MLB Off-Topic

[countryboy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Since it's obvious that the legal action of throwing "four wide ones" was removed and there is deliberation involved in motioning the individual to first base, just allow neither of them. Make the pitcher have to throw pitches "with clear and visible effort that evading the batter's ability to competitively work against said pitches is not being employed as a means to work toward an out" actually goes into play.

In other words, if you want to unintentionally-intentionally walk someone, that's fine and good luck. Best be close enough to your catcher so that it doesn't scoot by him, and also best not go in the strike zone so the batter doesn't rake where you weren't trying to plant your seeds. You know, actually compete out there and earn what you are attempting to have happen.

See, I used to think that the intentional walk really was the same as a regular base-on-balls. I am actually somewhat offended that there is a statistic that differentiated the two (even though it still counts as a walk on their ledger), because all legal actions were taken place. It was just a way to communicate to the batter that they are throwing the white flag on the at-bat (even though sometimes the batter still countered it, baserunners could have gains on it, the pitching team may have some trickery up their sleeves, or the pitching team could change their mind halfway through). Anyway, since they decide it is a special item, let's just say it's not allowed. Keep that catcher in the box so long as the pitcher isn't deliberately lobbing or bouncing the ball to the plate if there is no valid reasoning behind it that is not "I am trying to put him on first base." This would be to the umpire's discretion, and if this is the case we can add a balk to that pitch as well.

I don't have a penalty for the IBB with no one on base thought up yet though.

So if a runner is on 2nd base and you want to put the batter on to set up a double play, what's to stop a pitcher from doing 4 pitch outs and claiming that he was thinking the runner was going to steal third?

And the "legal action" of throwing 4 wide ones wasn't removed, it's just not required. If a pitcher wants to throw 4 straight wide pitches he can.

[mattm7x]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Bryce Harper claimed off waivers by "mystery team'?????

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

So if a runner is on 2nd base and you want to put the batter on to set up a double play, what's to stop a pitcher from doing 4 pitch outs and claiming that he was thinking the runner was going to steal third?

And the "legal action" of throwing 4 wide ones wasn't removed, it's just not required. If a pitcher wants to throw 4 straight wide pitches he can.

No, you got it. People keep talking about the lobbying aspect, well now you can't do that anymore. There is justification behind it, it keeps the catcher in the crouch a little bit longer (it would be interesting to alter pitch regulations so that catchers can't maybe move from their position until the ball is released), and it's done at a competitive scale. It still keeps the game and everyone on their toes, and bad things can always still happen.

I think I'm almost more intrigued in removing the statistic then the action, and don't think that won't make a difference in how teams operate. First of all, we eliminate the IBB statistic so that nothing can be deemed intentional anymore. People don't play to the statistic in the same way they may do for a save, for example (and yes, managers absolutely 100% manage their closers for "save" opportunities, and if that wasn't a stat they would completely revise their strategies), but frankly if there wasn't an automatic/simple gesture to induce intentional walks then even the pitchout scenario would actually be minimized.

You'll see more pitchers kind of do the "unintentional intentional walk," but there is still a bit of a mindset that maybe they can even get that batter out. I mean you see that today all of the time: a manager will have the pitcher throw to the batter twice, only to fall behind 2-0 in the count and they will ultimately just say: "Alright, let's put him on." You tried to see what you could do to have the batter swing at your pitches or maybe accidentally steal strikes, but once the count goes completely in that batter's favor you save face and go toward the walk. The point however is that you began that at-bat by competing, and only because of the automation process thereafter you simplified the result. If that option is "removed" in a way where your only justification of a "competitive pitchout" is because of a stealing runner, I don't think you'll see it nearly as often as you'll see a manager throw up four fingers.

And remember, I somewhat feel that all of this goes back to whose opinion should possibly hold a little more water than others in these scenarios. I wouldn't take marriage advice from someone who has only lived in their mom's basement their entire adult life, and likewise I don't see much validation about the "dullness" of the idea from fans whose teams had only induced 165 IBB's from '02-'04 (Cardinals only threw 99 of them themselves), whilst I watched a single player encounter 249 of them during that exact same timespan. Even though IBB's generally lasted less than a minute, not one of those 4+ hours spent watching them was something that brought me to a halt or took my eyes off the screen. I didn't want Bonds to be walked, but it was more of an event than me watching managers standing on the top dugout step looking back at their bench coach playing telephone for a potential replay challenge.

I think my opinion and justifications have been completely validated in the process. No single individual who I know of made a single stink about IBB's before they were talked about being turned automatic, and when I'm sitting asking "Why?" the only defense people have right now is "Why not?"

[countryboy]

MLB Off-Topic

If the argument to remove intentional walks all together is because you’re upset they changed from four pitches to four fingers then I don’t understand the argument. It’s the same outcome. I understand you are taking away the ultra rare occurrence that something happens in those 4 pitches but I don’t understand why you would want to remove the strategy altogether.

And in its place you want to force pitchers to pitch near the zone and catchers stay in the box longer, and all that would be a judgment call by the umpire? If the common thought is umpires have too much influence now, why give them more?

And if a pitcher truly wants to walk a batter he will. Again how do you stop pitchouts? How can you make a determination of intent when a runner is on?

I’m sorry but I see nothing positive in your rules/idea. You’re taking strategy out of the game simply because you’re upset over the change to intentional walks?

I don’t get it


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

How would you punish the team who pitches out when they weren't allowed to? Make them redo the pitch? If a pitcher made an illegal pitch I guess you could just charge him a ball, but that's hardly deterring the process lol.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

If the argument to remove intentional walks all together is because you’re upset they changed from four pitches to four fingers then I don’t understand the argument. It’s the same outcome. I understand you are taking away the ultra rare occurrence that something happens in those 4 pitches but I don’t understand why you would want to remove the strategy altogether.

And in its place you want to force pitchers to pitch near the zone and catchers stay in the box longer, and all that would be a judgment call by the umpire? If the common thought is umpires have too much influence now, why give them more?

And if a pitcher truly wants to walk a batter he will. Again how do you stop pitchouts? How can you make a determination of intent when a runner is on?

I’m sorry but I see nothing positive in your rules/idea. You’re taking strategy out of the game simply because you’re upset over the change to intentional walks?

I don’t get it


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

I was more so playing devil's advocate to the whole idea saying that if they want to increase pace of play, why do they allow intentional walks at all anyway? Supposedly it used to be a legal gesture, but since they eliminated that notion than it's clear that they treat it in a separate category to normal walks. So why even have it in the first place? Just stay competitive and pitch to/around the guy as desired. Every plate appearance now holds meaning to everybody just as every pitch does.

I said pitchouts are fine (with the right effort and oomph), but I can assure you that you would see much less of those if both the intentional and automatic walk gestures were not a facet of the game. Absolutely guaranteed. Teams would be competitive by nature alone. It's the same thing as sacrifice bunts becoming near extinct if pitchers are removed from hitting when NL teams host games. Even the position players who do it will be doing it less often, and defenses will shift against it less. Same with closers coming in "save opportunities" only if the save statistic were invalidated. That's the nature of baseball's consciousness: throw an idea out the window, and it's less considered for any particular outcome. You don't see pitchouts as much as it is because you see less steals and hit-and-runs. Things like that.

The umpires have dozens of things where they have to make discretionary calls: infield flies, attempted swings and bunts, balks vs. pitch deliveries with lefties (there is no "45-degree line" statement in the rulebook, that is a determination by the umpire), hit-by-pitch attempts, warnings & ejections from arguments & retaliations, runners advancing bags on dead ball calls... they appear everywhere. I'm seeing the straw man come out in stating my proposal is what's best for MLB if it means that umpires have more control than before, but they are big boys and can handle exactly that.

At any rate, I don't see it being any worse than the automatic walks, and that's just it... the regular intentional walk was no worse either, because automatic walks aren't any better. Take pace-of-play, "excitement," and probability of occurrence out of the picture... I see players trotting bags on a home run to be every bit as irrelevant as throwing four balls to a batter; to a lesser extent, I see sacrificing an out for advancing a runner to also be as irrelevant.

One other thing I said was the automatic walk should be agreed upon by both parties. A batter does not have to take all four pitches, and he can swing at them should he choose to. Now you're literally taking that opportunity out of his hands, stupid as that sounds. A batter should have control as to whether or not he gets pitches thrown his way, or at least his manager should. Why should the opposing team take that out of his hands?

I'd like to see a set of teams collude, find a threatening batter, and point to first every time he comes at bat for sixty straight PA's. Believe it or not, pointing is much easier and painless than actually throwing those pitches. I'd like to see what the commissioner would do if that happened.

How would you punish the team who pitches out when they weren't allowed to? Make them redo the pitch? If a pitcher made an illegal pitch I guess you could just charge him a ball, but that's hardly deterring the process lol.

Balk as well. Though like I said, I have nothing for the "no one on base" idea yet. I'd have to think about that one.

[countryboy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I feel like I’m watching a dog chase it’s tail


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Great counter. Glad to see no one has still found a formidable reason to have changed the rule in the first place other then "Itz teh boring!!!1"

I brought up the base coach helmet rule earlier. I don't have an issue with base coaches wearing helmets at all, but I hate that it took a death for them to realize: "Oh, we should probably do this." One knee-jerk reaction later, it was forced upon all base coaches. Forget the players in the dugouts, and at the time we could forget the stands... just the base coaches needed them. I really think it should just be a suggestion/option, even if they all opted to wear them. Yet again though, it was brought down to high school softball. Now, I was already wearing a helmet because I had just gotten a concussion at the time, but the rule is still iffy. Why is it only protecting base coaches? Photographers come in the field of play all of the time and are focused through a big lens. What about them, and why aren't they protected?

Figure out these rules the right way. It does nothing else but muck up everything below it.

[countryboy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I swear it’s like you’re just wanting a response, any response, so you can use it as a jumping point to rant or argue or whatever


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Chip Douglass]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I guess watching those 4 pitches is the hill to die on or something.

Back in the real world, 99% of baseball fans have moved on.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I swear it’s like you’re just wanting a response, any response, so you can use it as a jumping point to rant or argue or whatever


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

Heaven forbid we are having a healthy conversation about the MLB in a thread regarding exactly that. I tend to leave posts go unattended when I have nothing to contribute, not talk in their faces about what I think of them. If I did, I'd have a lot to say in The Show forum, and I mean lots.

I was posed a conversation about it and I brought it forward. I'm glad you actually read some of my talking points when you responded because others tend to pick-and-choose, but I'm fine ceasing conversation about it so long as people don't think I'm a lunatic for asking that my sport doesn't get changed "just because." There was no need to change the rule. Period.

The biggest deal made about this so far has been Manfred's push to change it, and the vote to approve the new mechanic. I am nowhere close to making this a bigger deal than he is in that regard.

I guess watching those 4 pitches is the hill to die on or something.

Back in the real world, 99% of baseball fans have moved on.

I'm glad opinions only matter when you're a part of the majority. It could be one person versus seven billion, and that opinion still counts as much. I am totally allowed to not be accepting of this.

[Jr.]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

The intentional walk rule has been at the youth level for years before it reached professional ball.

Base coaches wearing helmets is pretty sporadic below the collegiate level. No one in Colorado wears them unless they choose to.

And the intentional walk rule was instituted in professional ball to reduce the amount of dead time in the game. Nothing more. It had nothing to do with shortening games.

Did it need to be changed? Probably not. But it did and the sport has survived the armageddon.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Operation Sports mobile app

[countryboy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Heaven forbid we are having a healthy conversation about the MLB in a thread regarding exactly that. I tend to leave posts go unattended when I have nothing to contribute, not talk in their faces about what I think of them. If I did, I'd have a lot to say in The Show forum, and I mean lots.

I was posed a conversation about it and I brought it forward. I'm glad you actually read some of my talking points when you responded because others tend to pick-and-choose, but I'm fine ceasing conversation about it so long as people don't think I'm a lunatic for asking that my sport doesn't get changed "just because." There was no need to change the rule. Period.

The biggest deal made about this so far has been Manfred's push to change it, and the vote to approve the new mechanic. I am nowhere close to making this a bigger deal than he is in that regard.



I'm glad opinions only matter when you're a part of the majority. It could be one person versus seven billion, and that opinion still counts as much. I am totally allowed to not be accepting of this.

My comments were probably off base and for that I apologize.

And the thing is, I actually agree with you in terms of the change to the intentional walk. Honestly, there are several changes that have been made over the years that I don't/didn't agree with and wish didn't happen, but the game has survived and continues to be played, and I continue to enjoy it now today just as much as I did then, maybe a bit more as I get older.

But your defense of your opinion/stance has been so over the top that it's hard, for me at least, to hold a "healthy conversation" with you and discuss this topic.

As for your threat/warning or what have you in regards to you not posting in the Show forums, I appreciate the heads up.

[countryboy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

2019 Schedule has been released.

https://www.mlb.com/news/2019-mlb-schedule-highlights/c-291189904

Opening Series is March 20th and 21st in Tokyo featuring the A's and Mariners

Traditional Opening Day is Thursday March 28th.

All Star Game is July 9th

Cardinals open the year on the road in Milwaukee

[DamnYanks2]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Yankees and Red Sox in London in 2019 apparently.

Sent from my SM-J327VPP using Tapatalk