New extra innings rule

[Statsman1]

Wow, LGO, are you in a bad mood these days?

You said, "I doubt you'd see this rule being used in the higher minors, let alone the majors, where the MLBPA would have to approve it." like you have some tremendous insight that only you are privy to, but the rest of us commenting on the issue are either over-reacting or just mis-informed idiots.

They wouldn't be testing this concept in those rookie leagues if it wasn't a possibility, however remote, that it might eventually come to the major league level, somehow.

I listed (what I believed) to be better ways to shorten the game (at the MLB level) than to do what they're doing in those two rookie leagues.

The fact that none of those things apply to ANY league right now isn't the point. But my first paragraph outlines why what I said is relevant.

Why not let people say what they want to say, without misinterpreting what they THINK as being what IS. Not everything is something, dude.

[nebradska]

Originally Posted by Caporegime

[Caporegime]

Originally Posted by nebradska

[slugger922cubs]

deleted

[Caporegime]

Originally Posted by slugger922cubs

deleted

Well, since you deleted your comment, I see no point in keeping my original reply to it posted. Your point was at least worth debating.

Anyways...

[slugger922cubs]

Originally Posted by Caporegime

The problem I have with that argument is that the lower minor league levels are precisely the place where I would expect young players in any organization to be learning how to play the game the correct way, regardless of the inning. This just isn't the right way to play the game.

It's in precisely situations like an extra inning game and the extra pressure that accompanies them that one would expect young players to be working on such things as bunting, situational hitting, improving their endurance (both physical & mental), not to mention it being a good way for an organization to properly evaluate individual players and their performances in critical situations such as that. All that gets tossed out with the day-old Gatorade when this gimmick gets employed instead of proper baseball rules.

Oh my because giving them live situations to bunt a guy over from second to third or the situational hitting of driving a runner home from second are totally bad things this gimmick would ruin. No way starting with a runner on second increases the leverage to test players physical and mental endurance. Nope makes everything nil and worthless.

For real do you realize that pretty much everything you said is made possible by starting extras with a man on second. Those are all arguments for the rule. No more wasting PAs in the 14th with no one on in Appalachia just because. Its not a gimmick. Its not a shootout, 3v3 hockey, starting every possession on the 25 yd line, or a HR derby. It would literally be the closest special OT format to how any sport is actually played in regulation in any American sport. Literally all is pretty much saying is every inning starts off with a free double and higher leverage.

[slugger922cubs]

Originally Posted by Caporegime

Well, since you deleted your comment, I see no point in keeping my original reply to it posted. Your point was at least worth debating.

Anyways...

lol i just deleted it becuase i wanted to reword things.

[zappa1]

And yet, I'm the one told to take my comment to "Talk Sports". Go figure.

[slugger922cubs]

Originally Posted by zappa1

And yet, I'm the one told to take my comment to "Talk Sports". Go figure.

You're right we should cut it off here and move there. I'll submit my comments over there so we don't have dueling threads.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Caporegime

The problem I have with that argument is that the lower minor league levels are precisely the place where I would expect young players in any organization to be learning how to play the game the correct way, regardless of the inning. This just isn't the right way to play the game ...

That same line of argumentation could be used against 7-inning games. I've not seen it made, however. Certainly not in this thread, at any rate.

[jpeters1734]

From the horse:

Manfred also defended the experimentation, in the minor leagues, with starting extra innings with a runner on second base, even though it's a change "we don't expect to ever apply at the major league level." But he said, "We may learn something that would be helpful moving forward."

[Statsman1]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

From the horse:

Manfred also defended the experimentation, in the minor leagues, with starting extra innings with a runner on second base, even though it's a change "we don't expect to ever apply at the major league level." But he said, "We may learn something that would be helpful moving forward."

It is hard to imagine what they'd learn by doing this, if there's no real intention to consider adopting it across the board, but I guess there's no danger of this coming to MLB anytime soon.

[Shackdaddy]

The extra inning rule is stupid and misguided. The focus in speeding up the game should be keeping the batter in the batters box instead of allowing him to step out of the batters box after EVERY SINGLE PITCH. I have been saying this for years.

The batter should only be allowed to step out of the batters box in these instances:

1. He hits the ball (fair or foul). Obviously.
2. He gets on base without hitting the ball. Again, obviously.
3. He injures himself during the at bat.
4. To get out of the way of a pitch.
5. If he breaks his bat.
6. To talk to a coach or manager.
7. If the umpire calls time out.
8. To help wave a runner in on a wild pitch or passed ball.

A batter would not be able to step out of the batters box if:

1. He takes a called ball or strike. (Except ball 4 and strike 3)
2. Swings and misses or hits a foul tip. (Except for strike 3)

If a batter violated the rule once in an at bat he would be warned. A second time in a at bat would be a automatic strike. Sometimes you have to take radical steps to break a habit.

Over the course of a nine inning (250-300 pitch) ballgame this would reduce the time of a ballgame by quite a bit.

If I were czar of baseball, these rules would be tried out in the minors this year to iron out any bugs and knowing that it will work would be a rule in all professional baseball in 2018.

I googled the extra inning rule and ran across an article on the Forbes magazine website talking about the extra inning rule. The writer agreed that the rule is stupid and will not speed up the game.

At the end of this article the issue of the batter was brought up. They had two videos.
One was of a David Ortiz at bat, the other a Mickey Mantle at bat. The difference is amazing.

That is what prompted my posting.

I would post the link to that article, but I am not quite at that level of computer savvy. Check out the article.

Historical note: This stepping out of the batters box began in the 70's with former Texas and Cleveland great Mike "The Human Rain Delay" Hargrove. He also was the manager for the Cleveland teams that lost the World Series in 1995 and 1997.

Well I feel better now, getting this off my chest.

Now I can get back to playing OOTP 17. Can't wait for 18.

[r0nster]

is funny how nobody talks about the obvious reason why the game goes to 3 hours long..... Commercials..... I think people should take note how much that would shave off the time from first pitch to last out. Most sports now take 3 hours anyways

[hillm2ca]

Originally Posted by Caporegime

Hey, why not? It's supposed to be a feel-good solution designed to help baseball keep pace with today's high-tech, fast-moving world. Haven't you heard?....Baseball is dying! Oh my!

If anything, the rule doesn't go far enough. Maybe all games should start in the bottom of the 9th with a runner on third. The games will be shortened on average of 98% and contain all action! Markus can rename OOTP to "Out of the Park in Thirty Seconds or less". Trust me, in today's fast-paced, high-octane, trans-fat-free America, it'll be a monster hit. We can then spend all that time we used to waste watching baseball discussing our feelings over a bowl of artisan chick pea salad or gluten-free hummus.

Well said! And if you want to really hook kids on baseball, a team should sign an iPhone 7 to play second base. All kidding aside, I do not think any of the proposals put forward by Rob Manfred and company will do nothing to turn kids onto baseball who already consider it a "slow" sport. Perhaps Markus and the team should proposition Major League Baseball with a proposal of dispensing with live games altogether and let's just run them on the OOTP simulation engine. Forgot trying to shorten your average game to under 3 hours - we can get through a game in 10 minutes!
I think the problem is that we have a "get on with it, get it over with" culture that demands immediate gratification and immediate results. The pace of modern society has surpassed human scale and what society needs is more baseball, just as it is, with all the things that make it "slow" - which are the same things that make it beautiful.

[Coltrane]

It would be pretty sweet to see ALL of these rule proposals implemented into OOTP imo (as an option, not a default). Being able to sim fifty years into the future with some of these rules applied could lead to some interesting results. Send these results to 245 Park Avenue and it may scare them out of applying ANY of them

[hillm2ca]

Originally Posted by slugger922cubs

Oh my because giving them live situations to bunt a guy over from second to third or the situational hitting of driving a runner home from second are totally bad things this gimmick would ruin. No way starting with a runner on second increases the leverage to test players physical and mental endurance. Nope makes everything nil and worthless.

For real do you realize that pretty much everything you said is made possible by starting extras with a man on second. Those are all arguments for the rule. No more wasting PAs in the 14th with no one on in Appalachia just because. Its not a gimmick. Its not a shootout, 3v3 hockey, starting every possession on the 25 yd line, or a HR derby. It would literally be the closest special OT format to how any sport is actually played in regulation in any American sport. Literally all is pretty much saying is every inning starts off with a free double and higher leverage.

I think that an argument can be made that the proposed rule change regarding place a runner on a second in order to resolve a tie is too much of a deviation from the normal rules. In short, the normal rules of baseball do not provide teams with a free base runner (even walks and hit by pitches are earned) so you are essentially playing a different game. Imagine an extra inning game being decided by a HR derby which is completely different from normal baseball. In other words, you would use something that is a diluted form of baseball to settle a normal baseball game. When there is too much deviation between the normal rules and "sudden death" overtime rules, it calls into question whether a team legitimately won a game because you are creating an artificial substitute of the normal rules in order to hasten an outcome. You wouldn't settle a tie with a hot dog eating contest.

[slugger922cubs]

Originally Posted by hillm2ca

I think that an argument can be made that the proposed rule change regarding place a runner on a second in order to resolve a tie is too much of a deviation from the normal rules. In short, the normal rules of baseball do not provide teams with a free base runner (even walks and hit by pitches are earned) so you are essentially playing a different game. Imagine an extra inning game being decided by a HR derby which is completely different from normal baseball. In other words, you would use something that is a diluted form of baseball to settle a normal baseball game. When there is too much deviation between the normal rules and "sudden death" overtime rules, it calls into question whether a team legitimately won a game because you are creating an artificial substitute of the normal rules in order to hasten an outcome. You wouldn't settle a tie with a hot dog eating contest.

Comparing starting an inning with a free double to a HR Derby or Sudden Death is an absolutely absurd jump in logic. At best what youre struggling with is the sacredness of the box score and keeping statistics. Things which have zero bearing on the way the game is actually played.

[vulcan4]

Originally Posted by tlowe77

I really hope this rule doesn't come in! Who gets charged the run? Does the runner get the run? Can the team put anyone on 2B, or does the next guy up go straight to 2B (which would suck if it was your homerun hitter)?.

I just think it's a silly rule, and I doubt very highly that the OOTP Development team would put in a proposed rule on that short of notice.

TOTALLY Agree.....

[swampdragon]

Pitching changes, time between pitches, and time between half innings for commercials are the big differences between now and the era when games lasted between two and two and one-half hours. If you want to get the times down by any meaningful amount, you have to deal with those issues. Extra innings are fun. What's not to like about free baseball?