MLB offseason 2020-2021

The Game Room
201

I think you nailed it. Ultimately current batters are strong enough to hit balls out of the current parks whenever they make really solid contact. So the park needs to be bigger, the ball deader, the bat deader, or making solid contact more difficult. But if we want the ball in play, baserunners, etc., making solid contact can’t be made more difficult.

Another angle is to incentivize putting the ball in play over waiting for “your pitch” to hit. As good as modern fielding is, that may just result in a lot of put-outs at first, which wouldn’t be progress.

Trying to alter the strike zone, the number of balls and strikes, the treatment of fouls, etc., is tough because a) the granularity is too high, and b) it’s tough to invent something that’s not even more subject to gamesmanship than the current set-up.

As a wild idea with only a few seconds’ thought behind it, what if a non-swinging strike counted as 2 strikes? Or increase the strike zone a lot, so there’s a lot more of a goal-tending POV for hitters; your goal is to keep it out of the catcher’s glove, not necessarily to hit it deep.

Shrinking the basepaths would decrease the speed advantage of a thrown ball over the runners running.

Pretty quick it stops looking much like current baseball though. As a comparison, arena football is non-stop entertaining, but it sure ain’t “real” football.

Ultimately I suppose the answer is today’s vastly better, faster, quicker, stronger athletes simply need a larger field of play. They’ve simply outgrown the fields they have. Widen the fair ground from 90 degrees to 120 degrees. Deepen it to 450 feet down the foul lines and 550 feet to center. That will restore the game to the dynamics of the 1930s, but with a lot less goofs.

Play Ball!

202

I don’t think increasing the strike zone will help at all. It’ll just jack up strikeouts. The “Goaltending” effect won’t work; if you make it easier for pitchers to get strikes, you make it easier for them to get strikeouts.

As you point out, the number of balls and strikes cannot be adjusted with sufficient granularity.

Fantastic idea. The difference doesn’t have to be that great. Reducing the basepaths to 86, 87 feet would make a huge difference.

What happens if you draw the bases in to 87 feet apart? Infielders have to play a little shallower; more ground balls sneak though. Contact will be encouraged and speed is more valuable. Those are both good things.

The changes should be subtle of course, you don’t want people hitting .540. You want it to look like it did in 1986, when the average team hit 140 homers, stole 130 bases. Batters hit about .260 excluding pitchers, and struck out 35% less than they do now.

203

If that means making the Mets good again, I’m all for it!

It just occurred to me that I can’t even remember the last time I saw a legit triple.

204

I don’t know how you define legit triple. But this was a memorable one from the Dodgers last October

205

That’s a good one. The THONK against the back wall was especially satisfying.

206

Triples aren’t down much… well, not from 1986, anyway. They climb very slowly as you go backwards in time.

I’d like to see a few more. Triples are exciting. They are down largely because fielding and positioning are better, but also due to shorter fences. Move fences out, more triples.

207

Lindor is seeking a 12-year deal worth $385 million, which would top the 12-year, $365 million deal that Mookie Betts signed with the Dodgers last year. Do you think Lindor is worth it, implying he’s better than Betts?

208

Lindor is a year younger and plays a more important position. He has a decent argument if this is the market we’re in.

209

There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with tinkering with baseball rules, as long as changes make the game more interesting/entertaining and aren’t designed to prevent ingenious adaptations because of “tradition”. Banning infield shifts seems particularly moronic. Hitters have had many decades in which to figure out how to defeat them. Smarter batters replacing dinosaurs is part of baseball evolution.

It hasn’t translated to MLB yet, but allowing “steals” of first base might liven things up (it’s been tried on the minor league level).

For even more variety, MLB could abolish rule 708i, which prevents players from stealing bases in reverse order. The rule was implemented after Germany Schaefer got on first in a 1908 game and stole second, hoping to draw a throw so his teammate on third could score. The catcher held onto the ball, but that didn’t stop Schaefer. From the account by Davy Jones:

“So now we had men on second and third. Well, on the next pitch Schaefer yelled, ‘Let’s try it again!’ And with a blood-curdling shout he took off like a wild Indian back to first base, and dove in headfirst in a cloud of dust. He figured the catcher might throw to first — since he evidently wouldn’t throw to second — and then I would come home same as before. But nothing happened. Nothing at all. Everybody just stood there and watched Schaefer, with their mouths open, not knowing what the devil was going on.”

“The umpires were just as confused as everybody else. However, it turned out that at that time there wasn’t any rule against a guy going from second back to first, if that’s the way he wanted to play baseball, so they had to let it stand. So there we were, back where we started, with Schaefer on first and me on third. And on the next pitch, darned if he didn’t let out another war whoop and take off again for second base. By this time the Cleveland catcher evidently had enough, because he finally threw to second to get Schaefer, and when he did I took off for home and both of us were safe.”

I suspect baseball was more fun in those days.*

*Schaefer tried it again in 1911 and succeeded in getting himself caught in a rundown between first and second while the guy on third broke for home - but was thrown out.
**Schaefer was also (in)famous for calling his shot while pinch-hitting for the Tigers in '06. Again, according to Tigers teammate Davy Jones in “The Glory Of Their Times”, Schaefer yelled to the fans: “Ladies and gentlemen, you are now looking at Herman Schaefer, better known as ‘Herman the Great,’ acknowledged by one and all to be the greatest pinch-hitter in the world. I am now going to hit the ball into the left field bleachers. Thank you.”
On the first pitch from Doc White, Schaefer hit the ball into the left field bleachers.

210

Just a reminder that starting today, all T-Mobile and Sprint customers can sign up for their free subscription to MLB.tv.

211

Neat. If I understand this correctly, basically any time the catcher misses a pitch, the batter is allowed to run to first? What happens if the catcher runs after a wild pitch, the batter moves towards first, and the catcher tags the batter? The batter says “I wasn’t running, I just stepped out of the box!” In other words, what determines when the batter becomes a runner?

I’m in favor of experimenting with rule innovations, but allowing backwards base-running might be too much even for me. :slight_smile:

212

Durn traditionalists. :frowning:

213

Actually, now that I’ve put some more thought into this, I now support backwards base-running. So long as you’re allowed to steal home from first! (I think I may have accidentally reinvented cricket.)

214

I think Lindor is playing a dangerous game, if he’s actually sticking to 12/385 and not just negotiating. This coming offseason Seager and Story will be Free Agents, so there is a good chance he’ll end up with something less than the Mets’ offer of 10 years for $325mil.

215

I agree. It was pointed out that Lindor is a year younger, not that it makes a big difference in my mind. I looked at his stats. Betts’ worst season of OPS+ is equal to Lindor’s career OPS+. Lindor IS good and is a shortstop, there may be some added value there. But overall worth more than Betts? Not to me.

216

Lindor is a year younger than Betts, but Betts made his deal a year ago, so if Lindor gets his deal now, then the age thing is a wash. And if Lindor holds out until the end of this season, he’ll actually be older, when he signs his free agent deal, than Betts was when he signed his Dodgers contract.

And Betts is averaging 8.6 WAR per 162 games. Lindor is at 6 WAR per 162 (that’s Baseball Reference numbers; Baseball Prospectus numbers are lower for both, but still have Betts ahead by about 2 wins per year).

Part of the equation, also, is not just what position they play, but what sort of free agent market there is for that position when the deals are getting done, and if he waits until the end of the year that could be a factor. Still, I think that @Munch is right about one thing: given the state of the market, and how good Lindor is, it’s certainly possible he’ll get what he’s asking.

217

Woohoo! Yeah - as an offensive player, Betts is much better. They’re both very good defensively. The market for a SS is always going to be a little higher than for an RF, but the major factor is salary inflation. Working against Lindor holding out is a potential players strike at the end of the season.

218

Getting tired of athletes and their ‘personal decision’ about getting the vaccine. https://twitter.com/billplunkettocr/status/1376998138368598017?s=21

I don’t expect a guy like Mookie Betts to be a genius, but if he can help protect himself and his teammates, this should be a no brain decision. And unlike the average Joe, he’s got access to excellent medical professionals.

How about instead of making up games canceled due to Covid, they forfeit?

219

The league needs to crack the hell down on this shit ASAP. Get the shot or you don’t play. If the player’s union complains, lock them out. Stadium clubhouses are already small, poorly ventilated, and a hygienic disaster zone.

220

Leaving aside the “if he gets it he’s worth it” argument, no he is not. Or to put it more clearly; I absolutely would not consider Lindor more valuable than Betts.

Munch has already elucidated the argument FOR Lindor; he is a year younger and plays shortstop.

The arguments against this are, however, certainly persuasive to me:

  1. Lindor isn’t as good a player. If you believe in WAR, Betts has been better every year for the last six years, usually not by a small margin.

  2. Betts has especially been much better the last three years.

  3. I don’t think the positional difference is that great. Betts isn’t a slug in the outfield; he’s an AWESOME outfielder, and there’s a lot of value in a terrific defensive outfielder.

  4. Lindor’s OBPs don’t compare, and of all things I want in a ballplayer it’s that.