6A6261564065424D230 wrote: Let’s be honest...the three batter rule has nothing, nothing, to do with speeding up the game. It’s a smokescreen to cover what they are really doing, and why I hate the rule. They’re manipulating the game by essentially removing the LOOGY/ROOGY role. Now, like that guy and his role on the team or not, his job is essentially to get the other team's best hitter out, because the fact of the matter is that platoon splits are real.
So, just to use one example, let’s take the Cubs since they’re in division and most observers know them. Let’s say that Maddon's lineup has Rizzo-Bryant-Schwarber-Baez at 3, 4, 5, 6. Lefty, righty, lefty, righty. That’s common managerial strategy, to split your lefties and righties.
Just for the sake of the thought experiment, let’s say Liriano is still on the team next year and we’re playing them. If we want to bring him in to face Rizzo, that means he has to pitch to Bryant, too. Someone is going to get to face a pitcher who throws opposite them. In my scenario, it’s Bryant. On another day, it might be Rizzo. Regardless, MLB gets what they want, better matchups for their “stars.”
I don’t believe for a second this has anything to do with saving time. I think it has everything to do with the fact that guys hit fifty to a hundred points lower against pitchers that throw with the same hand with which they hit. MLB wants Mike Trout facing the occasional lefty. They want Rizzo facing the occasional righty.
I couldn’t care less about Tony LaRussa, wasting time bringing in three guys to get through the seventh inning or anything like that. I care about winning baseball games, and if an MLB team wants to employ a pitcher whose sole job it is to come in and get the other team's best lefty or righty out, they should be able to do that.
This is manipulating the game, and I hate it.
I agree. If a team wants to use a roster spot for a loogy or a roogy let them. There are plusses and minuses to that strategy.
Rule Changes Could Be Coming
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
Rule Changes Could Be Coming
406667706676050 wrote: Let’s be honest...the three batter rule has nothing, nothing, to do with speeding up the game. It’s a smokescreen to cover what they are really doing, and why I hate the rule. They’re manipulating the game by essentially removing the LOOGY/ROOGY role. Now, like that guy and his role on the team or not, his job is essentially to get the other team's best hitter out, because the fact of the matter is that platoon splits are real.
So, just to use one example, let’s take the Cubs since they’re in division and most observers know them. Let’s say that Maddon's lineup has Rizzo-Bryant-Schwarber-Baez at 3, 4, 5, 6. Lefty, righty, lefty, righty. That’s common managerial strategy, to split your lefties and righties.
Just for the sake of the thought experiment, let’s say Liriano is still on the team next year and we’re playing them. If we want to bring him in to face Rizzo, that means he has to pitch to Bryant, too. Someone is going to get to face a pitcher who throws opposite them. In my scenario, it’s Bryant. On another day, it might be Rizzo. Regardless, MLB gets what they want, better matchups for their “stars.”
I don’t believe for a second this has anything to do with saving time. I think it has everything to do with the fact that guys hit fifty to a hundred points lower against pitchers that throw with the same hand with which they hit. MLB wants Mike Trout facing the occasional lefty. They want Rizzo facing the occasional righty.
I couldn’t care less about Tony LaRussa, wasting time bringing in three guys to get through the seventh inning or anything like that. I care about winning baseball games, and if an MLB team wants to employ a pitcher whose sole job it is to come in and get the other team's best lefty or righty out, they should be able to do that.
This is manipulating the game, and I hate it.
I agree. If a team wants to use a roster spot for a loogy or a roogy let them. There are plusses and minuses to that strategy.
I just think that this is a terribly slippery slope to go down.
1. Eliminate specialists. check
2. Move the mound back and lower it. already being done in an indy league
3. Eliminate defensive shifts. Already being done in the same indy league
4. Universal DH. coming soon to a National League near you
MLB should just be honest...removing steroids from the game, combined with new strategies like pitching specialists, defensive shifts, and pitchers who universally throw harder, coupled with hitters who realize they can't slap hit their way to a nine-figure contract, has drastically reduced offensive numbers in the game. Yeah, it was steroid fueled, but the McGwire/Sosa home run chase of 1998 put butts in seats and eyes on screens. MLB needs to get back to that, but they can't bring the juice back into the game. So, they're going to systematically eliminate anything that adds to the offensive reduction to try to bring more "thunder" back into the game.
Question is...what's next? Limit the number of breaking balls pitchers can throw in a game? Catcher has to tell the batter what pitch is coming? Like in tee-ball? At least this will probably lead to robo umps eventually because that will all but eliminate pitch framing, yet another "advantage" the pitchers have.
So, just to use one example, let’s take the Cubs since they’re in division and most observers know them. Let’s say that Maddon's lineup has Rizzo-Bryant-Schwarber-Baez at 3, 4, 5, 6. Lefty, righty, lefty, righty. That’s common managerial strategy, to split your lefties and righties.
Just for the sake of the thought experiment, let’s say Liriano is still on the team next year and we’re playing them. If we want to bring him in to face Rizzo, that means he has to pitch to Bryant, too. Someone is going to get to face a pitcher who throws opposite them. In my scenario, it’s Bryant. On another day, it might be Rizzo. Regardless, MLB gets what they want, better matchups for their “stars.”
I don’t believe for a second this has anything to do with saving time. I think it has everything to do with the fact that guys hit fifty to a hundred points lower against pitchers that throw with the same hand with which they hit. MLB wants Mike Trout facing the occasional lefty. They want Rizzo facing the occasional righty.
I couldn’t care less about Tony LaRussa, wasting time bringing in three guys to get through the seventh inning or anything like that. I care about winning baseball games, and if an MLB team wants to employ a pitcher whose sole job it is to come in and get the other team's best lefty or righty out, they should be able to do that.
This is manipulating the game, and I hate it.
I agree. If a team wants to use a roster spot for a loogy or a roogy let them. There are plusses and minuses to that strategy.
I just think that this is a terribly slippery slope to go down.
1. Eliminate specialists. check
2. Move the mound back and lower it. already being done in an indy league
3. Eliminate defensive shifts. Already being done in the same indy league
4. Universal DH. coming soon to a National League near you
MLB should just be honest...removing steroids from the game, combined with new strategies like pitching specialists, defensive shifts, and pitchers who universally throw harder, coupled with hitters who realize they can't slap hit their way to a nine-figure contract, has drastically reduced offensive numbers in the game. Yeah, it was steroid fueled, but the McGwire/Sosa home run chase of 1998 put butts in seats and eyes on screens. MLB needs to get back to that, but they can't bring the juice back into the game. So, they're going to systematically eliminate anything that adds to the offensive reduction to try to bring more "thunder" back into the game.
Question is...what's next? Limit the number of breaking balls pitchers can throw in a game? Catcher has to tell the batter what pitch is coming? Like in tee-ball? At least this will probably lead to robo umps eventually because that will all but eliminate pitch framing, yet another "advantage" the pitchers have.