Tracking page for impact of MLB Rule Changes

[LansdowneSt]

Originally Posted by Dr Naysay

Anybody see the new rules snuck through for testing in the Atlantic league? I like the current rule changes but these new ones in testing are just horrible imo.

https://sports.yahoo.com/mlb-announc..._ilIjNk4MCX8Np

I did see that. As one watching the game and looking at the baseball reference site, I think MLB accomplished its goal on the stolen bases. The pitcher having limited throws to first seems, to my eye, the most impactful but whatever is the driver, the effect is noticeable, and I think - as we watch the numbers come in over a season via the link in the first post, the pinch runner thing won't be necessary and would be too far even if one is very open-minded on new rules.

I miss starters too. The complete game workhorses of my youth are gone but I think some of the restrictions on pitchers on the roster and the limits on the AAA shuttle to constantly move relievers in and out is helping. But I'd need to look at Quality Starts and IP per starter to see if my impression is supported by data. As an AL-league guy, I don't want to lose the DH under any circumstances and injuries (though this will prob be a carve out in the rules) or ineffectiveness further reducing the ability of a team that falls behind to come back (by losing the DH) is silly.

Sometimes you need to test to see how silly it is though.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

There’s no sign in here that says you have to keep going.

There's also no sign saying you have to read the thread if it doesn't interest you.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

There's also no sign saying you have to read the thread if it doesn't interest you.

The thread interests me. You trying to derail it does not.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by LansdowneSt

I did see that. As one watching the game and looking at the baseball reference site, I think MLB accomplished its goal on the stolen bases. The pitcher having limited throws to first seems, to my eye, the most impactful but whatever is the driver, the effect is noticeable, and I think - as we watch the numbers come in over a season via the link in the first post, the pinch runner thing won't be necessary and would be too far even if one is very open-minded on new rules.

I miss starters too. The complete game workhorses of my youth are gone but I think some of the restrictions on pitchers on the roster and the limits on the AAA shuttle to constantly move relievers in and out is helping. But I'd need to look at Quality Starts and IP per starter to see if my impression is supported by data. As an AL-league guy, I don't want to lose the DH under any circumstances and injuries (though this will prob be a carve out in the rules) or ineffectiveness further reducing the ability of a team that falls behind to come back (by losing the DH) is silly.

Sometimes you need to test to see how silly it is though.

I do feel like the days of the 10 CG a year starter is done, not necessarily because of huge bullpens but because the league figured out that there’s a significant penalty for one pitcher facing batters more than a couple times, maybe 3 times at the most, per game. I also can’t really see a way you can legislate that back into the game and so I’m OK with trying to do things to fix everything else. Admittedly my own solutions - make the balls slightly larger and squishier, experiment with moving the mound back - are a lot more game impacting than tinkering with the designated hitter (admittedly I think the designated pinch runner is interesting even if it doesn’t get at all the strikeouts).

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

The thread interests me. You trying to derail it does not.

I missed when you were assigned director of thread content. Congratulations on the promotion!

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

Admittedly my own solutions - make the balls slightly larger and squishier, experiment with moving the mound back - are a lot more game impacting than tinkering with the designated hitter (admittedly I think the designated pinch runner is interesting even if it doesn’t get at all the strikeouts).

What about the old standby of raising or lowering the pitching mound? It's not as if that hasn't been tinkered with before.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

So? Why should the rules change just because additional innings are needed to resolve the game? Why not just call it a tie? Other baseball leagues do this. (Indeed, MLB itself does this during spring training.)

Feel free to explain how an extra mound visit materially changes the way the game is played on the field as compared to effectively granting clubs a double it did not hit.

Not originally. Leagues have over the years altered their rules for extra time in the regular season to become more gimmicky.

I would have no problem with ending the game in a tie or going a few more innings with regular rule and THEN ending the game in a tie. However, I also have no problem with the current rule that places the guy on 2nd base.

The issue is that the game needs to end at some point and the rule is put in place to make it likely that will happen (with a winner) in the first few extra innings.

I wonder what would happen if you put up a poll asking if people would prefer the extra runner vs. the game ending in a tie.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I would have no problem with ending the game in a tie or going a few more innings with regular rule and THEN ending the game in a tie. However, I also have no problem with the current rule that places the guy on 2nd base.

The issue is that the game needs to end at some point and the rule is put in place to make it likely that will happen (with a winner) in the first few extra innings.

I wonder what would happen if you put up a poll asking if people would prefer the extra runner vs. the game ending in a tie.

I’m pretty much on the fence about the ghost runner but the shortened game time could cause them to get rid of it. What I will say is, in OOTP terms extra inning games are low key annoying AF when you play out your team’s game (not to mention the nerdy crap I do with my dynasty). I think extra innings rules came about at a time when overtime was very rare, games were really fast in spite of all the runs, and the nature of all the runs meant that extras would only last an inning or two extra. Nowadays, even putting aside the way bullpens are managed for 9 innings and not 15, a regulation tie can quickly turn into an extra half a game, which is just not something that’s super needed until the playoffs.

Personally I’d still solve that the way the KBO does, that is by just calling it a tie after 12 innings. Ties are fine. They aren’t the end of the world.

[kq76]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I wonder what would happen if you put up a poll asking if people would prefer the extra runner vs. the game ending in a tie.

I did that, a couple months ago.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by kq76

I did that, a couple months ago.

Ha, I wonder if I was subconsciously remembering that or something.