Rule Changes
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
fjk090852-7
- Posts: 3590
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 2:52 pm
Rule Changes
Recently they changed the intentional walk rule, and the Commissioner has said there may be future rule changes next season. It won't happen, but I would like Baseball to expand rosters for the entire season to 28 players. Fourteen pitchers and fourteen position players. Each game a team would activate only 25 players. In most cases three pitchers would be inactive which in most cases would be the previous days starter, and the upcoming next two starting pitchers. That would give teams a six man position player bench and a few additional bullpen arms if a game goes beyond nine innings.
Rule Changes
545859020B020A07001F05320 wrote: Recently they changed the intentional walk rule, and the Commissioner has said there may be future rule changes next season. It won't happen, but I would like Baseball to expand rosters for the entire season to 28 players. Fourteen pitchers and fourteen position players. Each game a team would activate only 25 players. In most cases three pitchers would be inactive which in most cases would be the previous days starter, and the upcoming next two starting pitchers. That would give teams a six man position player bench and a few additional bullpen arms if a game goes beyond nine innings.
I don't know if I agree with this, as it's a big change. You're eliminating strategies when you do something like this. You make substitutions less problematic and painful. I LIKE it when benches get short and the bullpen is as well. That's when things get interesting. I LIKE it when there's a situation when you might consider putting a pitcher on the mound you really don't want to. I LIKE it when a team, in the playoffs, considers pulling a starting pitcher early in game 6 so that he might pitch in relief in game 7. Might as well go with a DH if we're going to have so many players.
Maybe try a 26-player roster first if you really want to go that direction. We're changing pitchers a lot more than we used to even 30 years ago, and the extra roster spot could help there without going overboard. I guess that wouldn't be too crazy, and wouldn't kill strategic elements of the game entirely.
I don't know if I agree with this, as it's a big change. You're eliminating strategies when you do something like this. You make substitutions less problematic and painful. I LIKE it when benches get short and the bullpen is as well. That's when things get interesting. I LIKE it when there's a situation when you might consider putting a pitcher on the mound you really don't want to. I LIKE it when a team, in the playoffs, considers pulling a starting pitcher early in game 6 so that he might pitch in relief in game 7. Might as well go with a DH if we're going to have so many players.
Maybe try a 26-player roster first if you really want to go that direction. We're changing pitchers a lot more than we used to even 30 years ago, and the extra roster spot could help there without going overboard. I guess that wouldn't be too crazy, and wouldn't kill strategic elements of the game entirely.
-
Bobster21
Rule Changes
18333F36333268655C0 wrote: Recently they changed the intentional walk rule, and the Commissioner has said there may be future rule changes next season. It won't happen, but I would like Baseball to expand rosters for the entire season to 28 players. Fourteen pitchers and fourteen position players. Each game a team would activate only 25 players. In most cases three pitchers would be inactive which in most cases would be the previous days starter, and the upcoming next two starting pitchers. That would give teams a six man position player bench and a few additional bullpen arms if a game goes beyond nine innings.
I don't know if I agree with this, as it's a big change. You're eliminating strategies when you do something like this. You make substitutions less problematic and painful. I LIKE it when benches get short and the bullpen is as well. That's when things get interesting. I LIKE it when there's a situation when you might consider putting a pitcher on the mound you really don't want to. I LIKE it when a team, in the playoffs, considers pulling a starting pitcher early in game 6 so that he might pitch in relief in game 7. Might as well go with a DH if we're going to have so many players.
Maybe try a 26-player roster first if you really want to go that direction. We're changing pitchers a lot more than we used to even 30 years ago, and the extra roster spot could help there without going overboard. I guess that wouldn't be too crazy, and wouldn't kill strategic elements of the game entirely.
I don't like it either. It isn't supposed to be so easy for the manager by giving him those extra bench players or relievers. It would also lengthen games with more pitching changes.
I don't know if I agree with this, as it's a big change. You're eliminating strategies when you do something like this. You make substitutions less problematic and painful. I LIKE it when benches get short and the bullpen is as well. That's when things get interesting. I LIKE it when there's a situation when you might consider putting a pitcher on the mound you really don't want to. I LIKE it when a team, in the playoffs, considers pulling a starting pitcher early in game 6 so that he might pitch in relief in game 7. Might as well go with a DH if we're going to have so many players.
Maybe try a 26-player roster first if you really want to go that direction. We're changing pitchers a lot more than we used to even 30 years ago, and the extra roster spot could help there without going overboard. I guess that wouldn't be too crazy, and wouldn't kill strategic elements of the game entirely.
I don't like it either. It isn't supposed to be so easy for the manager by giving him those extra bench players or relievers. It would also lengthen games with more pitching changes.
Rule Changes
517C71606776612122130 wrote: Recently they changed the intentional walk rule, and the Commissioner has said there may be future rule changes next season. It won't happen, but I would like Baseball to expand rosters for the entire season to 28 players. Fourteen pitchers and fourteen position players. Each game a team would activate only 25 players. In most cases three pitchers would be inactive which in most cases would be the previous days starter, and the upcoming next two starting pitchers. That would give teams a six man position player bench and a few additional bullpen arms if a game goes beyond nine innings.
I don't know if I agree with this, as it's a big change. You're eliminating strategies when you do something like this. You make substitutions less problematic and painful. I LIKE it when benches get short and the bullpen is as well. That's when things get interesting. I LIKE it when there's a situation when you might consider putting a pitcher on the mound you really don't want to. I LIKE it when a team, in the playoffs, considers pulling a starting pitcher early in game 6 so that he might pitch in relief in game 7. Might as well go with a DH if we're going to have so many players.
Maybe try a 26-player roster first if you really want to go that direction. We're changing pitchers a lot more than we used to even 30 years ago, and the extra roster spot could help there without going overboard. I guess that wouldn't be too crazy, and wouldn't kill strategic elements of the game entirely.
I don't like it either. It isn't supposed to be so easy for the manager by giving him those extra bench players or relievers. It would also lengthen games with more pitching changes.
That was exactly my thought. The game is already getting too long with all of these pitching changes and the usage of extra players. Giving a manager like Hurdle extra bench players would make his head explode.
I don't know if I agree with this, as it's a big change. You're eliminating strategies when you do something like this. You make substitutions less problematic and painful. I LIKE it when benches get short and the bullpen is as well. That's when things get interesting. I LIKE it when there's a situation when you might consider putting a pitcher on the mound you really don't want to. I LIKE it when a team, in the playoffs, considers pulling a starting pitcher early in game 6 so that he might pitch in relief in game 7. Might as well go with a DH if we're going to have so many players.
Maybe try a 26-player roster first if you really want to go that direction. We're changing pitchers a lot more than we used to even 30 years ago, and the extra roster spot could help there without going overboard. I guess that wouldn't be too crazy, and wouldn't kill strategic elements of the game entirely.
I don't like it either. It isn't supposed to be so easy for the manager by giving him those extra bench players or relievers. It would also lengthen games with more pitching changes.
That was exactly my thought. The game is already getting too long with all of these pitching changes and the usage of extra players. Giving a manager like Hurdle extra bench players would make his head explode.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Rule Changes
This would hurt small market teams and dilute major league baseball talent. I don't like it. I think teams carry too many pitchers. The specialty pitchers are used too much (one batter, one inning).
Rule Changes
6D666E6267667D383E497068616666276A66090 wrote: This would hurt small market teams and dilute major league baseball talent. I don't like it. I think teams carry too many pitchers. The specialty pitchers are used too much (one batter, one inning).
I agree with Bobster, in that it will make the games longer with more substitutions.
I also agree with Dog that this will hurt small-market teams and dilute talent. If the big-market teams had room on the roster, they'd offer bigger contracts than the small-market teams can afford and scoop up more talented players than they already do. We'd never be able to get anything better than a 4A pitcher if we didn't trade for or draft him, to say nothing of the state of our bench. We're already working the reclamation project angle - if there were suddenly 90 more roster positions available, we wouldn't even get a decent reclamation project.
Sorry fjk090852-7. I'd like to have an extra roster spot or 3 at times as well, but if every team has them, we'll get the short end of the stick.
I agree with Bobster, in that it will make the games longer with more substitutions.
I also agree with Dog that this will hurt small-market teams and dilute talent. If the big-market teams had room on the roster, they'd offer bigger contracts than the small-market teams can afford and scoop up more talented players than they already do. We'd never be able to get anything better than a 4A pitcher if we didn't trade for or draft him, to say nothing of the state of our bench. We're already working the reclamation project angle - if there were suddenly 90 more roster positions available, we wouldn't even get a decent reclamation project.
Sorry fjk090852-7. I'd like to have an extra roster spot or 3 at times as well, but if every team has them, we'll get the short end of the stick.
-
fjk090852-7
- Posts: 3590
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 2:52 pm
Rule Changes
No problem. You don't have to be sorry. It was an idea that I threw out and it is great to get the opinions from others like myself who enjoy baseball.
-
johnfluharty
Rule Changes
1 extra spot would be helpful in the situations where managers insist on carrying an extra pitcher and shorting their bench and likely wouldn't dilute talent much. Some AAAA guys would just end up in the majors.
Rule Changes
I could see teams being permitted an extra slot for a backup catcher, available in case of injury. As it now stands, managers can't use their backup catcher to hit at any point because he may be needed if there is an injury. But not just to add one more pitcher.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3642
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Rule Changes
6A6F686E666C756861727479000 wrote: 1 extra spot would be helpful in the situations where managers insist on carrying an extra pitcher and shorting their bench and likely wouldn't dilute talent much. Some AAAA guys would just end up in the majors.
I don't think that's what would happen though. The Cubs/Dodgers/Whatever would sign one more legitimate free agent away from other teams, leaving the Pirates or Reds with two extra AAAA guys. If they had a slot for another guy they'd certainly use it, leaving less for everyone else.
I don't think that's what would happen though. The Cubs/Dodgers/Whatever would sign one more legitimate free agent away from other teams, leaving the Pirates or Reds with two extra AAAA guys. If they had a slot for another guy they'd certainly use it, leaving less for everyone else.