2015 Home Run Derby

Questdog · 07-13-2015, 11:09 PM

I think this Home Run Derby was the best ever, but I may be prejudiced since my man Frazier won the whole thing.

I honestly did not think I would like the new format going in, but it seemed to add to the drama rather than take any away. Seems like every round, almost, came down to the wire.

So, am I just prejudiced or was it really great?

actionjackson · 07-13-2015, 11:24 PM

Yes, it was much more exciting/intense than the previous format, and it was over in a timely fashion (10:40 PM EST). It also didn't have players taking pitch after pitch after pitch...If I want to watch that, I'll tune in to the next Red Sux/Spankees game.

Matt Arnold · 07-13-2015, 11:25 PM

Pretty much every round was close. The fact that the fans were behind the winner certainly helped the mood. Also went by at a pretty quick pace, too.

Questdog · 07-14-2015, 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by actionjackson

Yes, it was much more exciting/intense than the previous format, and it was over in a timely fashion (10:40 PM EST). It also didn't have players taking pitch after pitch after pitch...If I want to watch that, I'll tune in to the next Red Sux/Spankees game.

Good point! Had not realized until you pointed it out that that had a LOT to do with how much more enjoyable it was.

Bluenoser · 07-14-2015, 06:08 AM

Definitely like the new time limit format - now guys are swinging at everything instead of taking pitch after pitch until they get the perfect one.

Good show

CD1083 · 07-14-2015, 07:51 AM

I concur with the rest of you. Felt like I was watching a video game, which was a lot of fun to watch.

Déjà Bru · 07-14-2015, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Questdog

So, am I just prejudiced or was it really great?

You are prejudiced. There's no excitement in watching a guy lob softballs to be leisurely swatted into the seats.

Here's a clue: I didn't watch much but from what I saw, nobody wore a batting helmet. Which means they were not actually batting, just swinging. Which in turn means any guy with muscles and a small amount of coordination could do what those "sluggers" were doing.

Yawn.

PotatoPeeler · 07-14-2015, 09:15 AM

That's like saying, "That was the most exciting grass growing competition yet!" Might have been an improvement on previous iterations but I still don't feel sorry for skipping it.

kq76 · 07-14-2015, 10:38 AM

I usually try to catch at least some of it, but I was working so I missed all of it this year. Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, by the handful of articles I've read on it, it sounds like it was the coolest thing MLB has done in a long long time.

For those who did see it or read a fair bit about it, would you tweak it any?

I definitely liked the idea of the clock, but 4 minutes per round sounds a bit long to me. On one site I saw someone say cut it to 2 minutes and double the participants. Doubling the participants sounds good to me (plus a mandatory home team guy as Frazier winning it was great), but I'd say cut it down to 3 minutes as a few articles mentioned that the participants seemed to tire late in their rounds. And with the one less minute per go, the extra first round probably won't make the whole event too much longer.

I liked the idea of the extra time for moonshots too, but, by the sounds of it at least, 425 feet was a bit too easy to make and the initial rules of 475 might have been too long. An extra 30 seconds for a shot of 450+ feet sounds good, maybe even a total of an extra 60 seconds for a 500+ foot shot. Yeah, those 500 foot shots are rare, even in the derby, but that makes them all the more deserving of extra time.

I liked the one timeout idea so no need for a change there. And while Fielder was hurt by the head-to-head format (he would have beat a number of others in the first round), it sounds like there was far more drama with it than the old top however many make it to the next round format. Those going second had an advantage, but, with seeding based on their home run totals this year, I don't see anything unfair about that.

I read some complaints about some players hitting balls before the previous had even landed and that definitely sounds like a problem as you want the crowd / audience to be able to follow and enjoy each shot. Maybe all they need to do for that is have an ump to rule the successive homer invalid and that should keep players from trying to cheat and wasting their energy.

Questdog · 07-14-2015, 12:22 PM

I did not notice anyone blatantly breaking the rule of waiting for the last shot to land before the next one.

I liked the fact that it became a bit of an endurance test, especially in the later rounds. And the 4 minutes did not seem to be too long. Also, almost every hitter went through a slump period every round and I think you want to give them enough time to be able to make adjustments.

I have never been a big Derby fan, but I enjoyed this one. If you are going to have a grass growing competition, you might as well make it as enjoyable as you can.

P.S. Babe Ruth never wore a batting helmet in his life and I think he did some hitting.

Bluenoser · 07-14-2015, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kq76

I usually try to catch at least some of it, but I was working so I missed all of it this year. Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, by the handful of articles I've read on it, it sounds like it was the coolest thing MLB has done in a long long time.

For those who did see it or read a fair bit about it, would you tweak it any?

I definitely liked the idea of the clock, but 4 minutes per round sounds a bit long to me. On one site I saw someone say cut it to 2 minutes and double the participants. Doubling the participants sounds good to me (plus a mandatory home team guy as Frazier winning it was great), but I'd say cut it down to 3 minutes as a few articles mentioned that the participants seemed to tire late in their rounds. And with the one less minute per go, the extra first round probably won't make the whole event too much longer.

I liked the idea of the extra time for moonshots too, but, by the sounds of it at least, 425 feet was a bit too easy to make and the initial rules of 475 might have been too long. An extra 30 seconds for a shot of 450+ feet sounds good, maybe even a total of an extra 60 seconds for a 500+ foot shot. Yeah, those 500 foot shots are rare, even in the derby, but that makes them all the more deserving of extra time.

I liked the one timeout idea so no need for a change there. And while Fielder was hurt by the head-to-head format (he would have beat a number of others in the first round), it sounds like there was far more drama with it than the old top however many make it to the next round format. Those going second had an advantage, but, with seeding based on their home run totals this year, I don't see anything unfair about that.

I read some complaints about some players hitting balls before the previous had even landed and that definitely sounds like a problem as you want the crowd / audience to be able to follow and enjoy each shot. Maybe all they need to do for that is have an ump to rule the successive homer invalid and that should keep players from trying to cheat and wasting their energy.

Just to point out - there is an MLB Ump standing just off to the side of home plate and the next pitch cannot be thrown until the ball lands. That is the Umps job, to signal the pitcher when he can throw.

I watched most of it and I didn't see anyone pitching/hitting early. There was of course the standard rush to get that last pitch in when the clock got down to 5 sec or less and they're waiting for the ball to land so they can get 1 more toss/hit in.

I wouldn't tweak anything. This, imo, was a huge improvement over what was a very boring event. Sitting and watching a guy take 10 pitches then swing at 1 he liked, then wait another 4 or 5 - might as well watch paint dry.

With this format, the guys were swinging at most pitches because of the clock - very good idea MLB.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what they do with it, some people just aren't going to like it.

DejaBru - you never watched the derby before? No helmets, so what? Junior used to wear a ballcap backwards when he participated. Helmetless HR Derby's are he norm.

What would you suggest - have staff ace pitching to the hitters and trying to strike them out? Guess that would be exciting for the fans - getting to see maybe a dozen HR's total out of the whole event.

Hitting lob balls is just fine - I think those kids they allow in the OF to try and shag a few enjoy that very much. I doubt they'd be able to allow them out there if a pitcher was blazing 95+mph pitches across the plate. Let the kids have some fun, I'm pretty sure that MLB wants the fans to have fun over the 3 or 4 days. Serious baseball will be back soon enough.

ihatenames · 07-15-2015, 03:02 AM

I loved the new format. Each round was close and the crowd was into the whole event. Usually the crowd response disappeared after the first round. I actually think the shortened rounds (from 5min to 4) was a blessing for the event. I think that timing is perfect. I think any longer and I might have lost interest. Not to mention the hitters were gassed at 4 minutes by the end of the event.

I'm sure it could use some tweaking the next few years but I think it was a fantastic step in the right direction. Well done MLB.

The Game · 07-15-2015, 06:39 AM

One of the best HR Derby's in the last 15 years. Anyone know who was the last home player to win the Derby? I can't recall who has done it.

kq76 · 07-15-2015, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Game

One of the best HR Derby's in the last 15 years. Anyone know who was the last home player to win the Derby? I can't recall who has done it.

Ryne Sandberg in 1990.

The Game · 07-15-2015, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kq76

Ryne Sandberg in 1990.

Not who i was guessing. i was guessing Pujols perhaps or someone around 2005-2009 timeframe.

ihatenames · 07-15-2015, 01:33 PM

I think Sandberg is the only other home player to win, not just the last guy to do it.

MBarrett · 07-15-2015, 01:37 PM

The 2nd batter in each round won every single time. They may need to tweak something to off-set that.

actionjackson · 07-15-2015, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MBarrett

The 2nd batter in each round won every single time. They may need to tweak something to off-set that.

Joc Pederson went first and beat Albert Pujols in one of the semi-finals, and seedings were determined by the number of HR hit by each player so far this year.

ihatenames · 07-15-2015, 01:55 PM

There is definitely an inherent advantage to knowing your target to advance to the next round. There will always be a disadvantage to going first, but I think that's fine if they are seeded.

07-13-2015, 11:09 PM	#1
Questdog Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: In a dark, damp cave where I'm training slugs to run the bases...... Posts: 16,142	2015 Home Run Derby I think this Home Run Derby was the best ever, but I may be prejudiced since my man Frazier won the whole thing. I honestly did not think I would like the new format going in, but it seemed to add to the drama rather than take any away. Seems like every round, almost, came down to the wire. So, am I just prejudiced or was it really great?

07-14-2015, 09:15 AM	#8
PotatoPeeler Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Rapid City, SD Posts: 3,639	That's like saying, "That was the most exciting grass growing competition yet!" Might have been an improvement on previous iterations but I still don't feel sorry for skipping it. __________________ 培傑西 I have never taken a lesson on how to talk on TV in my life. - Tim McCarver Guns have only two enemies; rust and liberals. The world is a comedy to those that think; a tragedy to those that feel.

07-14-2015, 10:38 AM	#9
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 10,701	I usually try to catch at least some of it, but I was working so I missed all of it this year. Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, by the handful of articles I've read on it, it sounds like it was the coolest thing MLB has done in a long long time. For those who did see it or read a fair bit about it, would you tweak it any? I definitely liked the idea of the clock, but 4 minutes per round sounds a bit long to me. On one site I saw someone say cut it to 2 minutes and double the participants. Doubling the participants sounds good to me (plus a mandatory home team guy as Frazier winning it was great), but I'd say cut it down to 3 minutes as a few articles mentioned that the participants seemed to tire late in their rounds. And with the one less minute per go, the extra first round probably won't make the whole event too much longer. I liked the idea of the extra time for moonshots too, but, by the sounds of it at least, 425 feet was a bit too easy to make and the initial rules of 475 might have been too long. An extra 30 seconds for a shot of 450+ feet sounds good, maybe even a total of an extra 60 seconds for a 500+ foot shot. Yeah, those 500 foot shots are rare, even in the derby, but that makes them all the more deserving of extra time. I liked the one timeout idea so no need for a change there. And while Fielder was hurt by the head-to-head format (he would have beat a number of others in the first round), it sounds like there was far more drama with it than the old top however many make it to the next round format. Those going second had an advantage, but, with seeding based on their home run totals this year, I don't see anything unfair about that. I read some complaints about some players hitting balls before the previous had even landed and that definitely sounds like a problem as you want the crowd / audience to be able to follow and enjoy each shot. Maybe all they need to do for that is have an ump to rule the successive homer invalid and that should keep players from trying to cheat and wasting their energy. __________________ My OOTP Wishlist Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project)

07-15-2015, 03:02 AM	#12
ihatenames Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Rockford Posts: 2,535	I loved the new format. Each round was close and the crowd was into the whole event. Usually the crowd response disappeared after the first round. I actually think the shortened rounds (from 5min to 4) was a blessing for the event. I think that timing is perfect. I think any longer and I might have lost interest. Not to mention the hitters were gassed at 4 minutes by the end of the event. I'm sure it could use some tweaking the next few years but I think it was a fantastic step in the right direction. Well done MLB. __________________ New Album coming soon!

07-15-2015, 06:39 AM	#13
The Game Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Inside The Game Posts: 30,807	One of the best HR Derby's in the last 15 years. Anyone know who was the last home player to win the Derby? I can't recall who has done it. __________________ Go today don't wait for tomorrow It isn't promised, all the time you get borrowed Don't live your life for other people Don't bottle your emotions till they crack and fill a couple just sorrows Take your mind and refocus go get a paper write your goals out Throw your middle fingers to all your haters "Stay Strong"

07-13-2015, 11:24 PM	#2
actionjackson Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 6,123	Yes, it was much more exciting/intense than the previous format, and it was over in a timely fashion (10:40 PM EST). It also didn't have players taking pitch after pitch after pitch...If I want to watch that, I'll tune in to the next Red Sux/Spankees game.

07-13-2015, 11:25 PM	#3
Matt Arnold OOTP Developer Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Here and there Posts: 14,142	Pretty much every round was close. The fact that the fans were behind the winner certainly helped the mood. Also went by at a pretty quick pace, too.

07-14-2015, 06:08 AM	#5
Bluenoser Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In The Moment Posts: 13,682	Definitely like the new time limit format - now guys are swinging at everything instead of taking pitch after pitch until they get the perfect one. Good show

07-14-2015, 07:51 AM	#6
CD1083 All Star Starter Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 1,590	I concur with the rest of you. Felt like I was watching a video game, which was a lot of fun to watch.

07-14-2015, 12:22 PM	#10
Questdog Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: In a dark, damp cave where I'm training slugs to run the bases...... Posts: 16,142	I did not notice anyone blatantly breaking the rule of waiting for the last shot to land before the next one. I liked the fact that it became a bit of an endurance test, especially in the later rounds. And the 4 minutes did not seem to be too long. Also, almost every hitter went through a slump period every round and I think you want to give them enough time to be able to make adjustments. I have never been a big Derby fan, but I enjoyed this one. If you are going to have a grass growing competition, you might as well make it as enjoyable as you can. P.S. Babe Ruth never wore a batting helmet in his life and I think he did some hitting.

07-15-2015, 01:33 PM	#16
ihatenames Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Rockford Posts: 2,535	I think Sandberg is the only other home player to win, not just the last guy to do it. __________________ New Album coming soon!

07-15-2015, 01:37 PM	#17
MBarrett All Star Reserve Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Canada Posts: 623	The 2nd batter in each round won every single time. They may need to tweak something to off-set that.

07-15-2015, 01:55 PM	#19
ihatenames Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Rockford Posts: 2,535	There is definitely an inherent advantage to knowing your target to advance to the next round. There will always be a disadvantage to going first, but I think that's fine if they are seeded. __________________ New Album coming soon!