domrep
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by domrep on Feb 21, 2017 10:14:37 GMT -5
Wieters to the Nats, will be interesting to see what the contract looks like. And it doesn't sound like the Nats are going to trade for a closer, which is probably their one big weakness.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2017 16:59:07 GMT -5
Wieters to the Nats, will be interesting to see what the contract looks like. And it doesn't sound like the Nats are going to trade for a closer, which is probably their one big weakness. Too bad. The White Sox have a couple for them.
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Feb 21, 2017 18:38:30 GMT -5
Alex Rodriguez said Tuesday at Yankees camp that he's retired and has no intention of continuing his playing career.
|
|
The Kevstaaa
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,891
Member is Online
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 21, 2017 20:37:30 GMT -5
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 16,937
|
Post by BRV on Feb 21, 2017 20:48:23 GMT -5
I can't say enough how much I hate the new rule that you can just give a signal for an intentional walk instead of throwing four pitches. It takes all of what, 20 seconds to throw four intentional balls? And add to that, while it's exceedingly rare, it does take a potential play out of the game. For example, now we will never get the chance to see something like these:
It's yet another example of Major League Baseball bastardizing the game in the name of safety or time. They are thinking that they're doing something good for the game, like instant replay or removing collisions at the plate or takeout slides at second base, but in slightly tinkering with it, they're likely to do more harm than good.
|
|
StuntGranny®
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Not Actually a Granny
Posts: 16,099
|
Post by StuntGranny® on Feb 21, 2017 20:57:12 GMT -5
This is so f***ing stupid and pointless. If someone thinks baseball is too long, maybe they should just not watch it.
|
|
The Kevstaaa
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,891
Member is Online
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 21, 2017 21:13:34 GMT -5
I don't hate the idea of changing things in baseball. Sometimes baseball minds get way too stuck in their ways. This one wouldn't bug me much but it doesn't even make a real impact. I saw a tweet that said this now makes the average game just 1.5 pitches shorter. Not much of a difference.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 16,937
|
Post by BRV on Feb 21, 2017 21:39:06 GMT -5
This is so f***ing stupid and pointless. If someone thinks baseball is too long, maybe they should just not watch it. This, more or less, is how I feel. Baseball needs to accept the fact that they're not going to win over casual fans or today's social media-crazed generation where instant gratification is the only gratification. It will not ever be as exciting to watch on television as football, basketball, or hockey. So instead of catering to the dolts with the attention span of a goldfish who only watch Opening Day and the final game of the World Series, why not improve the game for the fans that actually do sit down to watch 100 or so games a year? Baseball fans are a dedicated lot, they'll stick with you through a great deal of muck and mire, but the more the game changes to cater to a fan base that really doesn't have interest in the product, the more likely MLB is to lose what is an already-dwindling demographic: actual baseball fans.
|
|
|
Post by burdette25159 on Feb 21, 2017 23:51:38 GMT -5
Meanwhile in other news, the MLB commish sides with the Diamondbacks saying that Chase Field "Needs work"
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Feb 22, 2017 1:54:11 GMT -5
I do not mind it. Baseball needs some changing and while yes I appreciate the game and its history there is no doubt as other games are getting faster baseball is getting slower. Baseball is a purist sport and long time fans and people in the business will not take to the change immediatly.
It took people a while to get used to replay becoming a thing which was a big change so I have no doubt it will take the same time for people to get used to the newer rules and regulations they put in.
|
|
|
Post by sfvega on Feb 22, 2017 6:17:23 GMT -5
I do not mind it. Baseball needs some changing and while yes I appreciate the game and its history there is no doubt as other games are getting faster baseball is getting slower. Baseball is a purist sport and long time fans and people in the business will not take to the change immediatly. It took people a while to get used to replay becoming a thing which was a big change so I have no doubt it will take the same time for people to get used to the newer rules and regulations they put in. I agree. There are way better hills to die on for baseball purists than the f***ing intentional walk. It took waaaay too long for replay for really stupid reasons, thankfully the pushback on this one has not nearly been as bad.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Feb 22, 2017 10:56:06 GMT -5
I do not mind it. Baseball needs some changing and while yes I appreciate the game and its history there is no doubt as other games are getting faster baseball is getting slower. Baseball is a purist sport and long time fans and people in the business will not take to the change immediatly. It took people a while to get used to replay becoming a thing which was a big change so I have no doubt it will take the same time for people to get used to the newer rules and regulations they put in. I agree. There are way better hills to die on for baseball purists than the f***ing intentional walk. It took waaaay too long for replay for really stupid reasons, thankfully the pushback on this one has not nearly been as bad. Baseball is in a weird transition all around. Front offices are getting younger with people living and dying on analytics but there is something to be said about having people who know the game instead of those of just project Number's. Baseball is right to reject shit thrown out there like a "automatic" strike zone where you won't need umpires.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Feb 22, 2017 18:20:19 GMT -5
The ditching of the IBB is ridiculously stupid. On average, a baseball game has less than 1.5 intentional walks a game, so this accomplishes just about nothing.
Said it before, will say it again: enforce the rules that are already on the books and the pace of the game (which is, ultimately, more important than the actual length of the game) will improve dramatically. It worked for decades, there's no reason why we can't have that pace again without having to screw with rules and bring in a bunch of gimmicks.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 16,937
|
Post by BRV on Feb 22, 2017 19:31:00 GMT -5
I do not mind it. Baseball needs some changing and while yes I appreciate the game and its history there is no doubt as other games are getting faster baseball is getting slower. Baseball is a purist sport and long time fans and people in the business will not take to the change immediatly. It took people a while to get used to replay becoming a thing which was a big change so I have no doubt it will take the same time for people to get used to the newer rules and regulations they put in. I agree. There are way better hills to die on for baseball purists than the f***ing intentional walk. It took waaaay too long for replay for really stupid reasons, thankfully the pushback on this one has not nearly been as bad. For me, it's not really a hill to die on as much as it is that my criticism is a tacit acknowledgement that this is yet another effort by Major League Baseball to either speed up the game or make it safer, when every previous effort over the last half-decade to speed up the game or make it safer has been a calamitous failure. I don't think anyone will miss watching the pitcher lob four balls for an intentional walk but it's just a half-baked idea by MLB under the guise of improving the product for fans with no attention span that will ultimately be irrelevant because there's about one intentional walk a game and it takes about 20 seconds to accomplish. You want to actually speed up the game? Force pitchers to actually throw the ball in under 20 seconds as opposed to holding onto the ball, checking the runner at first, faking a throw to first, shaking off the signals from the catcher, allowing the batter to call time-out, wiping the sweat from his brow, looking in at the signs again, shaking off the catcher again, checking the runner at first again, then throwing the pitch.
|
|
|
Post by sfvega on Feb 22, 2017 19:41:44 GMT -5
I agree. There are way better hills to die on for baseball purists than the f***ing intentional walk. It took waaaay too long for replay for really stupid reasons, thankfully the pushback on this one has not nearly been as bad. For me, it's not really a hill to die on as much as it is that my criticism is a tacit acknowledgement that this is yet another effort by Major League Baseball to either speed up the game or make it safer, when every previous effort over the last half-decade to speed up the game or make it safer has been a calamitous failure. I don't think anyone will miss watching the pitcher lob four balls for an intentional walk but it's just a half-baked idea by MLB under the guise of improving the product for fans with no attention span that will ultimately be irrelevant because there's about one intentional walk a game and it takes about 20 seconds to accomplish. You want to actually speed up the game? Force pitchers to actually throw the ball in under 20 seconds as opposed to holding onto the ball, checking the runner at first, faking a throw to first, shaking off the signals from the catcher, allowing the batter to call time-out, wiping the sweat from his brow, looking in at the signs again, shaking off the catcher again, checking the runner at first again, then throwing the pitch. This isn't about every other attempt to speed up the game. What, realistically, is the argument FOR keeping the IBB the way it is? To me, the backlash on this is just representative of the fact that a portion of baseball fans are gonna drag their feet on any change in the game, no matter how small and completely, painfully, mind-numbingly insignificant.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 22:13:04 GMT -5
I agree. There are way better hills to die on for baseball purists than the f***ing intentional walk. It took waaaay too long for replay for really stupid reasons, thankfully the pushback on this one has not nearly been as bad. For me, it's not really a hill to die on as much as it is that my criticism is a tacit acknowledgement that this is yet another effort by Major League Baseball to either speed up the game or make it safer, when every previous effort over the last half-decade to speed up the game or make it safer has been a calamitous failure. I don't think anyone will miss watching the pitcher lob four balls for an intentional walk but it's just a half-baked idea by MLB under the guise of improving the product for fans with no attention span that will ultimately be irrelevant because there's about one intentional walk a game and it takes about 20 seconds to accomplish. You want to actually speed up the game? Force pitchers to actually throw the ball in under 20 seconds as opposed to holding onto the ball, checking the runner at first, faking a throw to first, shaking off the signals from the catcher, allowing the batter to call time-out, wiping the sweat from his brow, looking in at the signs again, shaking off the catcher again, checking the runner at first again, then throwing the pitch. The game will be back to its tawdry crawl when micromanagement has to use 3 different pitchers in the 7th inning; one for each batter. Each one of them gets "at least 7" warm-up throws (some get more), they start 0-2 with two heaters, then they all think they're Greg Maddux all of a sudden, nibbling at the plate corners. They strike the guy out on (typical) a 3-2 fastball. That's what takes forever in baseball. Constant pitching changes. Sure, you go out in order, but that's at least a half hour of bullshit that isn't needed. (Bullshit in a sense that the team doing this stuff is down 9-2.) Then 5 days later, they whine how their bullpen is overworked.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Feb 23, 2017 7:35:11 GMT -5
For me, it's not really a hill to die on as much as it is that my criticism is a tacit acknowledgement that this is yet another effort by Major League Baseball to either speed up the game or make it safer, when every previous effort over the last half-decade to speed up the game or make it safer has been a calamitous failure. I don't think anyone will miss watching the pitcher lob four balls for an intentional walk but it's just a half-baked idea by MLB under the guise of improving the product for fans with no attention span that will ultimately be irrelevant because there's about one intentional walk a game and it takes about 20 seconds to accomplish. You want to actually speed up the game? Force pitchers to actually throw the ball in under 20 seconds as opposed to holding onto the ball, checking the runner at first, faking a throw to first, shaking off the signals from the catcher, allowing the batter to call time-out, wiping the sweat from his brow, looking in at the signs again, shaking off the catcher again, checking the runner at first again, then throwing the pitch. This isn't about every other attempt to speed up the game. What, realistically, is the argument FOR keeping the IBB the way it is? To me, the backlash on this is just representative of the fact that a portion of baseball fans are gonna drag their feet on any change in the game, no matter how small and completely, painfully, mind-numbingly insignificant. Twofold argument, for me: the current IBB at least opens the door to potential chaos (the rare instance where a pitcher screws up) and also can throw a pitcher off his game by making him throw lobbed pitches instead of his regular stretch, making it a more interesting as a strategic decision. Second: in the same way I dislike how the DH removes a lot of thinking from making ing-game lineup changes or making bullpen decisions during a game, I feel this decision lends itself toward baseball feeling too "mechanical" rather than organic or, again, even somewhat chaotic in small doses. To me the game loses a lot of its appeal when things become automatic, as it would if they brought about the rule that got floated around over the past couple of years of removing defensive shifts. Baseball is chock full of weird idiosyncrasies, everything down to the fact that just about every baseball stadium has different dimensions, and I hate to see anything removed from the game that cuts into that weirdness. Beyond that, again, to me this is a hammer searching for a nail, and then creating one when it can't find one. Shaving five minutes off a game will do absolutely nothing (and, in the case of intentional walks, you're likely saving no more than about 45 seconds). It won't get casual viewers to tune in more often. Enforcing the rules already on the books that prevent batters from stepping out of the box, or prevent pitchers from dilly-dallying when nobody's on base, absolutely could have a positive impact, since that's the part of a game a casual viewer is more likely to see while channel surfing. If MLB finishes a season and celebrates "Hey, we've shaved an average of three minutes off our game length!", it will mean literally nothing, since pace matters more than actual time with this stuff. Did see another good point elsewhere, though: if baseball wants to draw in more fans, get better announcers. Here in the tri-state the Mets' TV and radio announcers have completely spoiled us with how good they are, but man alive, having used MLB.tv and having XM to listen to radio broadcasts, there are just some absolutely dire broadcast teams out there, not to mention the crappy national broadcast teams MLB saddles its fans with each game of the week, All Star weekend, and playoff. If the game is going to go nearly 3 hours, then at least make the conversation surrounding the game interesting, not just a evidence-less cliche-fest, or constant dead air, or various other hallmarks of a bad baseball broadcast.
|
|
|
Post by Duke Cameron on Feb 23, 2017 14:52:05 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 9:11:35 GMT -5
The man may have not "officially" retired, but his number will be June 24th. Mark Buerhle's #56 will join the others that day in a pre-game ceremony. (If the ceremony is like his pitching, the ceremony might last one minute and 32 seconds.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 15:00:14 GMT -5
|
|