. In that second year of the mound-visit rule, the record for average time of game was broken again.

There were 42,823 strikeouts in 2019. In December, Manfred announced the league would institute a three-batter minimum for all pitching appearances in 2020, with exceptions only for injury and pitchers who were removed between innings. If that rule had been in effect in 2019, it would have affected just 691 of the 16,573 pitching changes made.

Here comes the three-batter minimum...

Member

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!

Member

Member

Member

Malt Liquor Picker

Member

MemBer

Member

The Ultimate One

79

Experiencing Furry Panic

Intangible

Member

Urological Expert

Experiencing Furry Panic

He'll cry if he wants to...

PN23's replacement

Member

Member

Looks like Zach Galifianakis

Member

New Member

Member

Homeland Security

Member

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member