MLB, MLBPA discussing restoring extra-innings "ghost runner"

edoug

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
6,007
I would add doubleheaders or getaway days with a team having a game the next day.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
View: https://twitter.com/jaysonst/status/1503459330846253057


I would be fine with this if they played at least 1-2 extra innings normally, and then, say, beginning in the 12th did this. Not a fan of it in the 10th inning at all.
Not sure if you read the article (i know it's subscription only) but they are talking about it not being in the 10th:

One question, even if the rule is enacted, is what inning it would go into effect. It is possible that, rather than using it in all extra innings, the ghost runner wouldn’t be used until the 11th inning or even the 12th.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
I'm glad that they're revisiting this. When they first introduced it I hated the idea, but quickly warmed up to it. There is little exciting about extra innings until someone gets into scoring position. Both teams have the same opportunity and while it may be true that the strategy might differ depending on whether you are the home or visiting team, that can be said for other situations as well.
 

DGreenwood

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 2, 2003
2,445
Seattle
They should follow the NHL's lead. Play up to three extra innings and if there isn't a winner, go to home run derby.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,685
San Diego
I'm glad that they're revisiting this. When they first introduced it I hated the idea, but quickly warmed up to it. There is little exciting about extra innings until someone gets into scoring position. Both teams have the same opportunity and while it may be true that the strategy might differ depending on whether you are the home or visiting team, that can be said for other situations as well.
Not sure I agree with that one (see: Game 3, 2018). Hopefully if they do implement anything, it's for the regular season only.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
Yes, like the joy of making a four hour game six.

I was pleasantly surprised by how much I liked the ghost runner because you had multiple games that had back and forth runs in extras. But would be perfectly happy with it being bumped to the 11th or 12th for the sake of @mikeford.
 

edoug

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
6,007
Why is Stark calling it a ghost runner? It's a real runner who gets placed on base. Ghost runners are when you don't have a physical runner on a base, but you act as though there were for scoring/force purposes (usually because you're playing a very short-handed pickup game as a kid). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_runner_rule
Better than calling them 'runner of ill repute". Or " person born on second base and act like they hit a double."
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
I'm glad that they're revisiting this. When they first introduced it I hated the idea, but quickly warmed up to it. There is little exciting about extra innings until someone gets into scoring position. Both teams have the same opportunity and while it may be true that the strategy might differ depending on whether you are the home or visiting team, that can be said for other situations as well.
I agree with this. I remember this article early on helped sway me from "This is a disgrace" to "This is interesting." Today I've come around to: "Despite its oddities I like the new extra inning rule and hope it stays for regular season games only."

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29558236/mlb-new-extra-innings-rule-here-surprise-glorious

In part, the variety reflects different teams' attitudes. The Royals bunted, which seems in character. The A's didn't bunt, which seems in character. But once these scenarios moved from abstractions to real life, it became immediately evident how much variety the situations themselves produce. The Angels had the bottom of their order up; the A's had the heart of their order up. That makes a huge difference. The Blue Jays had a pinch runner on second; the Rays had a catcher running on second. The Mets faced a relief pitcher who struck out 13 batters per nine innings last year; the Braves faced a relief pitcher who struck out 6½ per nine. In their 10th inning, the Pirates had a leadoff hitter with 38 career sacrifices and 21 career homers; in the 11th, they had a leadoff hitter with no career sacrifices, who hit 37 homers last year.
Not sure I agree with that one (see: Game 3, 2018). Hopefully if they do implement anything, it's for the regular season only.
Yes, I am confident that like in the NHL and NFL the overtime/extra inning rules would be different between regular and postseasons, and like last season this "extra inning rule" would only be in place during regular season games.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
7,878
Boston, MA
I prefer the Manfred Man. And I warmed up to the idea after not seeing guys swinging for the fences and coming up short for 5 innings straight.
 

edoug

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
6,007
What I would give to hear Eck bust out with, "Look at __________ standing out there at second base acting like he hit a double"
Yeah, that would be hilarious.
I heard someone start using the term "zombie runner" which kind of works. Also partial "bastard of the basepaths".
"bastard of the basepaths", that is awesome. I don't think Eck would say that not in the air. I could actually hear Vin Scully saying it though.
 

ookami7m

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,657
Mobile, AL
"Zombie Runner" is the preferred nomenclature from the Effectively Wild podcast crew - Ghosts are invisible, but you can clearly see this abomination.
 

mikeford

woolwich!
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2006
29,519
St John's, NL
Yes, like the joy of making a four hour game six.
How often does this happen that this is a serious problem that needed fixing? Twice a season, if that?

The 07 Sox, the poster children for running up the count and games taking forever, played 7 extra inning games all season and 2 of them eclipsed 4 hours. 2 games of 162. This is not a problem that needs solving.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
How often does this happen that this is a serious problem that needed fixing? Twice a season, if that?

The 07 Sox, the poster children for running up the count and games taking forever, played 7 extra inning games all season and 2 of them eclipsed 4 hours. 2 games of 162. This is not a problem that needs solving.
I don't think the push for this is coming from the "games take too long" crowd. I think the push is coming from GMs and managers that don't want to have extra inning games screw up their pitching staff for a week, particularly as we get deeper into an era in which every 9-inning game sees 4-5+ pitchers used per side. Their concern is pitcher health more so than pace or length of play.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,288
AZ
I don't think the push for this is coming from the "games take too long" crowd. I think the push is coming from GMs and managers that don't want to have extra inning games screw up their pitching staff for a week, particularly as we get deeper into an era in which every 9-inning game sees 4-5+ pitchers used per side. Their concern is pitcher health more so than pace or length of play.
Yep, was just coming to post the same thing. I think 5 to 6 pitchers for 9 innings is a thing that's going to stay and it isn't going anywhere. One 16 inning game can really crush a team.
 

Marceline

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2002
6,441
Canton, MA
Fair, but are games likely to end more quickly if each team starts with a runner on 2nd? If so, why?
I suspect it would result in a higher level of scoring variance per inning, which would make it less likely for the score to remain tied. But I'd be interested to see if this has been analyzed since the rule was put in.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,288
AZ
Fair, but are games likely to end more quickly if each team starts with a runner on 2nd? If so, why?
I think you're asking whether the rule actually shortens games? I would think the answer is obvious. The chance of scoring at least a run in a half inning goes from 28.6 percent with nobody on to start the inning to 61.4 percent. The average number of runs goes from .4 to 1.1. I would think it obvious that the more chances of scoring runs and the greater likelihood of scoring multiple runs increases the chances that a game will end, since you are significantly reducing the number of zero run half innings.

Here's fangraphs with stats. https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-runner-on-second-in-extras-rule-has-worn-out-its-welcome/

Here's tango run expectancy in various scenarios -- a few years old but still pretty stark: http://www.tangotiger.net/re24.html
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,923
Yeah, I just looked at how long Sox extra innings games went in 2021 v 2019 and there was a significant difference, much more than I realized.


2021: 12, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 10, 12, 10, 11, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10

2019: 11, 12, 11, 10, 13, 11, 10, 17, 10, 12,10, 10, 10, 15, 15, 11, 11
 
Last edited:

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
Exactly. That’s good for viewers and pitching staffs alike.

I know we talk a lot about money being the root of all evil in sports. But unlike the other major sports leagues, MLB’s biggest foe as it seeks to adapt to 21st century norms is its own insular, and often whitewashed, culture. For all the beauty in the game, the strong gravitational pull to put it up on a pedestal like some piece of fragile artwork has always been its Achilles heel – and the lack of leadership has been glaring.

For all the things that have happened to the game over the last 30 years—labor strife, the BALCO and PED scandals, the Astros cheating—for me the moment that encapsulates baseball’s retrograde mindset was Bud Selig throwing his hands up when both teams ran out of pitchers in the ASG, calling off the game because no one was able to reconcile how to alter tradition so the league could continue its beloved midsummer classic and otherwise meaningless exhibition game.

Solutions do exist, guys. You just need a little vision and leadership to get there. This isn’t that. But it’s at least a start.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,600
02130
Yep, was just coming to post the same thing. I think 5 to 6 pitchers for 9 innings is a thing that's going to stay and it isn't going anywhere. One 16 inning game can really crush a team.
Whenever this happened (thinking of the Chris Davis pitching game in like 2012 in particular, but there are numerous examples) I always felt like if I were managing and the 12th inning came around I would just go to position players pretty quickly rather than wear out guys who I planned to use the next day. I know that's probably not optimal strategy if you compare the WPA in the scenarios but it felt like the increased chance of winning one game with a tired bullpen guy was not worth reducing your chances in the games following, or having an injury.

Anyway, I like this rule in the regular season because it means managers are less likely to have to make that consideration and can manage the team with the goal of winning the game rather than saving players for later, which should be encouraged.
 

SoxJox

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2003
7,082
Rock > SoxJox < Hard Place
Alternatively, why can't they just institute ties for the regular season, and then some form of the new rule for post-season, where a win is required? At least that potentially would mean not needlessly chewing up players' health (particularly pitchers).
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Alternatively, why can't they just institute ties for the regular season, and then some form of the new rule for post-season, where a win is required? At least that potentially would mean not needlessly chewing up players' health (particularly pitchers).
After nine innings or would it be perhaps after twelve innings, sort of like an overtime period? I'm not crazy about the idea, but it's an idea.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,600
02130
I like the idea of some ties but American fans are allergic to them and I doubt they would ever put them in.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,288
AZ
I like the idea of some ties but American fans are allergic to them and I doubt they would ever put them in.
Yeah, I think it will never happen. We just don't have a sense of a "good" tie like in soccer. People paying $400 for a good ticket are probably not going to take too well to it, but I would support it. I thought it was fine in hockey.

Then again, if I were king the first thing I would do is eliminate the time out in all sports, so I don't think I'm exactly the guy who the advertisers that are the reason sports exist would really look to for guidance.
 

BornToRun

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2011
17,321
God strike me dead because I actually grew to like the ghost runner. Won’t be upset if they stick with it.

Edit: And no ties. Ever. Not even once.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
Can’t believe I’m saying this but on one of his recent podcasts Bill Simmons (or maybe it was House) had a pretty good idea, I thought, which was to do extra innings by total bases instead of runs. So, if all the away team does in the top of the 10th is hit a double, then the home team in the bottom of the 10th just needs to get a guy to third to win, and if they get a guy to second the game remains “tied” and the teams move on to the next inning. Would make most games end in the 10th, and could lead to some interesting strategy calls too (if you’re the home team and know you just need to get a guy to second, maybe you try to bunt for a hit and then steal instead of swinging for the fences, etc.).
 

BornToRun

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2011
17,321
Can’t believe I’m saying this but on one of his recent podcasts Bill Simmons (or maybe it was House) had a pretty good idea, I thought, which was to do extra innings by total bases instead of runs. So, if all the away team does in the top of the 10th is hit a double, then the home team in the bottom of the 10th just needs to get a guy to third to win, and if they get a guy to second the game remains “tied” and the teams move on to the next inning. Would make most games end in the 10th, and could lead to some interesting strategy calls too (if you’re the home team and know you just need to get a guy to second, maybe you try to bunt for a hit and then steal instead of swinging for the fences, etc.).
I think I’ll just stick with deciding who wins by amount of runners who touch home.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
I thought the runner on 2nd worked well in keeping regular season games from stretching onward forever. Playoffs can use the old rules. Works for me.
 

Manuel Aristides

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2009
224
This stuff is an abomination and a total perversion of baseball. Please stop trying to fix things that aren't broken.
Just wanted to +1 this. Not really trying to talk anyone into it, I get the reasons people want the unearned baserunner, I just have too many romantic memories of staying up late watching games to be happy about the change. Didn't feel broken to me.

That said, when they inevitably expand this to the playoffs, I expect you all to be on my side of this. The memory of '04 demands it.
 

Sausage in Section 17

Poker Champ
SoSH Member
Mar 17, 2004
2,087
This stuff is an abomination and a total perversion of baseball. Please stop trying to fix things that aren't broken.
I hear you, but I also think the extreme specialization of relief pitching over the last 40 years has "perverted" the game from it's prior form. When both teams can bring in a parade of guys throwing 96+, the likelihood of runs scoring seems to have been radically reduced. I certainly have enjoyed staying up until the wee hours many times, but I guess over time, as I see how the strain and overload of these games can cause injuries, not just for pitchers, and how it can alter travel, rest, and other factors within a season that is already a complete grind, I say mercy for the players. Sometimes things do get broken, and it is usually them. It seems like they break more often than they used to.

But in the playoffs? Never.