Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 34

Thread: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

  1. #1
    RZ Chamber of Commerce Unassisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    13,429

    NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.co...e-interesting/

    Ideas for Making Baseball More Interesting

    By Stephen J. Dubner
    When I was a kid, I loved baseball more than anything, and I’m afraid I mean that literally — more than my family, my friends, even more than my dog. If given the opportunity, I would have played baseball 24 hours a day. And when I couldn’t play it, I would watch it on T.V.
    Now I can barely sit through a whole inning of a game on T.V.

    Judging from the World Series T.V. ratings for the past 40 years — they’ve slipped from a 22.8 rating/57 share in 1968 to 10.6 rating/18 share in 2007 — I am not alone.

    Why? Maybe I and a lot of people have adult-onset A.D.D. and need more stimulation than baseball can offer. Maybe there are just too many other forms of entertainment.

    Or maybe the game is just too boring.

    Is it more boring than it was in 1968?

    No, but it hasn’t changed much since then either. If you are a traditionalist, which I am in many ways, this could be good news. But since sport is entertainment, you have to keep in mind that people get bored watching the same game play out every day.

    Football and basketball may be more innately exciting than baseball, but just as important, they’ve also changed a lot over the past 40 years. They are full of innovation.

    What is baseball’s biggest innovation of the past 40 years? Steroids maybe. Or the specialization of the pitching staff (yawn).

    You may not like all the changes in other sports, but it does keep things interesting. Baseball, meanwhile — well, if you have watched enough of it, you know exactly what’s coming at just about any point in the game. You can predict what the manager will do in a given situation. You can predict what the commentators will say after the play.

    Darren Everson has written a nice piece in the Wall Street Journal about how a few baseball managers are trying some new things, however marginal. Here are a few examples from Everson’s piece:

    1) Having a relief pitcher play the outfield for a batter or two and then come back in and pitch; this gets around the archaic substitution rules — you can’t take a pitcher out of the game and bring him back in — while still letting you practice situational pitching.

    2) Putting an infield shift even on a right-handed batter like Vladimir Guerrero, which means asking any of the three infielders who might field the ball to make a long throw to first.

    3) If bad weather is forecast, don’t waste your starting pitcher; instead, start a bullpen pitcher. More broadly, use relievers to start the game but have them pitch only a few innings, bringing in your “starter” to finish the game off, including innings eight and nine.

    4. Have your pitcher bat eighth instead of ninth so your ninth-place hitter can set things up for the top of the lineup.
    I particularly like what Bill James had to say in Everson’s article about why most managers do the same thing in baseball:

    “A blunder by a manager is a move that is A) unconventional, B) doesn’t work, and C) occurs at a moment of focus in the game,” says Bill James, senior baseball-operations adviser with the Boston Red Sox. “If you put those three things together, you have a blunder. As long as you do what’s conventional, you won’t be accused of a blunder.”

    While none of the above examples are earth-shattering, they’d certainly make the game a bit more fluid and fun to watch. I am guessing that you all can come up with at least a few dozen other potential changes, including rule changes, that would make baseball better without damaging its great tradition.

    A lot of these changes might not have to do with how the game is played but rather how it is presented on T.V.; the long commercial break between each half-inning, for instance, is a gilded invitation to go watch something else.

    I understand that the game is the game and that you don’t want to start installing trampolines in the outfield, for instance. But aren’t there some things that could be done to make people like me who used to love the game want to watch it again?
    /r/reds

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Just The Big Picture macro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    The Bluegrass State
    Posts
    6,150

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    Item #1 from the list above might work, but the outcome might not be pretty if the pitcher can't field and misplays a ball hit to him.

    I like #3, and it makes you wonder why that's not done more. We had a discussion here a year or two ago about unconventional use of pitchers in games. I think the strict policy of saving the "closer" until the 8th or 9th inning is not a good one. If the bases are loaded with none out in the sixth inning of a tie game, bring him in. If you don't, there may not be anything to save three innings later.

    As for the long TV breaks, those are present in every sport, so I'm not sure how that makes baseball any different. I do wish they'd shorten the breaks in all sports, though.

  4. #3
    nothing more than a fan Always Red's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cincy West
    Posts
    4,738

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    There are only 2 changes I would like to see. First, to abolish the DH, and secondly to return the pace of the game back to when most games lasted about 2+ hours.

    The problem is not the game of baseball. The problem lies with many of those today who watch the game with very short attention spans and expectations of constant action and entertainment.

    In baseball, often the little things are really the big things. Many of the newer fans do not realize that, and neither does the media. There's a reason they mostly only show HR's on Baseball Tonight (though to be fair, they seem to have tried to get away from that.)

    My very favorite game to see is a 1-0 thriller, with great pitching and incredible defense. Most fans today seem to prefer a 10-9 slugfest. Just my opinion.

  5. #4
    Danger is my business! oneupper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Back in Florida
    Posts
    8,126

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    Quote Originally Posted by Always Red View Post
    My very favorite game to see is a 1-0 thriller, with great pitching and incredible defense. Most fans today seem to prefer a 10-9 slugfest. Just my opinion.
    I really like a 5-4, 6-5 or 4-3 (like last night) game. Not too long, usually has a lead change or two, several situations with runners on...etc.

    In 1-0 games, usually one or both pitchers are dominating. I sometimes feel bad for the guy on the losing side.
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."

    http://dalmady.blogspot.com

  6. #5
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,288

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    Even the playing field and make the WS games watchable for kids (i.e. start game before 8:30 pm).

  7. #6
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Olathe, KS
    Posts
    13,774

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    Judging from the World Series T.V. ratings for the past 40 years — they’ve slipped from a 22.8 rating/57 share in 1968 to 10.6 rating/18 share in 2007 — I am not alone.
    I hate faulty logic like this.

    In 1968, how many channels were available?

    How about today?

    If you want to measure the popularity of baseball, look at how attendance is steadily increasing each year.

    Baseball doesn't need to be made "more interesting."

  8. #7
    Member smith288's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    New Albany, OH
    Posts
    7,248

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    Im for Instant reply on homeruns, fan interference and traps. Limit it to 2 a game and max the review to 60 seconds to 120 seconds maybe.

  9. #8
    The Lineups stink. KronoRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West N. Carolina
    Posts
    55,509

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    One thing would help baseball.

    The Base Ejector.
    Go Gators!

  10. #9
    Member medford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    2,078

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    I like the idea of a relief pitcher playing the field for a batter or 2 to allow for a left specialist to come in to face a specific batter, IF said pitcher could actually play the field. One could argue how much worse can you get than Dunn in left field (Well man-ram for one), but certainly a guy like Ankeil could have done it. Or Kischnick (sp?) pitched and played the field some. Certainly there are other guys that would be more than servicable in the OF for a batter or 2 if it allowed you to keep them in the game.

    For the Reds, I would think a guy like Marcus McBeth could do this should he ever make it back to the bigs. Perhaps try it out in the minors from time to time to see how a potential reliever would react if given the opportunity to field for a batter or 2.

  11. #10
    2009: Fail Ltlabner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    7,441

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    Two words:

    Landmines in the outfield.
    a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

    I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

  12. #11
    Manliness Personified HumnHilghtFreel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,690

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    For the final out of every inning, special balls will be used. These balls will have been soaked in kerosene and lit on fire for game use.

    Install dunk tanks behind the plate, with one lucky fan sitting on the plank. Give pitchers the option once per inning to dunk them with a single pitch. It counts as a strikeout.

    Players should use steroids to increase offensive producti... oh wait, we might have tried that one already.

    Allow Norris Hopper to hit with an aluminum bat.

  13. #12
    Member blumj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Northern MA
    Posts
    4,560

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    Quote Originally Posted by macro View Post
    We had a discussion here a year or two ago about unconventional use of pitchers in games. I think the strict policy of saving the "closer" until the 8th or 9th inning is not a good one. If the bases are loaded with none out in the sixth inning of a tie game, bring him in. If you don't, there may not be anything to save three innings later.
    The reason you don't see this is practical, teams don't want their best relievers warming up and sitting down and warming up again later on a regular basis, because the additional warmups add wear and tear, even if they don't actually pitch in the game. By the time the bases are loaded in the 6th or 7th inning, it's too late to warm him up in time to resolve the situation, and, if you warm him up every time a few guys get on base in the 6th or 7th inning, he'll get worn out. That's why you see some teams have the Joe Borowskis and Todd Joneses as closers, so they can use their best relievers earlier in the game.
    "Reality tells us there are no guarantees. Except that some day Jon Lester will be on that list of 100-game winners." - Peter Gammons

  14. #13
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    33,784

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    Want WS ratings to go up? Don't start the games at 9pm. Start all games at 8pm est or earlier.

  15. #14
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,749

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    If you read the comments, I'm in there... That's one of the blogs I frequent. Great stuff.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  16. #15
    Member cumberlandreds's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Sterling VA
    Posts
    8,767

    Re: NY Times: Ideas for making baseball more interesting

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Want WS ratings to go up? Don't start the games at 9pm. Start all games at 8pm est or earlier.
    You got that right. They really should start no later than 7:30. I know I haven't watched a complete World Series game live that wasn't on a Saturday night in a long time. People do have to get up and go to work the next day. I can't stay up to nearly midnight and expect to get up at 4:45 and be anywhere close to being productive.
    Reds Fan Since 1971


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25