Farewell to LOOGYs?

[Guest 41Forever]

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25935056/mlb-players-discussing-rule-changes-alter-gamehttp://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25935056/mlb-players-discussing-rule-changes-alter-game



ESPN's Jeff Passan reports a number of pace-of-game changes are being discussed by the union and league, including a three-batter minimum for pitchers unless hurt or ending an inning.



Topics on the table include: A three-batter minimum for pitchers, a universal designated hitter (though it could be phased in by allowing in inter-league games in NL parks; a single trade deadline before the All-Star break; a 20-second pitch clock, the expansion of rosters to 26 players; with a 12-pitcher maximum; draft advantages for winning teams and penalties for losing teams; a study to lower the mound; a rule that would allow two-sport amateurs to sign major league contracts.

The three-batter minimum for pitchers, first reported by The Athletic, is perhaps the most controversial measure, as it would ostensibly eliminate a job created by modern bullpen use: the one-out left-handed reliever. MLB's proposal of the idea illustrates the league's concern with both time and pace of game, as constant bullpen shuffling has contributed to the average game time lasting longer than three hours. The rule would apply to all pitchers, except in instances in which pitchers finish an inning or are injured, sources said. The union did not strongly oppose the idea, according to sources, instead suggesting it preferred the implementation to be delayed until 2020 rather than 2019, as MLB proposed. ... In typical bargaining sessions, dozens of ideas are offered, considered and placed on the back burner, so the likelihood of a handful of these proposals being ratified, let alone all of them, is unlikely, according to sources. Still, as MLB and the union seek to find a place of understanding amid a winter chill that has fractured already-tenuous relations, the mere discussion, sources said, is considered a positive.

[whippoorwill]

What is a LOOGY ?



I like this idea!

[Guest 41Forever]

=whippoorwill post_id=2407 time=1549456747 user_id=79]
What is a LOOGY ?



I like this idea!

Edited February 6, 2019 by Guest

[Frayed Knot]

I'd prefer NOT to place arbitrary limits on things such as the number of hitters one must face. Plus, as soon as you put in the "injury" provision there'll be no limit to how many guys complain of a sprained Mendicular-Johnson joint as soon as they finish pitching to the guy(s) their manager brought them in to deal with. The good thing, though, about sprained Mendicular-Johnson joints is that they heal quickly. Mariano's used to last only about the length of the All-Star break.

You want less in-inning dead time? ... then make pitching changes quicker by getting ALL your warm-ups done before being called in. The distance to, and the size of, the plate are the same on the field as in the pen.



* a universal designated hitter -- I think you know where I stand on this one

* a single trade deadline before the All-Star break -- I don't have a problem with the way things are now, but this is just paperwork stuff which I generally don't get too worked up over one way or the other

* a 20-second pitch clock -- I'd prefer it not be necessary, but it might be necessary. I do like that it's in the minors so that hopefully the next generation of players will grow up with this as the norm

* the expansion of rosters to 26 players; with a 12-pitcher maximum -- 25 vs 26 to me isn't that big a deal, but again with the artificial limits. If you want to carry extra pitchers you weaken you bench ... your choice. And how do you count Ohtani in such a scenario? Can we list Thor as a hitter on days he isn't pitching?

* draft advantages for winning teams and penalties for losing teams -- The devil is in the details on that one

* a study to lower the mound -- eh

* a rule that would allow two-sport amateurs to sign major league contracts -- You mean, allowing the few amateurs with actual leverage to actually use their leverage .. What a concept!!

[Edgy MD]

The expansion of rosters is always floated as a concession to offer in exchange for the union swallowing something less palatiable.



The universal DH would be universally repugnant.



Limits on the number of any one position is silly. Everybody is a potential pitcher.



I'm always confused about the league thinking the game is too long but seemingly have no idea why.

[seawolf17]

I hate rules that fundamentally change the game. Outlawing shifts? Fuck that. Multi-batter minimums? Fuck that. DH? Fuck that.



The intentional walk thing bothered me, but whatever, I guess. The number of times something zany happens on an intentional walk is minimal. I do like the mound visit rule. You want to add a roster spot? Sure, go for it. Pitch clock? Sure, go for it. Earlier trade deadline? Sure, whatever.

[smg58]

Scrap all those idiotic ideas favor of this proposal: get the owners to stop colluding and taking a bigger and bigger share of revenues before the next work stoppage puts more than a year between pitches.

[Guest 41Forever]

Joel Sherman tweeting about the proposed changes -- with a Mets note:



Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1





4/Also stronger movement toward adding the DH in the NL. Here is something to keep in mind: 1 HUGE reason #Mets agreed to take on final 5 yrs of Cano's contract was their internal strong belief that the DH was coming to the NL. Also if there is a universal DH, the PA knows

[MFS62]

You want a 20 second pitch clock to help shorten games?

Great, then couple that with a commercial time limit between (half) innings and during pitching changes.

And what's with in-game sponsorship? "That first arranging of a player's junk this game is brought to you by Speedo".

Later

[Guest 41Forever]

More from Sherman:



Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1

39m



...Also if there is a universal DH, the PA knows that NL teams would more comfortably make long-term offers to players such as Harper/Machado since if their legs/fielding skills declined, at least there would be a place for their bats. Union countered with general acceptance of a 20-second pitch clock but with many more strictures about how/when it would be in use. To make the game more fan friendly, union offer included much more miking of players, dugouts and even player-to-player mikes so they could be heard chatting during the game."

[Gwreck]

Idiotic proposals that are going to alter the game in bad ways? This is very sad.

[smg58]

=41Forever post_id=2414 time=1549459702 user_id=69]
Joel Sherman tweeting about the proposed changes -- with a Mets note:



Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1





4/Also stronger movement toward adding the DH in the NL. Here is something to keep in mind: 1 HUGE reason #Mets agreed to take on final 5 yrs of Cano's contract was their internal strong belief that the DH was coming to the NL. Also if there is a universal DH, the PA knows

[Vic Sage]

* A three-batter minimum for pitchers - I think specialization has hurt the game, from DHs to LOOGies and ROOGies. It rewards limited players, and leads to over-managing for the slightest of statistical advantages while slowing the pace of play. I'd prefer to see pitchers build careers on being able to get anybody out. With regard to the concern over an "injury loophole", where guys fake an injury (at instruction of manager) to allow for manipulation of the rule, simply require any pitcher taken out for an injury under these circumstances to be placed on a 5-day DL, so the pitcher couldn't be active for 5 days and the team couldn't fill that slot unless the pitcher goes on a longer DL (10, 15, 30 or 60 day). I think teams would then think twice about such manipulations if they were then forced to lose a reliever for a week and had to play shorthanded (literally).



* A universal designated hitter - see above, re: specialization. But I'd prefer to see both leagues play by the same set of rules, whatever they are.



*A single trade deadline before the All-Star break - whatever.



* A 20-second pitch clock - yes, please. And call a K on a hitter who fails to get into the box in time. I hate watching them readjust their gloves and their dicks after ever pitch.



* The expansion of rosters to 26 men, with a 12-pitcher maximum - yes to expansion, no to roster construction limitations. They are also talking about reducing September rosters from 40 to 28, which I also agree with. Frankly, i'd prefer to see larger rosters at the BEGINNING of the season, where teams are still trying to figure out who their best options are, then at the END of the season, where teams in a pennant race suddenly have to play against a team that's out of it, who have 20 pitchers they can use in a game.



* Draft advantages for winning teams and penalties for losing teams - I'd like to see exactly how this would work, but I'm not morally opposed to punishing non-competitiveness, which is often a strategy rather than a circumstance.



* A study to lower the mound - are we in an offensive drought of some sort? I hadn't noticed. If this is to cut down on Ks, I don't know why we would. GMs have figured out that guys who hit for more power (regardless of K rate) are worth more to an offense than those who put the ball in play more often (where random chance starts to become a bigger factor in outcomes). They also value guys who get on base, of course, but that doesn't have to come just from hits. So high SLG & OB rates are valued, and Ks are less relevant, and hitters have adjusted their swings to this new marketplace. I'm not seeing a problem that needs to be fixed.



*A rule that would allow two-sport amateurs to sign major league contracts - sure.

[Edgy MD]

Doesn't virtually everybody start out as a two-(or more-)sport amateur? Even dudes who are convinced to play only one sport in high school are often banging it around the links in the offseason.



Don't want to pay more more money? Well, I'm declaring myself eligible for the pro racquetball circuit.

[whippoorwill]

What is a LOOGY ? I like this idea! Hi Whippoorwill, it means left-handed, one-out guy -- when the managers start making the lefty-righty switches in the seventh and eighth inning.

Thank you!



Also from Vic Sage

* A three-batter minimum for pitchers - I think specialization has hurt the game, from DHs to LOOGies and ROOGies. It rewards limited players, and leads to over-managing for the slightest of statistical advantages while slowing the pace of play. I'd prefer to see pitchers build careers on being able to get anybody out. With regard to the concern over an "injury loophole", where guys fake an injury (at instruction of manager) to allow for manipulation of the rule, simply require any pitcher taken out for an injury under these circumstances to be placed on a 5-day DL, so the pitcher couldn't be active for 5 days and the team couldn't fill that slot unless the pitcher goes on a longer DL (10, 15, 30 or 60 day). I think teams would then think twice about such manipulations if they were then forced to lose a reliever for a week and had to play shorthanded (literally).

I love that idea

[smg58]

I think that anything that reduces strategy does not serve the best interests of the game. Especially if all the reductions in strategy benefit the offense. A boom in offensive production has not helped attendance levels, so stop assuming that's what people want.



This does not mean that LOOGYs are necessarily a good thing. Having a pitcher on your roster who can't give you 60 good innings, especially if you're also trying to pitch your starters less, can certainly backfire. But the manager and GM should make those decisions, right or wrong, not the league.

[Vic Sage]

=smg58 post_id=2445 time=1549477081 user_id=62]
I think that anything that reduces strategy does not serve the best interests of the game. Especially if all the reductions in strategy benefit the offense. A boom in offensive production has not helped attendance levels, so stop assuming that's what people want.



This does not mean that LOOGYs are necessarily a good thing. Having a pitcher on your roster who can't give you 60 good innings, especially if you're also trying to pitch your starters less, can certainly backfire. But the manager and GM should make those decisions, right or wrong, not the league.

[seawolf17]

But it's artificial strategy. (I mean, I guess all rules are "artificial," whatever, but still.) And if you have to put an additional artificial injury qualifier on it so people don't abuse it, then what's the point?

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

Seven inning regulation games.



Would cut out a lot of the stuff they want to monkey with to begin with (too many pitching changes, artificial limits on batters faced etc), chops an hour off game times right off the bat, discourages pursuit of gimmicky extra-inning rules they're also apparently dumb enough to consider, in step with changes in how the game is played physically today (harder throwers, more injuries, lighter loads), doesn't cost the TV stations programming or the owners butts in seats, addresses the game's-too-late-on-a-schoolnight argument from pearl-clutching moms, and probably brings bb in line, timewise, with alternatives like movies and clock-games like fb, bb, hockey etc



7 inning games!

[G-Fafif]

I'm trying to imagine somebody who doesn't much care for baseball deciding that if they'd only tweak the game enough, damn, I want to watch baseball.

[seawolf17]

Seven innings again fundamentally changes the game. I get the benefits, but I hate it more than I hate the DH.

[Frayed Knot]

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Seven inning regulation games.

Fuck that shit!

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

I'd sooner see it than have ties decided by a home run contest

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

=seawolf17 post_id=2460 time=1549481748 user_id=91]
Seven innings again fundamentally changes the game. I get the benefits, but I hate it more than I hate the DH.

[A Boy Named Seo]

=G-Fafif post_id=2459 time=1549481082 user_id=55]
I'm trying to imagine somebody who doesn't much care for baseball deciding that if they'd only tweak the game enough, damn, I want to watch baseball.

[Frayed Knot]

The "solution(s)" I often hear from those in the sports media who dislike baseball (iow: most of them) always seems to involve their ideas for there being significantly less baseball going forward (shorter games, shorter seasons, fewer teams, more off-days, no overlap with any other sport ever, etc.).

I'll pass on that whole line of thinking if you don't mind.

[Edgy MD]

And I'll pass on the overengineering something that's been pretty good for a long time. You end up creating unintended negative consequences, which you have to deal with through more engineering, which has more unintended consequences, and pretty soon, we're living out the plot to Ωmega Man.

[whippoorwill]

But the recent development of specialist pitchers is not a good thing (imo).

They suck up space on the roster, add zero interest to a game, and making pitching changes just for the sake of a one batter specialist does take up time which would be better served in a real baseball kind of way:



That is: a good pitcher against a threatening batter



Can you tell I am not a fan of middle relievers unless it's a mop up job?

Pitchers should have some class. One batter pitchers are a waste of space



Baseball has become like life. Mediocracy gets a job.

[Gwreck]

Calling, say, Pedro Feliciano “mediocre” is wildly inaccurate, though.



He was very good at what he did and helped the team win many, many games. Obviously his contribution is quantitatively smaller but not every player is a star.



Maybe the overall talent level can seem slightly

diluted if one started watching baseball before various rounds of expansion but these same players had the 24th and 25th spots on the roster whether or not they were only used to face one batter at a time.

[Centerfield]

The talent is not diluted. The population is exponentially more than it was before expansion. Players are coming from all over the world. It's harder than it's ever been to make the major leagues.