Of the rule changes that have been implemented or proposed, here's my power ranking. I'm sure I'm leaving a few out, so feel free to add.
- The good:
- Three-batter rule for relievers. A legitimate improvement.
- Pitch clock/pickoff limitations. Almost an unalloyed good.
- Bigger bases. Very subtle difference, mostly positive.
- Challenge system. Obviously the implementation is sometimes wanting, but this improved the sport.
- The mixed:
- Roster limits on pitchers and position players. Doesn't the three-batter rule do pretty much everything we need here?
- Infielder positioning rules. Adds complexity to the rulebook for a subtle gain, but I do think that the shift-caused BABIP Crisis was something that needed addressing. I wonder if just saying that infielders needed to have their feet on the dirt (in either direction) at the time of the pitch would have sufficed.
- The Ohtani rule. I feel like this is fine, but in its violation of the sense of what it means for a player to be "in the game," it points down the primrose path to things like Golden At Bat.
- The intriguing:
- Lose DH when you pull SP (the "double hook"). Has some baseball logic to it that makes it feel as much like a return to the traditional game as an aberration.
- Ball-strike challenge system. Clearly better than straight robo-umps, but I think the game theoretical dimensions need worked.
- The bad:
- The Manfred Man. I get that extra innings pose real logistical and roster challenges that need addressing, but I think that the league not using this in the postseason speaks volumes. It also points down the primrose path to things like...
- The insane:
- Golden At Bat. What even is this? This completely jettisons the entire sense of the sport. Where does the lineup pick up again after such an AB? It makes our statistical comparisons insane. If you GAB a hitter who is on base, do you PR for them but leave them in the game? If you GAB for another player, are they removed? WTF?