Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know I am going to be killed on here, but I have come to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe , baseball games in MLB should just be reduced to 7 innings instead of 9. first of all , most starting pitchers can't go more then 5-6 innings anyway , and if these games were only 7 innings, you would eliminate the garbage middle relief "specialists", the majority of whom don't belong in MLB anyway and would not be if not for expansion that took place in the 1990s.
Alos, i have read that the MLB Commissioner is considering adding two more teams via expansion to bring the total of MLB teams to 32. Mmore garbage pitchers that can't pitch more then 10 pitches before being yanked by a micromanaging Joe Girardi or Gabe Kapler type. Tired of it, tired of seeing these starting pitchers pitch brilliantly, only to be broken down by watching their masterpieces be ruined by some scrub of a pitcher who should not be in the Major Leagues....
and before you say it would ruin the tradition/history of the game, that has been ruined already by Bud Selig ( interleague play, late WS start times, all-star game is nonsense, no more doubleheaders with 1 ticket, three divisions in each league, overpriced tickets, etc)
My primary reason for opposing such a change would be the mess it would make of the record books as we would then have records for seven inning games and records for nine inning games. Comparing ballplayers and teams across eras is already difficult and requires adjustments to level the playing surface, I would not wish to see another complication added to this.
Quote:
Alos, i have read that the MLB Commissioner is considering adding two more teams via expansion to bring the total of MLB teams to 32. Mmore garbage pitchers that can't pitch more then 10 pitches before being yanked by a micromanaging Joe Girardi or Gabe Kapler type
Do you have some reason to believe that expansion would result in lowering the quality of pitchers but not the batters? In both cases you are adding players to the league who otherwise would not have made the cut. The difference between the worst major leaguers and the best Triple A players is difficult to detect, which is why such players get referenced as replacement level. I think it is quite possible to add another 50 Triple A players to MLB without a quality drop being particularly noticeable to the fan, as long as they are spread out among the 32 teams and not all concentrated on the expansion clubs. This would not have been possible under the original expansion rules before the age of free agency, but keep in mind that Arizona won a World Series in its 4th year, the Marlins won one in their 5th year. These aren't your Daddy's expansion clubs.
Eh...the game has become more like background music. It's length is eternal but to make changes in the way the game is played is foolish. Reading the other day they actually were discussing if games go extra innings to place men on first base so to increase chance of runs. Leave it alone..yea there's too many teams and not enough quality pitchers or catchers for that matter.
there's too many teams and not enough quality pitchers or catchers for that matter.
A reduction in the number of teams would not solve this problem because it is one of perception. If you vanquish a team, you are freeing up both hitters and pitchers to sign with the remaining teams. Naturally the best of them will be signed and the worst will be back in the minors or out of organized baseball. While the worst of the hitters are gone, so are the worst of the pitchers. Those who are left will be facing a higher caliber of competition and it will reduce their stats so that the stats of the worst players will look very much like those of the players that are no longer around. The perception of there being a lot of crappy players will still be generated because players who performed better against the weaker competition, now have it tougher.
I know I am going to be killed on here, but I have come to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe , baseball games in MLB should just be reduced to 7 innings instead of 9. first of all , most starting pitchers can't go more then 5-6 innings anyway , and if these games were only 7 innings, you would eliminate the garbage middle relief "specialists", the majority of whom don't belong in MLB anyway and would not be if not for expansion that took place in the 1990s.
Alos, i have read that the MLB Commissioner is considering adding two more teams via expansion to bring the total of MLB teams to 32. Mmore garbage pitchers that can't pitch more then 10 pitches before being yanked by a micromanaging Joe Girardi or Gabe Kapler type. Tired of it, tired of seeing these starting pitchers pitch brilliantly, only to be broken down by watching their masterpieces be ruined by some scrub of a pitcher who should not be in the Major Leagues....
and before you say it would ruin the tradition/history of the game, that has been ruined already by Bud Selig ( interleague play, late WS start times, all-star game is nonsense, no more doubleheaders with 1 ticket, three divisions in each league, overpriced tickets, etc)
...yea there's too many teams and not enough quality pitchers or catchers for that matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander
While the worst of the hitters are gone, so are the worst of the pitchers.
Those who are left will be facing a higher caliber of competition....
This is the point. Similar change would be an improvement for most business and schools as well.
Quote:
The perception of there being a lot of crappy players will still be generated
because players who performed better against the weaker competition, now have it tougher.
7 innings won't happen. Among all of the other reasons, the players' union would fight it to the end. It would remove the need for most relief pitchers and many bench players. The 25 man roster commonly contain about 12-13 pitchers. That would probably be reduced to maybe 8. 5 starters, 1 closer, 1 long-man, 1 "reliever." I don't know how it would change the bench exactly, but if players play less innings they probably would need less days off.
One could make the argument that is a good thing. But, the union wants players to be paid. So if it means a 25-man roster is going to only need 18 men? They'd probably fight that.
Also your pitcher argument really isn't that strong anyway. Pitchers used to pitch complete games most of the time. Then they started averaging 8 innings, then 7 innings, etc.
If the game went to 7 innings AND if rosters stayed at 25-men, I'd expect starters to pitch even less. Maybe twice through the order only. And we'd still have a lot of pitching changes as pitchers were used for even less batters.
I agree the game could use some speeding up. But skipping the last two innings would take a great deal of strategy out of the game and put many closers out of a job. Better to keep the 8th & 9th inning but start counting the innings at 3.
Okay, but it's not. An effect of reducing the size of the player pool will be to reduce the extremes. Right now there are about 375 ML pitchers and the ML ERA is 4.08. Let us say that four franchises are eliminated which would remove 50 pitchers. In theory these will be the 50 worst pitchers in MLB. The ML ERA for those who remain will be lower than it was for the overall group with the 50 worst included. Consequently, batters will be facing a tougher challenge. While the worst batters will also have been eliminated, the fat stats of the best hitters will be reduced. They will look like lesser stars because their averages and home run totals will have shrunk because you removed the pitchers who gave up the most hits and walks.
Baseball is an accounts balanced game. Every hit for a batter is a hit charged against a pitcher or against a defense. Every caught stealing for a runner is an assist for the catcher and so forth. You cannot change one element without a cascade effect which alters other aspects of the game.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
