MLB’s competition committee will be voting on several rule changes in a meeting tomorrow (Friday), most of which are designed to speed up the pace of play, as well as to effectively kill the infield shift.
The pace of play measures include:
A pitch clock (15 seconds when the bases are empty, 20 seconds with runners on base); hitters will be required to be in the batter’s box and “alert” by the time the pitch clock is down to 8 seconds.
Hitters would be allowed only one “time out” per plate appearance
Pitchers only allowed two “disengagements” from the pitching rubber (which would include pickoff attempts) per batter
The proposed rule changes regarding the shift are:
Only two infielders allowed on each side of second base, and all infielders have to be on the infield dirt or infield grass
Infielders cannot be on the outfield grass before the pitch is thrown
The other proposed change is increasing the size of bases from 15" to 18".
So if a guy got thrown at twice when leading off by a wide margin, he could run with impunity? It sounds like a 3rd pickoff attempt would be against the rules.
So, a third pickoff attempt isn’t against the rules, but if it doesn’t lead to successfully throwing the runner out, the runner automatically gets a base.
Honestly, I’d rather that they adopt the “safety base” at first base (i.e., an extra base, adjacent to the first-base bag, but in foul territory, which is what the runner must touch to be safe at first) – if they were serious about reducing injuries, it seems like it’s those collisions and stepping on each other at first that should be addressed.
The increase in the size of the bases should reduce injuries around them while increasing stolen base attempts. Both outcomes occurred in the minors when the bigger bases were tested.
They use the bigger bags in the minors - it’s a noticeable increase in stolen bases. Think of how close your typical steal attempt is, and now decrease the total distance for the runner to cover by 6”. That’s not nothing.
Really 3 inches. The runner never starts at the first bag, but with a “lead” Theoretically, you could lead 3 inches more since first base is a little bigger, but I’m not sure that would happen. But even so, the whole 3 inches wouldn’t be in one direction, it would be 1.5 inches in each. BUT, many steals are that close. It should make a difference.
Of course it would. You lead off a distance you’re comfortable enough to be able get back to the base during a pick-off attempt.
Nope. 1st base is positioned against the foul line. Add 3” to it, it grows 3” towards 2nd base.
This part is incorrect, but I’ll keep it in in case anyone read it. I was positive I saw this discussed on mlb.tv in the last year… 2nd base is positioned with the “northern-most” (i.e. the one closest to centerfield) corner being 127 feet 3 3/8” from the bottom tip of home. This actually creates an imperfect diamond. That would grow the base 3” towards both 1st and 3rd.
All of the proposed rules changes have been approved by the competition committee, and will be implemented for the 2023 season.
There are four active players on the competition committee (Tyler Glasnow, Jack Flaherty, Whit Merrifield, Austin Slater), who all voted against the pitch clock and defensive shift changes. In this ESPN article about the vote, the MLBPA indicates that their “no” votes are a reflection of the union’s feeling that MLB hasn’t addressed “areas of concern” that the players had surfaced regarding the rule changes. (The article doesn’t go into detail on what those are.)
This whole thread has depressed me so much. I have a feeling I won’t be watching much “baseball” next season. I truly don’t understand. The league wants what? more viewers, so they pass rules to drive us away with nothing at all to attract new people. They want more scoring so they gut the offensive and defensive games with new rules that give the umpires the authority to run the game. Everyone turns into clock watchers and we all get to listen to arguments about whether you did this in time or not. Fun? Gone.
Speaking as a lifelong baseball fan: the way the game is played today has already squeezed a lot of the fun out, at least for me.
Games are more than a half-hour longer now than they were when I was younger, with no corresponding increase in actual in-game action. Almost all of that additional time is dead time: pitching changes, mound visits, batters stepping out of the box, pitchers wandering around the mound.
And, offense (outside of home runs) is as low as it’s been in 50 years. It’s become a game of strikeouts and station-to-station baserunning, as everyone waits for someone to hit a home run. Advanced statistics and analysis are what has led to things like the dearth of the stolen base, frequent pitching changes, and the overwhelming use of the defensive shift; the idea of “small ball” is virtually dead in today’s MLB.
Anything that has the potential to change those trends, and make the game something different from long stretches of nothing, interspersed with the occasional home run, is worth trying, in my book.
Games were 2 to 2.5 hours in the 70s when I got so invested in baseball. They drag on so slowly now. So many strikeouts. I will be happy with any changes that really speed up the game and the pitch clock is a big part of this. I’ve been strongly suggesting a lot of that list for many years now if you pour though my past MLB posts.
I have no problem with the pitch clock. The minor league games I have been to have not suffered because of it.
On the other hand, banning shifts and limiting throws to first base are fundamental and unnecessary changes to what was once a beautiful game. A game I hardly recognize now.
Are you aware of how often the defensive shift is now used? Every team in MLB is using it on at least one out of every six plate appearances by opposing batters, and on average, one out of three plate appearances has a defensive shift being used. For left-handed batters, the shift is being used over 50% of the time now. (source)
I’m of two minds on banning the shift. On the one hand, I have reservations about banning a strategy that has been part of baseball for decades. On the other hand, the fact that it’s used so often now has distorted the game.
Also, I’m sick of baseball fans (not that you are saying this) who say, “if you don’t like the shift, learn to hit the other way,” as though hitters who face the shift are just being stubborn or stupid.
Baseball has changed, because the players have gotten better and teams have gotten smarter. These changes are meant to bring the game back to closer to the game you grew up watching. It isn’t going to happen without rule changes.
I’m glad baseball recognizes the problem and is attempting to recify it, though I have mixed feelings about some of these. Changing the base size seems like an easy win and makes sense that didn’t have any opposition. A pitch clock could be good too. I personally am fine with a leisurally pace, but understand that isn’t a majority opinion. My concern is how it impacts pitchers to have less recovery time. If it causes them to take a little velocity off that would be great. If it just causes more injuries, less great. The shift rule is another that smart people seem to disagree with it. I would think that banning the shift will just cause batters to pull the ball even more. Perhaps though, pitchers can adjust, and it will actually result in more action. It still doesn’t seem to address the fundamental problem that pitchers are just too good at striking batters out. But I think it should help on the margins, and I’m glad we are trying things, even if they don’t all work out.
I cannot imagine that. But it turns out baseball players aren’t collectively dumb. Hitting the ball the other way, even against the shift, is not an effective strategy. The balls get hit much less hard negating any value of having less defenders. Pitchers also don’t help. You can’t aim a 98 mile hour inside fastball with movement quite as easily as a basketball in your hand.
