Yappi
Go Buckeyes
How MLB's new three-batter-minimum rule will impact the game
Baseball voted in a major rule change that will reshape bullpen usage. How will it work and who will it impact most?
www.espn.com
How MLB's new three-batter-minimum rule will impact the game
- Thread starter Yappi
- Start date
www.espn.com
The rule says a pitcher must face 3 batters or until the end of an inning. Therefore we will still see LOOGY's used especially with 2 outs.
Actually I think this rule will have more impact on lineups than anything. It won't be necessary to go left, right, left, right anymore. I think you'll see more Left, Right, Right hitters. It will become even more rare to have two lefties batting back to back but far more common to have righties back to back.
Actually I think this rule will have more impact on lineups than anything. It won't be necessary to go left, right, left, right anymore. I think you'll see more Left, Right, Right hitters. It will become even more rare to have two lefties batting back to back but far more common to have righties back to back.
Red14
Well-known member
I completely disagree with this rule change. This affects strategy of baseball. If the issue is speeding up the game, simply enforce the rules already in place. There is no need for batter to leave the batter's box, and pitchers to immediately take the ball and get on the mound after every pitch. Just tell the umpires to enforce the rules already in place and you don't have to monkey around with the game.
MasonComet
U. S. American
I don't hate the rule but I pretty much agree with your sentiment. I believe the games are "too long" only in the sense that there is too much time between pitches. I welcome the occasional 3 1/2 hour game when pitchers are pitching and batters act like they're not scared of the next pitch. It's not the length of the game per se as much as it's the lack of action. But guys stepping out of the box to adjust their batting gloves when they don't even lift the bat off their shoulder is just silly.
If it impacts the game by adding a few more blown saves, a few more late inning hits/runs, and possibly a little more drama, my current position is that that's not necessarily a bad thing.
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
Once he takes the mound, he'll still have to get an out. What if the oppoosing manager flips batter PH ? If the LOOGY doesn't get his out, he has to ride it out. Switch hitters ?
cabezadecaballo
Well-known member
I like it.
It does negate the manager a bit, but the game was great before all the crazy bullpen gyrations of the modern game, post-LaRussa.
Last edited:
Yes, he'll have to get that out but the odds are in his favor (that's why he's a LOOGY). Once the batter has been announced he has to bat. However you can make the pitching change after the batter is announced.
Yappi
Go Buckeyes
The rule change was made due to the evolution of the game. So many specialization players today compared to the past. If the revolving door of pitchers existed 100 years ago, they would have made a rule change back then too.
I think a simple way to overcome this without changing rules would have been for the bullpens to be right behind the dugouts and newly inserted pitchers would not be allowed any warmup pitches. They would need to step in to the game ready to pitch. All warmup pitches should have been completed in the bullpen. Only time warmups would be allowed would be injury or the start of an inning.
Red14
Well-known member
This rule change severely hampers the manager's ability to manage the game. I don't say I like all the pitching changes, but when you have certain matchups you like, why can't a manager do that? It's like saying in football you are required to run the ball on first down, or pass on 3rd down? As I've said before the major issue is time of the game, and that can be easily be corrected by eliminating a commercial or two between innings. Another thing is for the umpires to simply enforce the rules in place. There are rules that don't allow batters to step out, but it's not enforced.
Yappi
Go Buckeyes
I don't think it is as much about how long the game is, rather, it is the disruptions at the end of the game. What should be an exciting part of the game is turned into an endless array of commercials. It's even worse being at the game. Even if games were finishing in under 2 hours, I think they would consider this rule to keep the game flowing.
Red14
Well-known member
So is the games more for the fans enjoyment and comfort level, or the ability of the teams to win the game? I honestly don't care about fans being frustrated with changes, and if it's my team trying to win, I'm fine with it.
wolves82
Well-known member
LOL. Baseball and all sports are in business because of the fans. Fan's frustration leads to fewer fans, which means lower attendance, and more importantly, lower TV ratings. All of that leads to lower revenue. Baseball has a business problem and a perception problem that they are trying to address. But you miss the point again, and only care about managerial strategy impact.
"Severely". I think the stats are that same side matchups represent about 2% more runs that OH matchups. You shrink that down to the size of 3 batters and it's minuscule at best.
wolves82
Well-known member
So are you saying that the MLB baseball people should not change the rules to benefit MLB baseball?? Not sure I've seen a more inane and insane post.
Isn't it their job to make changes in the best interest of the sport?
Red14
Well-known member
Please tell me how this rule is in the best interest of baseball? It's only to speed the game up, so you don't have as many pitching changes. There are already rules in place to speed up the game that doesn't include taking some strategy away.
Again, the numbers don't support that there's much strategy in micromanaging lefty-righty matchups. It does not significantly affect the game.