Although I’m not a fan of stolen bases (or, really, stealing in any context), I heartily agree that baseball needs more doubles and triples. You’re absolutely right about the entertainment value.
I really like the idea of keeping 2 infielders on each side of the diamond.
Above all, after living through the Maddux-Glavine Era, I eagerly look forward to Robo-umps for balls and strikes. I for one welcome our new silicon overlords.😉
I think you're all nuts. Leave the game the way it is. It's worked fine for 100+ years. People started losing interest in the game because of the lack of consistent rules. Let's change the intentional walk, and take a big part of the game away. Dumb. Let's make the pitchers dance around the rubber, since they don't know from one year to the next what a balk is going to be. And even when they do, half the umpires don't know. Let's change the shift, let's scrutinize what a catch is, let's make bigger bases, let's change the ball size, let's change the bat size, Dh or no Dh, let's make pitchers have to go a complete inning, let's make it ok to run to first on a dropped ball, let's scrutinize the umpires(well actually that may be ok). Enough already. You're all sounding like a bunch of politicians. I'm sick and tired of the pure game being torn apart. I'm going to scream now, excuse me!
Great read, i just got to it. I hope you revisit topic going into 2022.
Of all the potential rule changes the robot ump seems the most dramatic, and personally, terrifying. Beyond any issues of reliability, accuracy, and pace of play, it literally sucks life and nuance out of the game. So what if maddox and glavine were given calls? They had the accuracy to earn that. The umpire is fundamental to the pitcher-catcher-batter cat and mouse game. Adjustments, adjustments, adjustments! Robo umps might be good for guys who swing off their heels every pitch and have no 2 strike approach...
This is a step in the right direction. However, none of this addresses the problem of too many strikeouts, walks and home runs, and not enough doubles and triples. This is what the game really needs. Ballparks need to be reconfigured to how they used to be and players need to start driving the ball in the gaps again. And what ever happened to the hit and run?
If shifts affect LHB more than RHB, that's not all bad: LHB have 2 (or 3) built-in advantages over RHB that are irrefutable and arguably "unfair." Why should LHB have advantages IF they can be somewhat evened out?
I'm against banning the shift, because if action is baseball is about more balls in play, then hitters should be skilled and able to hit it the other way. That would put more balls in play. Shifts are a response to hitters that overly emphasize their pull side. What's so wrong about changing your strategy to get those hitters out when a traditional defensive alignment gives you a worse chance? Brandon Belt certainly has dropped down a bunt or two to beat the shift, and with the gigantic gaps created by the shift on left-handers, a line drive that the shortstop would ordinarily have caught can now be a hit. Fans should applaud hitters who have the skill and the willingness to do whatever it takes to beat the shift. If people beat the shift consistently, then the opposing team will settle back into a standard defensive alignment, or perhaps even come up with a new type of shift to deal with it.
The only argument I can see for banning the shift is that it exacerbates home runs by getting people to try to hit over the shift. But then you have to make the calculation of "does a 50% chance of getting a single or a <10% chance of getting a home run benefit my team more". So I'm not against it.
i think about that passage in the abstract all the time. its implications go way beyond baseball.
i am cool with rule changes meant to create a more dynamic game. but i think what baseball needs is a few unorthodox thinkers.
when everybody zigs, he who zags generally falls on his face. but every now and then he finds a better way. it's occurred to me many times over the past few seasons that if a team were to fully commit to the running/speed game, they'd catch the entire league flat-footed. that team might not win it all. but they'd certainly be fun to watch.
Although I’m not a fan of stolen bases (or, really, stealing in any context), I heartily agree that baseball needs more doubles and triples. You’re absolutely right about the entertainment value.
I really like the idea of keeping 2 infielders on each side of the diamond.
Above all, after living through the Maddux-Glavine Era, I eagerly look forward to Robo-umps for balls and strikes. I for one welcome our new silicon overlords.😉
I think you're all nuts. Leave the game the way it is. It's worked fine for 100+ years. People started losing interest in the game because of the lack of consistent rules. Let's change the intentional walk, and take a big part of the game away. Dumb. Let's make the pitchers dance around the rubber, since they don't know from one year to the next what a balk is going to be. And even when they do, half the umpires don't know. Let's change the shift, let's scrutinize what a catch is, let's make bigger bases, let's change the ball size, let's change the bat size, Dh or no Dh, let's make pitchers have to go a complete inning, let's make it ok to run to first on a dropped ball, let's scrutinize the umpires(well actually that may be ok). Enough already. You're all sounding like a bunch of politicians. I'm sick and tired of the pure game being torn apart. I'm going to scream now, excuse me!
Great read, i just got to it. I hope you revisit topic going into 2022.
Of all the potential rule changes the robot ump seems the most dramatic, and personally, terrifying. Beyond any issues of reliability, accuracy, and pace of play, it literally sucks life and nuance out of the game. So what if maddox and glavine were given calls? They had the accuracy to earn that. The umpire is fundamental to the pitcher-catcher-batter cat and mouse game. Adjustments, adjustments, adjustments! Robo umps might be good for guys who swing off their heels every pitch and have no 2 strike approach...
Anyway, great article.
This is a step in the right direction. However, none of this addresses the problem of too many strikeouts, walks and home runs, and not enough doubles and triples. This is what the game really needs. Ballparks need to be reconfigured to how they used to be and players need to start driving the ball in the gaps again. And what ever happened to the hit and run?
If shifts affect LHB more than RHB, that's not all bad: LHB have 2 (or 3) built-in advantages over RHB that are irrefutable and arguably "unfair." Why should LHB have advantages IF they can be somewhat evened out?
I'm against banning the shift, because if action is baseball is about more balls in play, then hitters should be skilled and able to hit it the other way. That would put more balls in play. Shifts are a response to hitters that overly emphasize their pull side. What's so wrong about changing your strategy to get those hitters out when a traditional defensive alignment gives you a worse chance? Brandon Belt certainly has dropped down a bunt or two to beat the shift, and with the gigantic gaps created by the shift on left-handers, a line drive that the shortstop would ordinarily have caught can now be a hit. Fans should applaud hitters who have the skill and the willingness to do whatever it takes to beat the shift. If people beat the shift consistently, then the opposing team will settle back into a standard defensive alignment, or perhaps even come up with a new type of shift to deal with it.
The only argument I can see for banning the shift is that it exacerbates home runs by getting people to try to hit over the shift. But then you have to make the calculation of "does a 50% chance of getting a single or a <10% chance of getting a home run benefit my team more". So I'm not against it.
i think about that passage in the abstract all the time. its implications go way beyond baseball.
i am cool with rule changes meant to create a more dynamic game. but i think what baseball needs is a few unorthodox thinkers.
when everybody zigs, he who zags generally falls on his face. but every now and then he finds a better way. it's occurred to me many times over the past few seasons that if a team were to fully commit to the running/speed game, they'd catch the entire league flat-footed. that team might not win it all. but they'd certainly be fun to watch.
I recently found your page and really enjoying your take on the game. I'm all for banning the shift much for the reasons you laid out.