Article: Upcoming Rule Changes Greatly Benefit Tyler Austin’s Future

[SomeGuy]

 

Viewers hate pitching changes and will tune out if you allow a substitution.

Have you ever tuned out after a pitching change?  It doesn't take that long, about 2 minutes?  People with attention spans that low probably aren't going to like baseball to begin with.

[yarnivek1972]

Per an article on Yahoo, it is 13 pitchers max until September then 14.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/mlb-announces-new-rules-for-trade-deadline-all-star-voting-home-run-derby-152243554.html

[Mike Sixel]

 

Have you ever tuned out after a pitching change?  It doesn't take that long, about 2 minutes?  People with attention spans that low probably aren't going to like baseball to begin with.

 

I'm almost certain you missed some sarcasm....

[dbminn]

I support the 26-man roster if they limit pitchers to 13 spots.

 

During the past 30+ years, pitching staffs have increased from 10 to 13 for most teams. There are now 8 RP to choose from in the late innings, while the team on offense has 3 PH options. Most of the time, the three PH include a backup C, OF, and a UT player. Hardly a fair battle of managerial strategy. 

 

For competitive teams, it will probably be a veteran. For a struggling team, it might be a prospect. In any case, it will give the offense another tool in late innings.

 

Here's an article that contains a handy set of graphs showing changes in age and roster use during the past 100 years.

[REPETE]

Why don't they address replay?  I can't stand watching the manager stand at the top step, while the umpires stare at him for 30 seconds while some other coach watches TV.   

 

I was in favor of replay if it meant not having to watch Gardy argue (incorrectly time & time again) for 2 minutes.  The "Gardy Replay Rule" should eliminate time consuming arguments, not take up more time by waiting 30 seconds just to go to commercial because they're not going to challenge.  

 

Like the additional roster spot, hate the 3 Batter minimum.  That fundamentally changes strategies.  Plus, a RP that "just doesn't have it" can blow a lead pretty easily in 3 batters.  

[SomeGuy]

 

 

Teams have until July 31st to prepare for all possibilities. 

 

If a team does not have suitable replacements on their roster come August 1st. It will be the GM's fault.

 

Just the same as if a GM rosters a LOOGY and spends the year moaning that his LOOGY has to face 3 batters miniumum which includes right-handers who routinely light him up. 

 

The rules will be in place... The GM"s must adjust to the rules or work at a significant disadvantage to the other GM's who adjusted to the rules. Sticking to yesterday's roster management in today's world is generally a bad idea.    

Saying that a GM should always have a suitable replacement for a star level player might be a stretch.  Especially considering the disparity of payrolls around the league.  Tampa Bay can't reasonably have an answer to losing a star player in August.  Doesn't seem like you have an answer for who benefits from ditching the August waiver deadline.

 

The 3 batter rule is designed to eliminate a strategy so GMs making an adjustment is really a backwards step.  Doesn't really have anything to do with the quoted trade deadline comment either.  I think it opens the door for those moments when you realize oh this pitcher clearly doesn't have it tonight.  Guess we are stuck with him for at least 3 batters.  Might suck for those end of game or playoff scenarios when you always want someone ready in relief.

[markos]

 

the union has already said it did not agree to the three batter minimum.....but on other things, yes, it's likely a good sign.

I wonder if this is one of those things that might change back quickly. I can imagine that there might be a lot of pushback by fans if they have to watch their own pitcher implode for 3 batters. Is it really a good thing for the game if a pitcher walks the first batter on 4 pitches and then gets booed by his own fans for 2 more batters as he is struggling to find the zone? Does that speed up the game at all? A new pitcher will need to enter that game anyway. 

 

Also, it probably isn't a good look if a bunch of pitchers get "injured" mid-batter or something in order to get another pitcher in the game. 

[ahart10]

I’m all for the roster rules changes. The three batter minimum and position player pitching rules are only baffling to me. Forcing a guy who doesn’t have it that night to stay in will only make games longer. A lot of LOOGY will lose their job also.

Edited March 14, 2019 by ahart10

[SomeGuy]

 

 

I'm almost certain you missed some sarcasm....

I did because it seems Manfred actually believes people tune out like this. 

Edited March 14, 2019 by SomeGuy

[SomeGuy]

 

 

Certainty this rule will force teams to pick a direction earlier. They won't be able to hedge their bets as easily by using the waiver/trade rules in August. As far as injury replacements go, teams just may need to be sure they have quality reinforcements in the minors. Waiver pickups will still be available as well. I think teams may be forced to be a little more active before the July 31 trade deadline. I doubt if that is a bad thing.

I think it is ultimately a bad thing if a team has to call up someone from AAA to replace an elite player especially near playoff time.  At least they could try to land a decent player in the old system.

 

At the end of August you are over 150 games in, one big injury can cripple a lot of teams.  That team could already be in a position to clinch a spot and you now have a weak team in the playoffs.  It could also mean one less team fighting for those last spots.  The later deadline was a nice emergency plan for anything that you really can't plan for.

 

I don't see the positive in this rule change.

Edited March 14, 2019 by SomeGuy

[markos]

 

Saying that a GM should always have a suitable replacement for a star level player might be a stretch.  Especially considering the disparity of payrolls around the league.  Tampa Bay can't reasonably have an answer to losing a star player in August.  Doesn't seem like you have an answer for who benefits from ditching the August waiver deadline.

I think small-market teams specifically benefit from the ditching of the August waiver deadline. Good teams, who have a real need for a specific player, can easily get blocked by their opponents (with worse records or in the other league) making waiver claims on that specific player. But there is an asymmetry there, as small-market teams are probably more reluctant to make a defensive claim on an expensive player that would help their opponents because they can ill-afford to be saddled with the salary. 

 

Personally, I wish they would have just moved the regular trade deadline to August 31.

Edited March 14, 2019 by markos

[chaderic20]

On today's radio broadcast Cory asked Falvey about these changes.  Falvey mentioned he expects there to be "tweaks" to the 3 batter minimum rule.  In particular they discussed the option of waiving the minimum if the opposing team puts in a pinch hitter.  That way a team can't suddenly put in a couple righties where they had lefties or vice versa and force your pitcher to face them.

[SomeGuy]

 

I think small-market teams specifically benefit from the ditching of the August waiver deadline. Good teams, who have a real need for a specific player, can easily get blocked by their opponents (with worse records or in the other league) making waiver claims on that specific player. But there is an asymmetry there, as small-market teams are probably more reluctant to make a defensive claim on an expensive player that would help their opponents because they can ill-afford to be saddled with the salary. 

 

Personally, I wish they would have just moved the regular trade deadline to August 31.

Moving the actual deadline would probably be better.  More competitive teams later into the season.  Would probably mean less return for the selling team though.  Might make the other broken system of the qualifying offer more appealing to teams.

 

I think small markets might also be negatively affected too.  if payroll is keeping them from grabbing a rental on an expensive contract that would be quite a bit cheaper a month later.

[howieramone2]

 

I like the rule changes, but even more than that, I like the collaboration between the owners and the players. This seems like a huge step in avoiding a strike, I would have thought both sides would have been waiving these changes around like weapons in an attempt to score a better deal in the upcoming CBA.

 

It almost makes me think the owners have already let it be known to the MLBPA that they're aware the current economic situation is crap and the players will get a bigger piece of the pie in the next CBA.

They threw a dog a bone.

[nicksaviking]

 

Saying that a GM should always have a suitable replacement for a star level player might be a stretch.  Especially considering the disparity of payrolls around the league.  Tampa Bay can't reasonably have an answer to losing a star player in August.  Doesn't seem like you have an answer for who benefits from ditching the August waiver deadline.

 

The 3 batter rule is designed to eliminate a strategy so GMs making an adjustment is really a backwards step.  Doesn't really have anything to do with the quoted trade deadline comment either.  I think it opens the door for those moments when you realize oh this pitcher clearly doesn't have it tonight.  Guess we are stuck with him for at least 3 batters.  Might suck for those end of game or playoff scenarios when you always want someone ready in relief.

 

A replacement for a star player isn't usually available anyway, there's usually a good reason why a player makes it through waivers and is available in August. Also, every other professional sport has a firm trade deadline and they seem to manage. 

 

I'd think the 3 batter rule would increase strategy, it just wouldn't be the current strategy. A manager is going to have to gameplan more than one at bat in advance with this rule.

 

I also rarely see a guy who "doesn't have it" get yanked after one batter anyway. It's usually not clear that he doesn't have it until he's faced three batters.

[nicksaviking]

 

Moving the actual deadline would probably be better.  More competitive teams later into the season.  Would probably mean less return for the selling team though.  Might make the other broken system of the qualifying offer more appealing to teams.

 

I think small markets might also be negatively affected too.  if payroll is keeping them from grabbing a rental on an expensive contract that would be quite a bit cheaper a month later.

 

I'm OK seeing how the new trade deadline plays out, I wouldn't have been opposed to seeing what happened by pushing the traditional deadline to August 31st though either. 

 

Teams need to be encouraged to make moves earlier in the year though. Maybe make the stakes of late season trades financially significant? Teams making trades after July 31st have to pay in what equals 50% of their acquired players' reaming season salary into the revenue sharing pool? Trades between June 1 and July 31st have to pay in 15% and trades made prior to June pay nothing?

[SomeGuy]

 

A replacement for a star player isn't usually available anyway, there's usually a good reason why a player makes it through waivers and is available in August. Also, every other professional sport has a firm trade deadline and they seem to manage. 

 

I'd think the 3 batter rule would increase strategy, it just wouldn't be the current strategy. A manager is going to have to gameplan more than one at bat in advance with this rule.

 

I also rarely see a guy who "doesn't have it" get yanked after one batter anyway. It's usually not clear that he doesn't have it until he's faced three batters.

Josh Donaldson would count as a star in my opinion. Other 2018 August guys like Ryan Madson, Curtis Granderson, and Gio Gonzalez are legitimate guys to get in a late season trade.  Maybe you prefer Justin Verlander joining the Astros to win the World Series in 2017. (That's two MVP winners traded in August in the last 2 years)

 

Other famous August trades like Justin Upton, John Smoltz, Larry Walker, Adrian Gonzalez would be star caliber.  Twins have used it in the past as well to obtain Bert Blylevin, get rid of Josh Willingham, Delmon Young, etc. 

 

3 batter minimum will negatively effect pitching strategy no matter how you look at it. There will be a change in pitching strategy yes but pitching overall just became worse.

 

In the playoffs (especially recently) teams often have another player ready the moment a reliever enters the game.  It is no longer even an option.

Edited March 14, 2019 by SomeGuy

[Jim Hahn]

I think it is ultimately a bad thing if a team has to call up someone from AAA to replace an elite player especially near playoff time.  At least they could try to land a decent player in the old system.

 

At the end of August you are over 150 games in, one big injury can cripple a lot of teams.  That team could already be in a position to clinch a spot and you now have a weak team in the playoffs.  It could also mean one less team fighting for those last spots.  The later deadline was a nice emergency plan for anything that you really can't plan for.

 

I don't see the positive in this rule change.

Perhaps. I suspect that it is mostly the richer teams that are in position to make significant trades to acquire true difference makers in August. I really don't have a problem with a harder deadline. The difference between a typical waiver pickup and whoever you have available in the minors usually isn't much, factoring in the variability of fringe major leaguers.

 

The other thing is that if contenders are sort of forced to call up their best prospects, rather than play games with their service time, well that wouldn't be a bad thing either.

[ashbury]

I did because it seems Manfred actually believes people tune out like this. 

So call my feeble attempt "Satire" instead of "Sarcasm" - which doesn't make it any safer to try on an Internet forum.

[ashbury]

On today's radio broadcast Cory asked Falvey about these changes.  Falvey mentioned he expects there to be "tweaks" to the 3 batter minimum rule.  In particular they discussed the option of waiving the minimum if the opposing team puts in a pinch hitter.  That way a team can't suddenly put in a couple righties where they had lefties or vice versa and force your pitcher to face them.

That tweak does stand out by a mile.

[mikelink45]

 

Concur. I like the roster reduction to 28 players in September the most. While it eliminates the cute stories like James Beresford getting a cup of coffee, it should keep teams honest and competitive.

I will take the minority opinion here.  September does not bother me and if it lets career minor leaguers get points towards the pension I am happy with that.  

[mikelink45]

 

On today's radio broadcast Cory asked Falvey about these changes.  Falvey mentioned he expects there to be "tweaks" to the 3 batter minimum rule.  In particular they discussed the option of waiving the minimum if the opposing team puts in a pinch hitter.  That way a team can't suddenly put in a couple righties where they had lefties or vice versa and force your pitcher to face them.

Make a rule and stick with it.  Tweaks are not necessary, adjustments in strategy are.  With three man benches there is only so many substitutes and the opposing manager knows what they are.

 

[mikelink45]

Where is the pitch clock?  How about the electronic ball and strike count?  What about more limits on the mound visits?  Still a lot to be done.

[SomeGuy]

 

Where is the pitch clock?  How about the electronic ball and strike count?  What about more limits on the mound visits?  Still a lot to be done.

You actually want these??  New mound visit limits are effective for 2019 down from 6 to 5.

Edited March 14, 2019 by SomeGuy

[Mike Sixel]

 

Where is the pitch clock?  How about the electronic ball and strike count?  What about more limits on the mound visits?  Still a lot to be done.

 

apparently the players don't want a pitch clock. They might lose money on their glove endorsements, I guess

 

/s

[Riverbrian]

Saying that a GM should always have a suitable replacement for a star level player might be a stretch. Especially considering the disparity of payrolls around the league. Tampa Bay can't reasonably have an answer to losing a star player in August. Doesn't seem like you have an answer for who benefits from ditching the August waiver deadline.

Who benefits? The players do... We do. Urgency is created and teams will be forced to build their squads in the off-season when they should all be building their clubs. It creates even more urgency in Late July and it get them off the fence. Playoff contenders will have to roster significant depth.Teams caught with their pants down, (Which is always their fault) will have to utilize top prospects and give them the chance that they would otherwise delay for service time considerations.

 

And.. And... I won’t have to try to understand the complicated waiver process anymore.

 

I’ve been preaching this for a long time. Injuries are going to happen. A healthy team in July that assumes it will be healthy in August and September deserves the painful fate that awaits them. Any team that picks a starting 9 with scrubs watching on the bench deserves the painful fate that awaits them. When Aaron Judge goes down he can’t be replaced. August deadline or not. You can go get a McCutchen in August to soften the blow but you should already have a McCutchen on your roster because Judge or Hicks or Stanton can also go down in September or In April.

 

Staff your roster. If you don’t... you deserve what happens.

 

Tampa isn’t going to replace Blake Snell even with an August deadline. Tampa will replace a Tommy Pham August injury because if they are in contention they can choose to trade for Starling Marte on July 30th before Pham gets hurt in August.

 

If nobody gets hurt, leaving Marte and Pham both healthy on the same roster... I do not see that as a problem... Kevin Cash can then figure it out.

[SomeGuy]

 

Who benefits? The players do... We do. Urgency is created and teams will be forced to build their squads in the off-season when they should all be building their clubs. It creates even more urgency in Late July and it get them off the fence. Playoff contenders will have to roster significant depth.Teams caughr with their pants down. Which is always their fault will have to utilize top prospects and give them a chance that they would otherwise delay for service time considerations and I won’t have to try to understand the complicated waiver process anymore.

I’ve been preaching this for a long time. Injuries are going to happen. A healthy team in July that assumes it will be healthy in August and September deserves the painful fate that awaits them. Any team that picks a starting 9 with scrubs watching on the bench deserves the painful fate that awaits them. When Aaron Judge goes down he can’t be replaced. August deadline or not. You can go get a McCutchen in August to soften the blow but you should already have a McCutchen on your roster because Judge or Hicks or Stanton can also go down in September or In April. Staff your roster. If you don’t... you deserve what happens.

Tampa isn’t going to replace Blake Snell even with an August deadline. Tampa will replace a Tommy Pham August injury because if they are in contention they can choose to trade for Starling Marte on July 30th before Pham gets hurt. Kevin Cash can then figure it out.

More teams will take themselves out of contention in July.  That's not a win for anybody.

 

If the argument is that teams need to be prepared for injures, and data says that older players break down more often.....It will place even more of an emphasis on younger (cheaper) players.  Older players will be even more limited in Free Agency.  Just one more reason to lean toward the drastic rebuild strategy to ensure they have a bounty of young core players before actively attempting to compete.  Doesn't seem like players or fans are benefiting...

Edited March 14, 2019 by SomeGuy

[Vanimal46]

Having one trade deadline forces teams to make decisions instead of drag their feet until August. And it creates urgency to make trades in May/June (gasp!) if the team is competitive.

[mikelink45]

 

You actually want these??  New mound visit limits are effective for 2019 down from 6 to 5.

I either want them or want them to quit talking about them.  But actually I do want them and I do not want the other proposal - reduce the  mound and move it back.  We already reduced it after Bob Gibson dominated the leagues.  But we keep searching for faster and better pitching then look for ways to make it less effective.

[SomeGuy]

 

I either want them or want them to quit talking about them.  But actually I do want them and I do not want the other proposal - reduce the  mound and move it back.  We already reduced it after Bob Gibson dominated the leagues.  But we keep searching for faster and better pitching then look for ways to make it less effective.

I don't like the automated balls and strike calls.  That could has some trickling effects throughout the game.  Pitch framing is obsolete, the catcher can focus almost entirely on the baserunners. etc.  Would an ump still stand there?  Would the catchers start using different crouch positions to quicken their throw to 2nd?

 

I also kind of like the human effect.  Make pitchers adjust if the ump doesn't give a certain part of the plate.  I like having the catcher trying to trick them with pitch framing.  If we get rid of this ump duty, we might as well get rid of them all and have a team of computer guys call every single aspect of play from off field computers.

Edited March 14, 2019 by SomeGuy