Author Topic: Pitch clock.  (Read 3409 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online imref

  • Posts: 26800
  • 1B: The New Hot Corner
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #25: October 16, 2014, 06:20:05 PM »
Can a manager challenge a pitch clock if it expires when the pitcher's arm is in motion?

What if the pitcher tucks the pitch?

Online Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 12474
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #26: October 16, 2014, 06:22:49 PM »
Here's what I don't understand: when they compare things to 30 years ago, how about in addition to the length of games, we talk about the fact that total attendance at baseball games in 1984 was 45 million and in 2013 was 74 million. Or how baseball revenues have grown exponentially. Or how in addition to live attendance, MLB is in front of every other major sport in online delivery and that MLB Advanced Media rakes in dough from the MLB at bat app? Or that teams are setting record after record in local TV rights deals?

Why are we drawing conclusions and making major changes to the game based on World Series rating declines? The game is HEALTHY. It's maybe never been healthier. So what if a couple million less people watch the World Series because they think baseball games last too long?
I don't think it hurts to tweak things.  There is no real good reason why games should be three hours.  It would help the future of the game to make some of these adjustments.  As far as attendance, be realistic.  How many of those people watch the whole game.  Most arrive late and leave early.  Eventually some of that attendance might dry up.  And TV revenues are most important. 

Online Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 12474
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #27: October 16, 2014, 06:23:55 PM »
Can a manager challenge a pitch clock if it expires when the pitcher's arm is in motion?

What if the pitcher tucks the pitch?
Yeh, we don;t want to have any debates over rules.  Because that never happens now!

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22041
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #28: October 16, 2014, 07:00:33 PM »
This is freaking stupid. It's baseball. The game without clocks. Take that crap to football or some other timed game.
But it's not without time restrictions. Technically, some of these restrictions are already in place, just not enforced. We just aren't accustomed to seeing them displayed on the field. There's not a clock that's saying an inning will only last 20 minutes. You still have to get three outs an inning. You still have to get 27 outs. But not expecting the game to evolve is an irresponsible way to treat the game. It must evolve or it will go the way of horse racing and boxing.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45257
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #29: October 16, 2014, 07:04:15 PM »
Here's what I don't understand: when they compare things to 30 years ago, how about in addition to the length of games, we talk about the fact that total attendance at baseball games in 1984 was 45 million and in 2013 was 74 million. Or how baseball revenues have grown exponentially. Or how in addition to live attendance, MLB is in front of every other major sport in online delivery and that MLB Advanced Media rakes in dough from the MLB at bat app? Or that teams are setting record after record in local TV rights deals?

Why are we drawing conclusions and making major changes to the game based on World Series rating declines? The game is HEALTHY. It's maybe never been healthier. So what if a couple million less people watch the World Series because they think baseball games last too long?

Compare football and basketball. They're longer too. A football game is longer than a baseball game now.

Online Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 12474
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #30: October 16, 2014, 07:23:34 PM »
Compare football and basketball. They're longer too. A football game is longer than a baseball game now.
Football teams only play once per week. You are right that those games are getting too long also. I believe the NCAA is considering eliminating the clock stoppage after first downs


Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 70650
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #31: October 16, 2014, 07:26:42 PM »
I believe the NCAA is considering eliminating the clock stoppage after first downs


that sounds like a good rule. Just put in a 2 minute warning and play the same as the NFL.

Offline Slateman

  • Posts: 45257
  • thanosdidnothingwrong
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #32: October 16, 2014, 07:56:30 PM »
that sounds like a good rule. Just put in a 2 minute warning and play the same as the NFL.

And give the NFL the NCAA's overtime rules

Online Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 12474
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #33: October 16, 2014, 08:03:08 PM »
And give the NFL the NCAA's overtime rules
Agree. The NCAA ot games are great.

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1161
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #34: October 16, 2014, 08:08:34 PM »
If they implement it based on what they modeled it from, the clock stops when the pitcher comes set.

Offline Kevrock

  • Posts: 12504
  • Troll So Hard University
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #35: October 16, 2014, 10:08:40 PM »
No

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 9994
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #36: October 17, 2014, 10:25:13 AM »
Then why are they working slower and slower all the time?

Here are three things I see slowing the game.

1. Batters working the count, and fouling off pitches.   This enriches the game and nothing should be done to curtail this.

2. Batters stepping out after every pitch.   This is the one thing I think could be addressed by actual rules.

3. Longer breaks between inning.  This seems to be an economic reality (more commercials can be aired) and if MLB has the will to change this then they should.  But they won't. It would mean less revenue.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22041
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #37: October 17, 2014, 10:45:55 AM »
1. Batters working the count, and fouling off pitches.   This enriches the game and nothing should be done to curtail this.
Is this true? Strikeouts are at an all time high. You hear all the old timers talk about how it was shameful to strikeout. It seems like that would be more conducive to working counts than the "swing for the fences" mentality it seems like everyone has.

2. Batters stepping out after every pitch.   This is the one thing I think could be addressed by actual rules.
I think this is a two way street. There are plenty of pitchers that take their own sweet time as well. There are actually rules on the books that address this for both the pitchers and the hitters, as I understand it. This would just be enforcing them.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19559
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #38: October 17, 2014, 10:58:45 AM »
Is this true? Strikeouts are at an all time high. You hear all the old timers talk about how it was shameful to strikeout. It seems like that would be more conducive to working counts than the "swing for the fences" mentality it seems like everyone has.


average number of pitches per game is rising http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/7533

Online Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 12474
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #39: October 17, 2014, 11:02:08 AM »
average number of pitches per game is rising http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/7533
INteresting.
Only goes back to the late 80s.  8% increase.  That accounts for some of the game length increase but not all.


Offline NJ Ave

  • Posts: 3221
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #40: October 17, 2014, 11:08:44 AM »
Football teams only play once per week. You are right that those games are getting too long also. I believe the NCAA is considering eliminating the clock stoppage after first downs

Why are all these sports worrying? THEY'RE MAKING MORE MONEY THAN EVER!

Just fixing things that don't need fixing.

Offline NJ Ave

  • Posts: 3221
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #41: October 17, 2014, 11:10:51 AM »
INteresting.
Only goes back to the late 80s.  8% increase.  That accounts for some of the game length increase but not all.



Also, patience leads to increased strikeouts. You'd think that striking out more indicates fewer pitches, but it's actually the reverse. More strikeouts and more walks indicate deeper counts and patience as much as the inability to put bat on ball.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 9994
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #42: October 17, 2014, 01:04:07 PM »
I think this is a two way street. There are plenty of pitchers that take their own sweet time as well.

But (as I mentioned earlier) there is a disincentive for pitchers so it is their own punishment and no rule is needed.  Batters have no such disincentive.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22041
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #43: October 17, 2014, 01:14:57 PM »
But (as I mentioned earlier) there is a disincentive for pitchers so it is their own punishment and no rule is needed.  Batters have no such disincentive.
That depends on how the umpires enforce it. If they allow the pitcher to deliver the pitch as the clock winds down whether the batter is in the box or not, there will be plenty of incentive.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 9994
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #44: October 17, 2014, 01:46:27 PM »
If they allow the pitcher to deliver the pitch as the clock winds down whether the batter is in the box or not, there will be plenty of incentive.
Yes that's true. But i don't think there is a chance in hell that that would be allowed.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22041
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #45: October 17, 2014, 01:53:26 PM »
Yes that's true. But i don't think there is a chance in hell that that would be allowed.
If the powers that be make it a point of emphasis, it will be. If they emphasize from the outset in spring training, they'll adjust in a hurry.

Offline welch

  • Posts: 12443
  • 2018: The Fight for .500
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #46: October 17, 2014, 04:58:21 PM »
Don't change a thing. The 18-inning marathon was better than any Super Bowl, except that few of us were dressed for 45 degree weather. For dramatics, see the 1986 NL championship between the Mets and Astros, and then games 6 and 7 of that World Series. Everyone remembers Game 6, but the Red Sox had a lead in Game 7; the Mets-Astros final seemed like it would never end...Mets, visiting team, take a two-run lead in extra innings, and I got on a subway happy, got off to discover that the game was tied again.

You don't get that with a timed game.

I think the interesting stat is "Number of players used per game". See http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/6927

The line is fairly stable from 1920 - 1980, and very stable from 1940 - 1980...what I would call "classic baseball", the era of Feller, Spahn, Williams, DiMaggio, Mantle, Mays, Aaron and the rest. It angles upward from 1980, suggesting that managers now use more one-inning or even one-batter relief pitchers. The NL would use more pinch-hitters.

Anything that forces the pitcher or hitter to change would hurt the game.

On "number of pitches thrown", it's interesting. Pitchers were expected to throw more like 125 or 130 pitches per game. Paul Richards set a 100-pitch limit for his "baby" staff, and people ridiculed Milt Pappas and the rest of the Orioles staff. After the 9th inning of Game 2, I've come to think that a manager should leave a pitcher in until he begins to lose it. No "6-inning quality start", no 7th, 8th, 9th inning specialists. Each pitcher in each game is unique. Please, Matt W., don't script the pitching.

Offline skippy1999

  • Posts: 16331
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #47: October 17, 2014, 05:27:39 PM »
Don't change a thing. The 18-inning marathon was better than any Super Bowl, except that few of us were dressed for 45 degree weather. For dramatics, see the 1986 NL championship between the Mets and Astros, and then games 6 and 7 of that World Series. Everyone remembers Game 6, but the Red Sox had a lead in Game 7; the Mets-Astros final seemed like it would never end...Mets, visiting team, take a two-run lead in extra innings, and I got on a subway happy, got off to discover that the game was tied again.

You don't get that with a timed game.

I mean, the game is not timed,  it'd still take as many innings and as much time as necessary for a team to win, no? :shrug:

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22041
Re: Pitch clock.
« Reply #48: October 17, 2014, 07:36:23 PM »
You don't get that with a timed game.
It won't be a timed game. These rules are already on the books. They're just enforcing them, or trying to figure out the best way to enforce them.