I propose a rule change in baseball
frankhardy
Posts: 8,097 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
I know that baseball has much tradition in it and statistics are used to compare one generation to another. However, I don't think my proposed rule change will alter future stats too much and it will make the game better.
The bottom line is that pitchers have an easy way out when a teams best hitter comes up. When a teams best hitter gets really hot, it becomes a no brainer - you walk him. I get to see this first hand with Albert Pujols on a daily basis. Yes, I know, if the Cardinals would give him better protection around him, he would get more opportunities to hit. Just a few days ago, the opposition intentionally walked him with the bases loaded. I would love to see a rule change that would give someone like Pujols a chance to hit more instead of the pitcher being able to take the bat out his hands so often.
Here is my proposed change. This is on a "per player" basis.
The first time a certain player is walked in a game (whether intentional or unintentional), the player gets one base, just like now. In other words, no change on the first walk in a game.
When a player gets walked for a second time in a game (whether intentional or unintentional), he gets 2 bases and goes to second base. This would put more pressure on the other team to not walk a guy like Pujols every flippin' time he comes up.
When a player gets walked for a third time in a game (whether intentional or unintentional), he gets 3 bases and goes to third base.
I think you get the picture. I think this would make pitchers and managers pick their spot a little more carefully. That would allow some of the games greatest hitters to showcase there skills.
The bottom line is that pitchers have an easy way out when a teams best hitter comes up. When a teams best hitter gets really hot, it becomes a no brainer - you walk him. I get to see this first hand with Albert Pujols on a daily basis. Yes, I know, if the Cardinals would give him better protection around him, he would get more opportunities to hit. Just a few days ago, the opposition intentionally walked him with the bases loaded. I would love to see a rule change that would give someone like Pujols a chance to hit more instead of the pitcher being able to take the bat out his hands so often.
Here is my proposed change. This is on a "per player" basis.
The first time a certain player is walked in a game (whether intentional or unintentional), the player gets one base, just like now. In other words, no change on the first walk in a game.
When a player gets walked for a second time in a game (whether intentional or unintentional), he gets 2 bases and goes to second base. This would put more pressure on the other team to not walk a guy like Pujols every flippin' time he comes up.
When a player gets walked for a third time in a game (whether intentional or unintentional), he gets 3 bases and goes to third base.
I think you get the picture. I think this would make pitchers and managers pick their spot a little more carefully. That would allow some of the games greatest hitters to showcase there skills.
Shane
0
Comments
Pitchers throwing the ball straight down the middle of the plate all game would actually make the best hitters stand out less
And why wouldn't they just hit him instead?
<< <i>This also assumes that intentionally walking a player is more beneficial to the pitching team than actually pitching to the hitter, which is a point I'm not at all convinced is legitimate. I would much rather have a player walk 650 times a year than hit .330 with 40 HR's (at least I think I would, on the surface it seems like a good trade off). >>
Of course you would rather a player walk 650 times in a year. What I am saying is, for one at bat, with a runner on second and third, would you rather see Pujols (or someone like him) walk, or would you rather see him get a chance to hit?
As far as Bonds and the Giants, yes, that would have made them much more dangerous. That is my point.
Shane
<< <i>
<< <i>This also assumes that intentionally walking a player is more beneficial to the pitching team than actually pitching to the hitter, which is a point I'm not at all convinced is legitimate. I would much rather have a player walk 650 times a year than hit .330 with 40 HR's (at least I think I would, on the surface it seems like a good trade off). >>
Of course you would rather a player walk 650 times in a year. What I am saying is, for one at bat, with a runner on second and third, would you rather see Pujols (or someone like him) walk, or would you rather see him get a chance to hit?
As far as Bonds and the Giants, yes, that would have made them much more dangerous. That is my point. >>
Id rather not see him unintentionally walked and a run score and runners still at 2nd and 3rd. I realize you want to see him bat, but the way it is set up is good now imo.
http://sportsfansnews.com/author/andy-fischer/
<< <i>
Pitchers throwing the ball straight down the middle of the plate all game would actually make the best hitters stand out less
>>
You do have a point. My rebuttal to that would be that most players never walk more than once per game, so it wouldn't affect most players. It would only affect the best hitter on a team.
This is all just a thought and it may be ridiculous. It just gets a little annoying to see Pujols (or back in the day, McGwire) get walked or pitched around all the time.
Shane
<< <i>
<< <i>This also assumes that intentionally walking a player is more beneficial to the pitching team than actually pitching to the hitter, which is a point I'm not at all convinced is legitimate. I would much rather have a player walk 650 times a year than hit .330 with 40 HR's (at least I think I would, on the surface it seems like a good trade off). >>
Of course you would rather a player walk 650 times in a year. What I am saying is, for one at bat, with a runner on second and third, would you rather see Pujols (or someone like him) walk, or would you rather see him get a chance to hit? >>
Hopefully Dallas or Hoopster or TomG will jump in here, but I bet that in the scenerio you just painted the decision between walking him or pitching to him is probably pretty close. In any event, I would be very surprised to discover that it's the kind of 'no brainer' which you're making it out to be.
your proposed rule seems just a tad silly :0)
As a Giants' fan, I understand your frustration. That said, while Pujols is on pace for 168 walks (which is a LOT, but still nowhere Bonds' record of 232), it is not the objective of the opposing team's pitcher/manager to ENTERTAIN you. Their primary objective, if not only objective, is to do what they can to win the game. As such, if they think walking Pujols increases their chances of winning, they're going to walk him. As such, I can't see any rule change happening. Also, while I think Pujols is a great player, if MLB didn't change the rules for Bonds (who walked 872 times over 712 games from 2000-2004), I don't think they're going to change the rules for Pujols. You say that:
<< <i>Just a few days ago, the opposition intentionally walked him with the bases loaded. >>
I've checked every game this season and I didn't see this. I could have missed it. So can you tell me what game this occurred on? Thanks.
/s/ JackWESQ
It isn't? in some other thread that is paramount! Now with that said Shane are you serious?
edited to add: It could be called 'cap on walks' I guess.
Steve
<< <i>
You do have a point. My rebuttal to that would be that most players never walk more than once per game. . . >>
Last year Soriano had two multi-walk games, Bonds had 38 (and if that is a fluke, Burrell had 28), the rest of the league falls somewhere in the middle. With eight or nine spots in the starting lineup, it probably happens in a significant number of games
<< <i>. . . so it wouldn't affect most players. It would only affect the best hitter on a team. >>
But when any hitter draws one walk, the pitcher will do more to avoid the harsher penalties of subsequent walks. Further, being able to draw multiple walks, or even just one walk and take advantage of the situation would become the ultimate offensive weapon. With every batter working the count to the fullest the five hour barrier for nine inning games would start to fall regularly
Shane
Logically speaking, you may have a point. But I can't imagine MLB instituting a rule that would REDUCE offensive production.
/s/ JackWESQ
How about if MLB eliminated four teams(to get rid of the glut of bad pitchers and hitters), put the mound height higher up, used baseballs that aren't juiced, moved the fences back further than Pony League distance, and eliminated all body armor for the batters?
Then it wouldn't be so easy for guys like Pujols and Bonds to hit the ball out of the park, thus reducing the fear pitchers would have in facing them...which would bring their intentional(and unintentional/intentional) walk totals down some.
<< <i>
<< <i>
This is all just a thought and it may be ridiculous. It just gets a little annoying to see Pujols (or back in the day, McGwire) get walked or pitched around all the time. >>
The Cardinals have to get players in front of and behind Pujols that make pitchers pitch to him. You can't walk Manny with Big Papi
coming up behind him.
<< <i>FrankHardy,
How about if MLB eliminated four teams(to get rid of the glut of bad pitchers and hitters), put the mound height higher up, used baseballs that aren't juiced, moved the fences back further than Pony League distance, and eliminated all body armor for the batters?
Then it wouldn't be so easy for guys like Pujols and Bonds to hit the ball out of the park, thus reducing the fear pitchers would have in facing them...which would bring their intentional(and unintentional/intentional) walk totals down some. >>
amen to that
http://sportsfansnews.com/author/andy-fischer/
<< <i>What I am saying is, for one at bat, with a runner on second and third, would you rather see Pujols (or someone like him) walk, or would you rather see him get a chance to hit?
>>
I'd rather them just play baseball the way it should be played and has been played for years. It's the teams fault if they don't have protection around these big name guys, and they shouldn't get rewarded for that.