Cubs/Sox Question
- Thread starter Wassup13
- Start date
I was a big baseball fan as a kid but not so much now. If baseball could speed up the game I would watch all the time.
They should
Put a pitch clock on the pitcher
State a batter can never step out of the box during an at bat.
Reinstitute letting the catcher block home plate.
Many will disagree but I hate challenging a call after it's been made. It kills momentum.
I want all hitters to know how to bunt.
Many will disagree with me but all games should have.the DH.
I especially like not letting the batter step out of the box (see Paulie) and I hate those instant replay challenges. When TV stations first got video tape, Jack Brickhouse noted that it showed how good the umpires were. Now, they're afraid to make a call because Jack Buck will be al over them.
Hooray for the pitch clodk.
I can't say I agree with much you say here and I will explain why.
1. Forget about the pitch clock. It's a gimmick. They have clocks in MLB stadiums. Have you ever actually watched to see how many pitches are thrown after it expires? Actually it's only a few. And of those that do happen after the time allotted, some occur because of a timeout or other reason. Having a pitch clock may save seconds or maybe a minute per game.
2. I am OK with a batter stepping out of the box. I like that mental battle. That should be controlled by the umpire, not by rule. An ump can order a player to get in the box. Don't need a rule for it and it won't save much time either.
3. I am not sure how having the catcher block the plate saves time. But, I know you didn't put it there for that reason. Yeah, I'm good with a catcher blocking the plate...IF he already has the ball. And if the catcher is allowed to block the plate, the the runner should be allowed to bowl him over, like the good old days. You would be surprised how many former professional players don't like the current rule. Catchers may not be a part of that group, however.
4. I am OK with some challenges, such as fair or foul balls. Maybe a close play or two. But, if it must stay, one challenge per team per game, period.
5. All hitters knowing how to bunt is not going to happen. Have you been paying attention to how hitters approach at bats in recent years? Homerun swings with 2 strikes on the hitter and the tying run on 3rd base with less than two outs. You see it in almost every game.
So, how do we speed up the game? I see, you didn't include the biggest culprits of why games take so long to play.
Largest culprit - All the mound visits and pitching changes. Easily the biggest problem. Look at box scores after games. It is pretty common to view one and see 10 pitchers having pitched in the game. That is 8 pitching changes. It takes somewhere around 3 minutes for a manager to walk out to the mound, make the change and have the new pitcher come in and throw 8 warmup pitches before the game starts back up. Multiply that by 8 and you have at least 24 minutes right there. That doesn't even count the mound visits that don't result in a change of pitcher. Possibly 30 minutes altogether right there. You could cut it by a third and still save 20 minutes a game.
Second largest culprit(s) - All the deep counts in what seems like every at bat. Current hitters take so many pitches and so many good pitches, it's almost criminal. I still don't understand why a guy would take two strikes and give himself one swing and expect to be successful. Lots of foul balls too. Add to that all the strikeouts in a game. To me, it's embarrassing to see teams strikeout so much. Again, homerun, walk or strikeout seems to rule. It takes time for all those strikeouts too. There are a lot of guys in the HOF who were first ball hitters or early in the count hitters. The saying was, "if the first pitch is good, go after it. It might be the only good pitch you get in the at bat"
Current launch angle swings and other BS is behind all the strikeouts. And that is at least adding 15 to 20 minutes to each game.
The third thing that is never, ever talked about is more time in-between innings for more TV commercials. No question it is longer. That has probably added 12 to 15 minutes more to games too. How many times have you seen a first pitch of an inning missed by the broadcast because commercials ran too long?
You take care of these three things first and games will get played at a much more rapid pace.
Incidentally, MLB has been showing past WS games all spring and summer. A while back they showed the videotape telecast of the 4th game of the 1969 WS between the Orioles and Mets. The game went 10 innings with the Mets winning it in the bottom of the 10th 2-1. I watched the whole game. Tom Seaver pitched all 10 innings (think about that for a minute) for the Mets giving up 6 hits. The Orioles sent four guys to the mound that day. The Mets got 10 hits. That game took 2 hours and 33 minutes to complete. Guys didn't stand up at the plate and wait on pitches. They went up there to hit. A game like that today would take 4 hours to play.
I am very sorry for the long post. I love baseball. But I hate what it has become.
Last edited:
LT,
Great points you make. I still want a rule a batter has to stay in the box for the entire at bat. Umps don't enforce it so we have to. If the batter steps out of the box it's an automatic strike added to the count.
Still want a pitch clock. Once the catcher receives the pitch, the pitcher has 20 seconds to deliver the next pitch or it's an automatic ball.
Great points you make. I still want a rule a batter has to stay in the box for the entire at bat. Umps don't enforce it so we have to. If the batter steps out of the box it's an automatic strike added to the count.
Still want a pitch clock. Once the catcher receives the pitch, the pitcher has 20 seconds to deliver the next pitch or it's an automatic ball.
Jack Buck's been dead for 18 years
This is a great opportunity for a really nasty shot at Joe Buck but I will pass. While I can't stand old Joe, he was a very good sport ridiculing himself on Brockmire.
B-u-e-h-r-l-e. But, who's paying attention?
The worst pitcher, catcher battery I ever saw as far as taking too much time between pitches was, Britt Burns and Carlton Fisk. It was so painful to watch that. Hell, Burns would lose his hat on every other pitch, it seemed, and Fisk just moved slowly anyway. Fisk took a lot of time in the batter's box too.
I would be interested to see how they formed that calculation. I find it hard to believe Buehrle took that long. I am wondering if they just take the total time the pitcher is on the mound, minus the time it takes for balls put in play and divide it by number of pitches. I don't know. But, if that's how they do it, the result isn't really correct.
There are so many variables, it's hard to get a correct reading. For instance, let's say a guy fouls a ball off. The pitch clock starts to run again. The ump throws in a new ball. The pitcher doesn't like the ball and throws it back and the ump throws him another. If the clock is still running during all that there is no way he gets the next pitch off in 20 seconds or less or even goes into his windup or stretch.
I think it should be calculated only when there is a pitch and nothing happens and then the catcher throws the ball back to the pitcher for the next pitch. Nothing else should count in the calculation. I don't know if that is how it's done. But, to me, that's the true time between pitches.And that's how it should be done.
yes, but some pitchers throw more balls in the dirt, some allow more contact with foul balls. There are many variables that could be considered, not just getting it and throwing it.
We will have to disagree in the batter in the box.
A pitch clock is not something new. The first one I saw at a stadium was when I played in the National Baseball Congress tournament in Wichita, KS in 1980. They played that tourney at what was the Cubs AAA Wichita Aeros stadium.
It was a 20 second clock. The rule was, the pitcher had to be into his windup or stretch before the clock expired or a ball was awarded the batter. It wasn't based on when the pitcher released the ball. I didn't see one case where a batter was awarded a ball. But pitchers in general worked faster then than they do today.
If there is ever a pitch clock in MLB, I would suspect it would work the same way.
You really can't start the clock when the catcher receives the ball. You have to do it when he throws it back to the pitcher. And it should only be started when the catcher throws it to the pitcher and not when the ump throws a new one in.
And you just made my point. I am suspect of the calculation and would like to know the parameters of the study. I explained in another post of how I think it should be calculated.
And the actual test is how long it takes a pitcher to go into his windup or stretch after he has the ball or after the catcher releases it to him for the next pitch. The pitcher doesn't control any of the other things when not in possession of the ball.
Well I disagree, some pitchers due to the reasons I stated and other variables just take longer to get through an outing. I agree some get it and throw it in less time and that shorten games, but others are killing you slowly for other reasons, which should be factored in.
That's all fine and good. But the article doesn't say how the calculation was made. Let's find that out.
I really don't see how anyone could make a true calculation if the pitcher doesn't have the ball. Some catchers and umpires work faster too. I get that part.
But if you really want to get into the weeds, let's find out which catchers move more slowly and which umpiring crews work faster. If that is a factor, we can't pin this on pitchers alone. I am well aware some pitchers work faster than others.
Shorter games = less concessions sold. But I like the sentiment.
I want all hitters to know how to bunt.
Amen!
Have at it, I'm more concerned with how long a game takes when a specific pitcher is on the mound. I'm less inclined to care how he gets there.
The real question here is how does baseball speed up games.
It's funny. I just read two articles about it. The average time for a MLB game to be played in 2019 was 3:05:35. That was up from 3:00:44 in 2018 which was largely due to new restrictions on mound visits when a pitcher wasn't removed.
Sure, some people want pitch clocks. But even if you shave a second off time between each pitch you save maybe 5 minutes per game. How wonderful is that? Three hours to play a game instead of three hours and five minutes. These are some of the same people who like the idea of pitchers not throwing pitches for an intentional walk and just sending the hitter to first base. Saves you maybe 30 seconds and doesn't happen in every game.
Guys, I talked about REAL solutions to save real time. By the way, one of the articles I just read said the additional time for commercials is also a factor. I already pointed it out and I guarantee you, the additional commercials add much more time to the games than pitchers working more slowly or guys stepping out of the box.
I am not saying all of the ideas are bad. I just disagree with some and none of the ones suggested, other than the ones I pointed out, really save significant time. All the mound visits and pitching changes are killing the game more than anything else. You could easily shave at least 20-25 minutes off games if you change the rules with mound visits. I do like the idea of a new pitcher having to face at least three hitters or being used to end an inning. This will make managers work more and think ahead more. This total BS of one pitcher facing one hitter and another one coming in to face another hitter has got to go. I do not like the micro-managing that is being done.
It's funny. I just read two articles about it. The average time for a MLB game to be played in 2019 was 3:05:35. That was up from 3:00:44 in 2018 which was largely due to new restrictions on mound visits when a pitcher wasn't removed.
Sure, some people want pitch clocks. But even if you shave a second off time between each pitch you save maybe 5 minutes per game. How wonderful is that? Three hours to play a game instead of three hours and five minutes. These are some of the same people who like the idea of pitchers not throwing pitches for an intentional walk and just sending the hitter to first base. Saves you maybe 30 seconds and doesn't happen in every game.
Guys, I talked about REAL solutions to save real time. By the way, one of the articles I just read said the additional time for commercials is also a factor. I already pointed it out and I guarantee you, the additional commercials add much more time to the games than pitchers working more slowly or guys stepping out of the box.
I am not saying all of the ideas are bad. I just disagree with some and none of the ones suggested, other than the ones I pointed out, really save significant time. All the mound visits and pitching changes are killing the game more than anything else. You could easily shave at least 20-25 minutes off games if you change the rules with mound visits. I do like the idea of a new pitcher having to face at least three hitters or being used to end an inning. This will make managers work more and think ahead more. This total BS of one pitcher facing one hitter and another one coming in to face another hitter has got to go. I do not like the micro-managing that is being done.
ONCE AGAIN
Who do you got? Bryant or Moncada?
------'
Cubs/Sox Question. It's a short 60 game baseball season this year. Who do you think puts up better offensive stats this year - Bryant or Moncada??
I got Moncada.
Who do you got? Bryant or Moncada?
------'
Cubs/Sox Question. It's a short 60 game baseball season this year. Who do you think puts up better offensive stats this year - Bryant or Moncada??
I got Moncada.
I’m gonna eat some crow here. Said I wasn’t interested. I’m watching and I’m interested. Sox better get their s together. It’s only a 60 game season boys. I’m watching anything that’s on ESPN and I’m enjoying it.
As some of us said before, the Sox don't have enough pitching to win yet. Twins showed them who's gonna be boss in that division.
Let's see how the Sox 4 and 5 do before come to that conclusion, I like those two at the back end of the rotation.
Similar threads
