Ding dong, the shift is dead. Long live the pitch clock.

[MVP2110]

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

15 minutes ago, MVP2110 said:

 

Without a mechanism to enforce it (ie. a clock), umpires have refused to enforce that rule for about half a century.

Which is why we now have a clock. 

[Thurston Fluff]

2 hours ago, MrTPlush said:

Yah…my first thought was, “Why is it necessary to have a punishment for the batter?” If the batter isn’t ready at 8 seconds just let the pitcher pitch if he is ready. If the pitcher isn’t ready at 8 seconds himself…then where is the harm? 

The last thing baseball needs is cringe moments in the game like what happened to the Braves. At least make the pitcher throw the ball and not have it be an automatic strike.

If the batter takes to long to get set he's taking time away from the pitcher. Having the pitcher just throw the ball without the catcher, batter, and umpire knowing what's being thrown, or where it's being thrown in the case of the catcher, is a recipe for missed strike calls, passed balls, wild pitches and hit batters. Not the way to penalize the batter.

[brewcrewdue80]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

That adds complexity and would likely result in both players and umps being even more confused.

This was literally the first game on the first day of the new rule during a game that doesn't matter in the slightest bit. The consternation over this seems way out of proportion.

Sure it probably is an overreaction.  But I'd argue the test level was the minors. Players who don't need ill-will as they try to climb to the Majors.  Say a prospect makes the comment I believe seen on Machado. Who supposedly said he'll probably start out his at bats down 0-1 in counts, meaning he's going to do what he wants opposing that pitch clock.  Do teams want to call up prospects who are reluctant on a pitch clock rule? Their good behavior and promotion is their golden ticket. MLB players already on teams or paid tens of millions of dollars a year? What's to prevent them from being reluctant on adjusting to the pitch clock?  

I also thought I'd make a little idea on the Vegas idea. Over/unders.  Rather than an ump being chastised on a missed call, they are able to throw a strike 3 or ball 4 on a situation that maybe hinders a superstar from coming to the plate with runners on. Take the bases loaded situation, strike 3 eliminates huge potential of runs scored helping the under potentially win that game.  The ump meanwhile is just following the rules. Remember umps are being graded and talks of automated strike/ball zone calling.  There are a number that are petty and this could provide them a platform how changing the game looks bad when enforcing these new rules. You also going to see bad beat flak from bettors whose bet may have direct impact from that violation called at the moments in games. Strike out or walk with base loaded.

I enjoy the fact that it seems games could be done in 2hrs and 30mins consistently. Just tossing out what 1st uear hiccups could be as I never really thought a game would end by an ump enforcing a 3rd strike on clock violation.

[Brock Beauchamp]

9 minutes ago, brewcrewdue80 said:

But I'd argue the test level was the minors.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this statement but baseball has been testing the pitch clock in the minor leagues for a couple of seasons now.

[brewcrewdue80]

52 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this statement but baseball has been testing the pitch clock in the minor leagues for a couple of seasons now.

What I'm suggesting is the minors are children level being asked to abide by this new rule.

MLB players are the adults being told to abide by this new rule. 

Remember some of the reactions and freak out displays from the pitchers substance checking. Scherzer? I think? undressing himself to be checked walking off the mound.

To believe this change will just go smoothly without a hitch in a sport where superstitious players exist? There will be drama at points this season. Players and managers will be interviewed after games when the drama occurs and you'll hear arguments how the pitch clock needs to be better.

Minor Leaguers and managers aren't going to have the post game following if they say the kind of things when major league players and managers do following post game. It'll turn in to talking topics on ESPN and other sports shows seeking the opinion on what was said following the game that included drama due the pitch clock affecting.

Does that explain my thoughts? Or do you have another question?

[jerichoholicninja]

5 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Without a mechanism to enforce it (ie. a clock), umpires have refused to enforce that rule for about half a century.

Which is why we now have a clock. 

So the umpires can chose which rules they want to enforce? That seems like a much bigger issue that needs to be addressed.

[Brock Beauchamp]

22 minutes ago, jerichoholicninja said:

So the umpires can chose which rules they want to enforce? That seems like a much bigger issue that needs to be addressed.

Effectively Wild did a long dive into the rule's history and it's old. Like it started in the 50s, maybe? But it was implemented in such a scattershot way with no umpire buy-in, no penalties, no clock... everyone just ignored it.

Which wasn't really a problem until the 2000s when games started to drag out and kept dragging out. But by then, the rule was ancient, no one observed it, and there was no impetus to start observing it.

Which is why the new, much more clearly written, rule is now in place.

[TURBO]

I don't know about everyone else, but 2 1/2 hour games seem too short.

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

11 minutes ago, TURBO said:

I don't know about everyone else, but 2 1/2 hour games seem too short.

I love it. First, I can move on to another game and watch it if I'm still in the mood for baseball. Second, if I just want to watch a game, it's over before I'm bored with it. Third, the long term effect of this is that I can start taking my kids to baseball games without leaving in the sixth inning. Fourth, I can start actually letting my kids watch weekday night games.

Short baseball games are good. It's what we all grew up with, provided you're over 30 years old.

[homer]

26 minutes ago, TURBO said:

I don't know about everyone else, but 2 1/2 hour games seem too short.

 

my hunch is they will settle in at a little longer like 2:45

[Brock Beauchamp]

13 hours ago, homer said:

my hunch is they will settle in at a little longer like 2:45

Yeah, remember we're a couple of days into spring training. Many pitchers are just lobbing it over the plate at this point while hitters are swinging out of their shoes. Games will slow down a touch as velocity and command ramp up toward the season while hitters start displaying more typical discipline.

[wallus]

15 hours ago, TURBO said:

I don't know about everyone else, but 2 1/2 hour games seem too short.

 

Yeah but the amount of action is the same. You are just cutting out guys standing around which I have no desire to see.

[jerichoholicninja]

15 hours ago, TURBO said:

I don't know about everyone else, but 2 1/2 hour games seem too short.

 

Why? It's the same amount of innings. You're just getting rid of all the dead air. 

[SeaBass]

13 minutes ago, jerichoholicninja said:

Why? It's the same amount of innings. You're just getting rid of all the dead air. 

I guess MLB/teams can add more commercial time, extend the run time a bit to get it to that feel good 3 hour mark.

I understand where Turbo is coming from but I really liked how quickly the game went. As each half inning played out I didn't really notice it being "shorter", everything felt normal. It was just looking at my watch after 4 innings and it only being about an hour and twenty minutes had passed since the game started.

[homer]

 

 

[owbc]

Fascinating stuff here on how the Mets are planning to exploit the pitch clock: https://theadvancescout.substack.com/p/update-that-secret-pickoff-play-in

[MadScientist]

On 2/26/2023 at 8:48 PM, TURBO said:

I don't know about everyone else, but 2 1/2 hour games seem too short.

 

2 1/2 is just right for a baseball game.  Now the 1:58 game I saw years ago was a bit quick, but Maddux vs Hershiser on a cold day = fast.

[JimH5]

I am a huge fan of the pitch clock.  The slow pace of play has bugged me for years.  Look at the time of games for the 1982 Brewers.  Almost all of the games were played in 2:20-2:45.  Reaching 3 hours was rare, and usually meant extra innings.

1982 Milwaukee Brewers Schedule | Baseball-Reference.com

[homer]

I thought this was interesting 

[nate82]

Just now, homer said:

I thought this was interesting 

I think the jump of 10 minutes from 1990 to 2000 was probably because of more TV coverage.  I believe 2000 would be the year every team had all of their games televised?

[Brock Beauchamp]

3 hours ago, MadScientist said:

2 1/2 is just right for a baseball game.  Now the 1:58 game I saw years ago was a bit quick, but Maddux vs Hershiser on a cold day = fast.

Even though as a Twins fan I hated Mark Buerhle, his ability to spin up a two hour CG was something to witness.

[Brock Beauchamp]

21 minutes ago, nate82 said:

I think the jump of 10 minutes from 1990 to 2000 was probably because of more TV coverage.  I believe 2000 would be the year every team had all of their games televised?

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but MLB hasn't lengthened their between-inning commercial breaks for a long time. I know they shortened them in the past few years (2019?).

Game length is NOT due to innings breaks, which run on a 2:30 clock (which means TV is back well before that point).

[homer]

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

I LOVE the new pitch clock even more than I thought I would. I know games will likely slow down in the regular season but still, this is awesome. I'm hoping that as the season chugs along, we see a down tick in velocity to go along with the faster pace.