If the DH stays...

[Kc61]

FWIW, I’m ok with all of the rule changes last year. It’s different, but none of it changed the essence of the game.

Even the 7 inning doubleheaders, made a day of baseball more digestible. DH, no big deal, already part of the game. Three batter rule, extra innings rule, I hardly noticed frankly.

Legislating against the shift is more important. The shift encourages swinging for homers and turns LHH into a disadvantage. Restricting shifting would be far more beneficial than changing any of the COVID rules.

[mth123]

FWIW, I’m ok with all of the rule changes last year. It’s different, but none of it change the essence of the game.

Even the 7 inning doubleheaders, made a day of baseball more digestible. DH, no big deal, already part of the game.
ts
For me, dealing with the shift outweighs all of this. The shift is hurting baseball. It encourages swinging for homers and turns LHH into a disadvantage. Restricting shifting would be far more beneficial than changing any of the COVID rules.

Opposite for me. I don't like the expanded roster making more room for guys who shouldn't be in the big leagues. I hate the extra inning rule. The three batter rule wasn't a Covid Rule, and it did make the games move a little faster, but the concept of it goes against my instincts. Every move has a consequence and I think it should be up to the team to evaluate those trade-offs and do what it wants. I feel the same way about the shift. I agree it has changed the game, but, again, there are trade-offs associated with it. The Reds simply don't have the players capable of taking an approach to offset the shift.

I'd be OK with 7 inning doubleheaders if it meant the fans get 2 games for the price of one, but if getting past Covid is no longer an issue, I suspect we'll be back to the split day/night doubleheaders that require two separate admissions. I can take or leave the DH, but I want both leagues to be the same. It obviously would hurt the DH filled Reds if this rule went back to the way it was.

If I had to pick one rule to change (or I guess in this case I'd like to see enforced) is to get rid of the pine tar that pitchers use to increase the spin rate. If lacking offense is the issue, I think this may be a bigger reason than the shift. There wouldn't be as many swings and misses or times where a guy is fooled by a pitch that darts over the plate for a called strike.

[Kc61]

I didn’t mention the expanded rosters because there’s no chance that sticks. That was a COVID-only response. Agree that 26 man rosters are the way things should go.

On the shift, it’s too difficult to beat. If it were so easy, it wouldn’t have this impact. I think it’s the ultimate menace in the game. Baseball was not intended to be played with a near-total clog on the pull side of the defense.

Also sympathetic to ways to reduce the advantage pitchers have. But I’d rather first get defenders back to their natural positions. That might fix things up well enough.

[Old school 1983]

I didn’t mention the expanded rosters because there’s no chance that sticks. That was a COVID-only response. Agree that 26 man rosters are the way things should go.

On the shift, it’s too difficult to beat. If it were so easy, it wouldn’t have this impact. I think it’s the ultimate menace in the game. Baseball was not intended to be played with a near-total clog on the pull side of the defense.

Also sympathetic to ways to reduce the advantage pitchers have. But I’d rather first get defenders back to their natural positions. That might fix things up well enough.

The shift seems to be more of a loophole in the rules than anything else. The rules didn’t prohibit it because such a measure was never contemplated until recently. It was, for the most part, accepted that players would stay in their natural spots in most situations. And shifts would be used on guys who were all time legends like Ted Williams. Adjust the rules to limit the shift and dial back the juicing of the ball.

[757690]

FWIW, I’m ok with all of the rule changes last year. It’s different, but none of it changed the essence of the game.

Even the 7 inning doubleheaders, made a day of baseball more digestible. DH, no big deal, already part of the game. Three batter rule, extra innings rule, I hardly noticed frankly.

Legislating against the shift is more important. The shift encourages swinging for homers and turns LHH into a disadvantage. Restricting shifting would be far more beneficial than changing any of the COVID rules.

I don’t know how anyone could say that the extra inning rule or the 7 inning game didn’t change the essence of the game.

The extra inning rule literally changes how we decide who wins and loses. It’s an abomination to the essence of the game.

The 7 inning rule changes a core rule of the game, that it lasts 9 innings. Every stat is now corrupted, and the strategy of the game changes drastically. A team that is designed to win in 9 innings is not the same as a team designed to win in 7 games. Another abomination to the essence of the game.

If either of these rules is adopted, I doubt I will care about the game moving forward. I will still watch it casually, occasionally, but it will be impossible for me to care who wins.

[Kc61]

I don’t know how anyone could say that the extra inning rule or the 7 inning game didn’t change the essence of the game.

The extra inning rule literally changes how we decide who wins and loses. It’s an abomination to the essence of the game.

The 7 inning rule changes a core rule of the game, that it lasts 9 innings. Every stat is now corrupted, and the strategy of the game changes drastically. A team that is designed to win in 9 innings is not the same as a team designed to win in 7 games. Another abomination to the essence of the game.

If either of these rules is adopted, I doubt I will care about the game moving forward. I will still watch it casually, occasionally, but it will be impossible for me to care who wins.

Baseball could exist with seven inning games. Baseball could exist with the extra innings rule. They change the parameters of the game, the circumstances of the game. But not its essence.

The essence is a batter with a reasonable chance of striking the ball for a hit. Without that, there is no baseball.

That’s why the shift - along with the pitching prowess of today - threaten baseball. They dramatically limit the main action point of the game - the batter with a fair chance of hitting successfully. And it’ll get worse.

[foster15]

Baseball could exist with seven inning games. Baseball could exist with the extra innings rule. They change the parameters of the game, the circumstances of the game. But not its essence.

The essence is a batter with a reasonable chance of striking the ball for a hit. Without that, there is no baseball.

That’s why the shift - along with the pitching prowess of today - threaten baseball. They dramatically limit the main action point of the game - the batter with a fair chance of hitting successfully. And it’ll get worse.

SMH. If analytics has changed the game to less small ball and more long ball, then what's the problem with the shift to counter it? Seems to me that the analytics that determined swinging for the fences was more efficient, determined this without taking into account the shift. Maybe the shift will bring back small ball. The shift says "If you're going to swing for the fences, you will sacrifice the ability to luck out and have a ground ball sneak through the holes in the infield". If the combination of less small ball along with the shift has taken away "a reasonable chance of striking the ball for a hit" then it's time to counter that by finding more Pete Roses/Rickey Hendersons and less Mark Mcgwires.

All sports continue to evolve and need to be allowed to instead of making drastic changes to the rules to counteract trends that make the game less exciting for a period of time. Let nature take its course.

[Kc61]

SMH. If analytics has changed the game to less small ball and more long ball, then what's the problem with the shift to counter it? Seems to me that the analytics that determined swinging for the fences was more efficient, determined this without taking into account the shift. Maybe the shift will bring back small ball. The shift says "If you're going to swing for the fences, you will sacrifice the ability to luck out and have a ground ball sneak through the holes in the infield". If the combination of less small ball along with the shift has taken away "a reasonable chance of striking the ball for a hit" then it's time to counter that by finding more Pete Roses/Rickey Hendersons and less Mark Mcgwires.

All sports continue to evolve and need to be allowed to instead of making drastic changes to the rules to counteract trends that make the game less exciting for a period of time. Let nature take its course.

If nature takes its course - the spin rates will get even higher; the velocities will get even higher; the defenses will get even more sophisticated.

It will only get worse.

Even “Pete Roses/Rickey Hendersons” wouldn’t necessarily have the reflexes to beat these trends. Let alone average players of that type.

And if that type player is the answer, where are they? Why is the average major league BA down to .245?

Maybe some believe in survival of the fittest, but I believe in entertaining baseball as we’ve had over the years.

[757690]

Baseball could exist with seven inning games. Baseball could exist with the extra innings rule.

Something would exist. It wouldn’t be baseball, imo.

[foster15]

If nature takes its course - the spin rates will get even higher; the velocities will get even higher; the defenses will get even more sophisticated.

It will only get worse.

Even “Pete Roses/Rickey Hendersons” wouldn’t necessarily have the reflexes to beat these trends. Let alone average players of that type.

And if that type player is the answer, where are they? Why is the average major league BA down to .245?

Maybe some believe in survival of the fittest, but I believe in entertaining baseball as we’ve had over the years.

Averages are down because analytics determined that the long ball was better than small ball and players were developed with that strategy in mind. I still believe baseball was meant to be a game where a balance of all type of skills is the most efficient way to win. Soon I hope, due to the shift, it might be time to start developing players who think more about getting on base, and stealing one or two bases again. That .245 batting average has more to do with hitting philosophies than it does the pitchers.

Also, if pitchers are so good now, that's it's impossible to get to them with good fundamental hitting, then make adjustments that have been done in the past without changing the basics. Lower the mound, shrink the strike zone.

[mth123]

If nature takes its course - the spin rates will get even higher; the velocities will get even higher; the defenses will get even more sophisticated.

It will only get worse.

Even “Pete Roses/Rickey Hendersons” wouldn’t necessarily have the reflexes to beat these trends. Let alone average players of that type.

And if that type player is the answer, where are they? Why is the average major league BA down to .245?

Maybe some believe in survival of the fittest, but I believe in entertaining baseball as we’ve had over the years.

I don't think Nature has as much to do with Spin Rates as Pine Tar does. Agree on Velocities.

[Kc61]

I don't think Nature has as much to do with Spin Rates as Pine Tar does. Agree on Velocities.

Nature including the natural progression of coaching/pitching enhancement techniques.

[Kc61]

Averages are down because analytics determined that the long ball was better than small ball and players were developed with that strategy in mind. .

Analytics determinations are not made in a vacuum. Analytics disfavor “small ball” in part because modern pitching and defenses suppress rallies. Shifting, for example, makes multi-hit innings harder. So you’re better off trying to hit “over the shift” for a homer using launch angle techniques.

Advanced pitching and defense are among the CAUSES for the home run approach. There’s a reason analytics made the determination you rely upon.

[mth123]

Nature including the natural progression of coaching/pitching enhancement techniques.

Which means use Pine Tar. Just like Take Steroids and Steal Signs was a "coaching technique" on the offensive side.

[Kc61]

Which means use Pine Tar. Just like Take Steroids and Steal Signs was a "coaching technique" on the offensive side.

Again, I’ll take your word for it. But whatever, the development of pitching and defense - cheating or not - is skewing the game. There’s not enough you can do on the offensive side to effectively counter the pitching/defense “advancement.” If the best answer is reliance on launch angle, the game suffers IMO.

The shift is particularly oppressive because it’s most effective against LHH. It suppresses hits, but not evenly.

If baseball chose instead to legislate in the pitching area - whether pine tar, or the distance of the mound for example, that might be helpful too.