MLB 2023 Season

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

Nobody's comparing baseball to commercials. They're comparing the non-baseball stuff like stepping out of the batter's box on every pitch and adjusting and re-adjusting your batting glove a few times or pitchers walking around the mound or taking their sweet old time between pitches. That stuff is not baseball - even if it's done by baseball players during a baseball game. That stuff is an unnecessary time suck. The pitch clock has removed 30 minutes of that stuff from the average game. And, according to coaches and players and a whole lot of people way smarter than me, the gameplay that remains is largely unaffected.

Do you miss the 30 minutes of guys adjusting themselves or stepping out over and over and over again or taking a minute between pitches? I ask this seriously because that's the stuff the pitch clock has eliminated.

I have to agree with this. The pitch clock did not change the game itself. It did make the game more enjoyable, however, except for those who liked the increasingly snail-like pace of it. Unfortunately for them, they seem to be in the vast minority, if I may tweak that phrase.

[Westheim]

Anybody seen Pedro Baez, lately?

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Westheim

Anybody seen Pedro Baez, lately?

That is an amazing video that I have seen before but enjoy each view. For cryin' out loud, Pedro, will you pitch the damn thing already?

That is exactly the thing that we are talking about here. Man, you really need to have literally nothing to do to sit through and waste a minute and 50 seconds waiting for any action at all to take place.

Or you are doing something else. Me, for example, I might be playing OOTPB at the same time. But most viewers, at home but especially at the ballpark, want action! Not posing, strolling, and adjusting oneself.

Likely, that pitch was a ball or a called strike, followed by another minute or more of that guy goofing around up there. Jeez, if I were NOT playing OOTPB, I would be picking up my TV Guide! (Not literally, anymore, but figuratively.)

Sorry, and this is from a traditionalist, but the pitch clock was way overdue.

[Amazin69]

1. The pitch clock was not necessary to improve the pace of play. The rules were already in place; it was simply that the umps were not enforcing them. To claim this is some brilliant innovation is silly.

2. To use this one theoretical improvement to justify all of Manfred's other ****ery (sure now that we have 24 teams in the playoffs, the season doesn't end until Thanksgiving, but hey, pitch clock!) is disingenuous at best, and flat-out stupid at worst.

3. I'm sorry, but I refuse to wet myself about "oooh, the games were sooooo long!" An extra 90 seconds each half-inning for GKR to talk baseball never seemed unduly burdensome, especially as compared to actual offenders such as stuffing the adbreaks so full that you could hit the head, scratch your head and then get some head before the action resumed.

There is a difference between a few seconds here and there and a giant blob of waste at regular intervals. And what the hell was so all-fired important at 10.00 that you have to start crying if the game isn't over then?

(Sorry, but while it may be appropriate that a Yankee fan is trying to declare victory through majority rule, I still rather dislike having my opinions demeaned on that basis alone. You may disagree with my opinions, but I would rather you didn't mock me for them, tyvm,

Also, "vast majority" my buttocks. The highest figure I've seen [in an IMO unscientific study, as "opt-in" polls are inherently flawed] was 65-35 in favor. Not even 2-1 in favor. Trashing 35% of the population as a "vast minority" seems like a very bad idea, for what I should hope are obvious reasons.)

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Amazin69

2. To use this one theoretical improvement to justify all of Manfred's other ****ery (sure now that we have 24 teams in the playoffs, the season doesn't end until Thanksgiving, but hey, pitch clock!) is disingenuous at best, and flat-out stupid at worst.

When did anyone try to use one positive to justify every rule change? I only support the rules to speed the game. I haven't read any post here trumpeting everything Manfred has done. I have been on record as being against the shift rules for example. I don't like the extra playoff teams. But I'm not blind to the benefit of having more teams w/something to play for later in the year.

[Amazin69]

Originally Posted by Westheim

Anybody seen Pedro Baez, lately?

Hardly a fair comparison. Baez is dealing with a runner on second, so not only are the signals more complicated, but he has to fake two throws to prevent the runner from gaining a lead. Also, the presence of not only a network crew but two sideline reporters (Rosenthal, Verducci) presumably means that Baez was working during a playoff game, where it is hardly odd that players don't want to rush full speed ahead, what with this being a skosh more important than a SPRING TRAINING GAME.

(The video was uploaded "6 months ago", thus no later than March 23rd.)

Also, the ump let David Ross take at least 10 practice cuts and step out, twice. But sure, it's all Baez's fault. All Hail the Blessed Pitch Clock!

(And I'm sure that Joe Buck would have been griping about Baez even if he were as white as David Ross. Letting a white guy have a total pass for timewasting and dumping on the Latino doesn't show any unconscious bias, nuh-huh!)

[Amazin69]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

Sports is better enjoyed live, not taped.

And I don't equate it to salmonella.

I do think the for some reason popular "I prefer more mistakes" rationalization one of the lamest excuses I've ever heard. That is never used in just about any aspect in life. You want your pizzeria to get 3 of your 5 toppings correct instead of all 5? Cause, you know, error is part of life. You want surgeon's success rate to be 90% over 98%? Cause, you know, error is part of life. You want 80% of your paycheck instead of 100%? Cause, you know, error is part of life.

Its an asinine take. Sorry to be so blunt. I can take people just saying they like tradition. But making up a phony excuse that mistakes are preferrable is trying to find justification for a position you know isn't based in logic, but sentiment. And again, sentiment is fine. It's not right or wrong. But the "I like everyone trying their best to only have one nimrod screw it all up due to their incompetence/bias/humanity" position is just asinine.

Nobody is saying they WANT errors. That is a truly asinine take, and a disgusting way for you to smear those who disagree with you. The point is that they would rather have decisions be made by human beings rather than by machines, regardless of whether the machines allegedly make fewer "errors"…when measured against standards calibrated by human beings, anyhow. (Robo-umps could be squeezing batters all night long, anyhow.)

And your "logic v. sentiment" condescension is just as "asinine" and insulting. So at least you're being consistent.

You can be proud of that while getting heart-surgery from a robot, I suppose.

(Yes, some robots are used in some surgeries, but you know that's not what I'm saying. Don't let that impede your flow of insults ["phony excuse", "trying to find justification"], though.)

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by Amazin69

1. The pitch clock was not necessary to improve the pace of play. The rules were already in place; it was simply that the umps were not enforcing them. To claim this is some brilliant innovation is silly.

Apparently the pitch clock was necessary... since the umps weren't enforcing the existing rules.

Why weren't they enforcing them? Good question. Maybe laziness. Maybe protest. Maybe they were hard to enforce. May they were a bit fuzzy. I don't know, but I can guess.

The pitch clock is not fuzzy. And it's right there for everyone to see whether it's being enforced or not. It's basic and fairly easy to understand. And it's easy to enforce.

Had the original rules which were designed to speed games up been enforced and worked, they'd probably be receiving the same kind of praise as the pitch clock.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Amazin69

(Sorry, but while it may be appropriate that a Yankee fan is trying to declare victory through majority rule, I still rather dislike having my opinions demeaned on that basis alone. You may disagree with my opinions, but I would rather you didn't mock me for them, tyvm,

A69, you and I don't know each other personally but from interacting with me and from reading my posts, you should know that this comment is off-base. The last thing (well among the least likely things) that I want to do here is to mock anybody. I am merely pointing out that most people, a large majority, that I have read here and elsewhere favor the pitch clock.

P.S. - You know how old the animosity toward Yankee fans is getting by now? (Heh, especially with the team scrambling to stay out of the basement.) There are only a few of us here and, to my knowledge, none of us act in the manner that you seem to have stuck in your head about being a Yankee fan.

Long story made short, look to yourself.

[Amazin69]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

I find it odd that people who would claim less joy from baseball if we had robo umps because it is technology interfering with the game don't mind dvr technology to manipulate their enjoyment of the game.

I find it odd that people would try and win an argument by joining two obviously-different subjects to another. Enjoying athletic competition between HUMAN BEINGS hardly means I need to foreswear all technology, as anyone with more brain cells than buttholes should be able to understand.

Similarly, my considering electro-shock therapy cruel and inhumane does not mean I will stop using light bulbs. Sorry to disappoint you.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Amazin69

1. The pitch clock was not necessary to improve the pace of play. The rules were already in place; it was simply that the umps were not enforcing them. To claim this is some brilliant innovation is silly.

2. To use this one theoretical improvement to justify all of Manfred's other ****ery (sure now that we have 24 teams in the playoffs, the season doesn't end until Thanksgiving, but hey, pitch clock!) is disingenuous at best, and flat-out stupid at worst.

3. I'm sorry, but I refuse to wet myself about "oooh, the games were sooooo long!" An extra 90 seconds each half-inning for GKR to talk baseball never seemed unduly burdensome, especially as compared to actual offenders such as stuffing the adbreaks so full that you could hit the head, scratch your head and then get some head before the action resumed.

There is a difference between a few seconds here and there and a giant blob of waste at regular intervals. And what the hell was so all-fired important at 10.00 that you have to start crying if the game isn't over then?

(Sorry, but while it may be appropriate that a Yankee fan is trying to declare victory through majority rule, I still rather dislike having my opinions demeaned on that basis alone. You may disagree with my opinions, but I would rather you didn't mock me for them, tyvm,

Also, "vast majority" my buttocks. The highest figure I've seen [in an IMO unscientific study, as "opt-in" polls are inherently flawed] was 65-35 in favor. Not even 2-1 in favor. Trashing 35% of the population as a "vast minority" seems like a very bad idea, for what I should hope are obvious reasons.)

Yeah, sorry A69, but despite having interesting stuff to say, you come on a bit strong at times, bordering if not crossing the line to being offensive. Please bear in mind, if you address me in the future, that you have been placed on my ignore list. Which is a damned shame, since I enjoyed our interactions in the Mets thread. What the heck gets into you?

[Amazin69]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

When did anyone try to use one positive to justify every rule change?

In pretty much every single article that discusses the rule changes. "Fans approve new rules, bla bla bla."

Both MLB and the media prefer to discuss the distortion of the game en bloc, as I should think you've noticed by now.

And while I haven't memorized the entire board, I would wager it's odds against that nobody has ever said "I don't approve of all the rule changes, but the pitch clock is enough of a positive that I think Manfred has done a good job", or similar.

For all I know, that somebody might be you.

[Amazin69]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Please bear in mind, if you address me in the future, that you have been placed on my ignore list. Which is a damned shame, since I enjoyed our interactions in the Mets thread. What the heck gets into you?

Riiiiiiiight. It's all well and good to call people "asinine", claim that they value sentiment over logic and mock them as being in a "vast minority", but citing the stereotype of Yankees fans being one-dimensional bullies, that's over the line?

You do you, Bru. Toodles.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Amazin69

Riiiiiiiight. It's all well and good to call people "asinine", claim that they value sentiment over logic and mock them as being in a "vast minority", but citing the stereotype of Yankees fans being one-dimensional bullies, that's over the line?

You do you, Bru. Toodles.

Whoa. I held off until I could see your response to see if the situation could be saved. No sir. Adios, amigo.

[Amazin69]

Gosh, I didn't immediately beg forgiveness? I didn't get the second chance that what's-his-face was so kind as to deign to offer me? (Albeit without letting me know I was on his "probation".) The ring went unkissed?



Oh, well. What's for dinner?

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Amazin69

Riiiiiiiight. It's all well and good to call people "asinine", claim that they value sentiment over logic and mock them as being in a "vast minority", but citing the stereotype of Yankees fans being one-dimensional bullies, that's over the line?

You do you, Bru. Toodles.

He didn't do that. I wrote the post you were referring to. And what I did do was say the position was asinine. Not the person who has the opinion. Didn't mock anyone. This is a forum. People will have differing opinions. I know I come off strong. You do as well. As long as the back & forth doesn't result to insulting, trolling, lying, I'm fine with it. Stereotyping is a no-no.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Amazin69

In pretty much every single article that discusses the rule changes. "Fans approve new rules, bla bla bla."

Then take that point to THEM. Cause doing it here is arguing vs the wind. And makes your post a bunch of hot air.

Both MLB and the media prefer to discuss the distortion of the game en bloc, as I should think you've noticed by now.

And while I haven't memorized the entire board, I would wager it's odds against that nobody has ever said "I don't approve of all the rule changes, but the pitch clock is enough of a positive that I think Manfred has done a good job", or similar.

For all I know, that somebody might be you.

Again, you are being Don Quixote. You come of as an old man yelling at clouds when you are arguing points to people who never made them.

In the college football thread I made a post about the Deion Sanders topic. NO ONE HERE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT DEION. But I wanted to get some stuff off my chest. So I referred to arguments made by others & made sure I didn't imply anyone here had made those arguments. I just refuted the stuff I'd heard from fans & media.

That's what you should have done if you wanted to get some stuff out you've been holding in. But taking your frustrations over statements & behavior not made here & using them in response to the rest of us is doing nothing but causing unnecessary arguments and needlessly alienating others.

[Cobra Mgr]

What's more astounding? The Pirates came back from 9 runs down? Or that they have never before come back from 9 runs down?

[Amazin69]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

He didn't do that. I wrote the post you were referring to. And what I did do was say the position was asinine. Not the person who has the opinion.

Oh, how noble of you to spring to Bru's defense…over posts I never accused him of making. I pointed out that it was silly for him to raise no objections to your spewing "asinine" at other posters (and gosh, by calling the position asinine you weren't insulting the person who stated it? Give me a break with your bullspit hair-splitting) and yet still lose his water because I made a joke while taking offense at the insult he directed at me. I never said that he took the invective to asinine levels, merely that he raised no objection to your doing so.

But hey, keep parsing my posts for new things to get snotty about. That will do tons of good, I'm sure.

I know I come off strong. You do as well. As long as the back & forth doesn't result to insulting, trolling, lying, I'm fine with it. Stereotyping is a no-no.

Followed neatly by your going to literary lengths to insult me in your very next post. Well played, Dulcinea!

(Or are you saying that you're fine as long as other posters don't spew insults, but you don't feel that prohibition should apply to you? Certainly a convenient position for you to hold…but you shouldn't hold your breath waiting for me to co-sign it. Just so you know.)

[CONN CHRIS]

I have watched more games this year than I have in the past decade combined. It sure isn't because the Tigers are running to the playoffs.