Why is the MLB increasing the size of its bases?

[Melissa Berman]

Every Sunday at Target Field is Kids Day, where kids 12 and under can channel their best Byron Buxton baserunning and sprint, toddle, or crawl around the Target Field bases, and soon, both the MLB Players and Minnesota’s littlest fans will have a slightly easier path around the bases. 

In the new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), the MLB Players Association and the owners agreed to increase the size of first, second, and third bases from 15 inches square to 18 inches beginning in the 2023 season. The size of home plate will remain the same. 

MLB began experimenting with this larger size of bases during the 2021 season, when they increased the size of the bases in the Triple-A as a part of a group of experimental playing rules. 

But is bigger better when it comes to bases? MLB seems to think so. 

Bigger bases might lead to less injuries
MLB’s primary reason for experimenting with base size in Triple-A was a belief that making the bases bigger will “reduce player injuries and collisions” on the base paths. The idea is the bigger the base, the more space runners will have to slide around defenders.

With slightly shorter base paths, players will also not have as much time to reach full speed, and therefore slides and collisions might not be at the rates of speed previously seen. It is little surprise that the MLBPA signed onto a change which may allow for the game to be safer for its players in the long run,

Larger bases might equal more action and excitement
A common thread that connects several of the MLB’s new rules- the addition of a pitch clock, banning the shift, and larger base size is a desire to stimulate in-game action and increase excitement for fans.

“The Competition Committee also expects the shorter distances between bases created by increased size to have a modest impact on the success rate of stolen base attempts and the frequency with which a batter-runner reaches base on groundballs and bunt attempts,” the league wrote when introducing the 2021 Triple-A experimental rules. 

While a few inches does not sound like much, in baseball there are a sizeable amount of plays at home plate or a base that require deferral to the replay booth because they are too close to call. Every inch and fraction of a second count when trying to beat out a ground ball or steal a base.

In the MLB, the amount of stolen bases has been steadily decreasing over the years and is down from the heyday that largely lasted from the late-70s to mid-90s. Last season, there were 2,213 stolen bases league-wide, which is the fewest in a non-shortened season since 1973, when there were six fewer teams in the league. There are both fewer bases being stolen and fewer attempts. This decline is at least in part due to modern analytics allowing teams to more intelligently gauge the risk-reward of stealing a base. Bunting too has seen a steep decline in usage in the age of analytics. 

But in the Triple-A last year, the league saw an increase in stolen base rates after implementing the larger base size, though this is a small sample size and it is difficult to definitively attribute it to the base size.

According to Baseball Reference, during the 2021 MLB season 711 players were caught stealing (only 15 of these were by the Twins- the second lowest in the MLB). 

It is the MLB’s hope that not only will the larger base size encourage runners to steal more but will also allow runners to be successful on more of these attempts. The MLB knows fans love watching steals because they are gutsy, daring plays.

Unsuccessful stolen base attempts are not only the result of the ball beating the runner to the bag, but because a base runner over-slid the base or was unable to stop on a dime and not go through the base while running full speed. According to a 2021 report from the New York Post, bigger bases might help solve this issue:

'The current base, if you don't hit the front of it and stop, you're going through it,' Chris Marinak, MLB's chief operations and strategy officer, told the New York Post. 'And this base is a little more forgiving in the sense that, if you hit the front of it, hopefully there's more catch on the base. You can actually stop on the bag without popping off. Certainly that's one of the ideas behind it.'

Stealing bases is exciting for fans, and so is watching players beat out grounders and bunts and stretch singles into doubles. Time will tell if a slight infield change has the ability to make a big difference on in-game action and injury prevention. And if not, the kids will love stomping on those oversize Target Field bases anyway. 

What are your thoughts on the league's decision to increase the size of the bases starting in the 2023 season? Leave a COMMENT below. 

View full article

[mikelink45]

I will take a SB over a HR for excitement.  Not sure how this will help.  If they want to help the SB - make them safe when they get to the base and allow for a short lack of contact after they make it.  Like 1B - the momentum take out is fun, but not necessary.

[The Mad King]

The "shortened" distance between bases also means the same thing to the defence and throws. They cancel out...

[RJA]

I am a traditionalist old guy so messing with the game is not something I like.  But, I like the improved safety aspect of the larger bases, especially so as to avoid first base collisions.  If it increases stolen bases, that would be an added benefit.  Good article.

[roger]

Interesting.  And I had been wondering what the logic was for this change.  Thanks!

[tarheeltwinsfan]

Well thought out and well written article. Thank you.

[Squirrel]

I didn't really get this one, so thanks for explaining it 

[mikelink45]

1 hour ago, RJA said:

I am a traditionalist old guy so messing with the game is not something I like.  But, I like the improved safety aspect of the larger bases, especially so as to avoid first base collisions.  If it increases stolen bases, that would be an added benefit.  Good article.

Tradition is hard to define - I feel that way too, but for me it is retaining the 50s and 60s because those were the eras when I was young and really invested.  But baseball has always changed.  They lowered the mound after 1968 - the Bob Gibson Rule.  The original pitching position was in a box where the pitcher could move around. In 1893 they raised the mount and put in the rubber.  It was 60 1/2 feet from home plate.  

1857 was the first rule on bases - they had to be 1 foot square.    Check out the link - a lot of issues went into the foul line and base placement. 

Rules have changed often in the history of baseball.  No more spitters, Sacrifice fly was adopted - dropped and brought back.  Ground rule doubles were home runs then they weren't.  1969 the strike zone was shrunk.  The DH was added and then there are the unwritten rules, the changes in statistics and metrics, the PEDs, the allowance of Blacks to enter MLB.  

It is hard to get a handle on what Tradition really is and I still want it to go back to my era. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

3 hours ago, mikelink45 said:

If they want to help the SB - make them safe when they get to the base and allow for a short lack of contact after they make it.  Like 1B - the momentum take out is fun, but not necessary.

I take it you don't like replay challenges to see if a guy came off the base. I agree, but "allowing for a short lack of contact" wouldn't fix it -- it would just change the criteria from "did he come off the base?" to "did he come off the base enough?".

The only way to address that would be to change the replay rules. If we could get rid of the challenge system, and replace it with an extra replay ump on a short time limit, that would probably take care of it -- just overturn the obviously wrong calls, but don't spend a few minutes looking at a runner's contact with a base in slow-motion.

[IndianaTwin]

No particular preference on the size of second and third base, but I think the biggest win in terms of player safety would be the “double base” at first extending into foul territory, since that’s where the biggest number of collisions happens. It would also simplify the issue of running outside the base line on bunts and dribblers in front of the plate. 

[RJA]

3 hours ago, mikelink45 said:

Tradition is hard to define - I feel that way too, but for me it is retaining the 50s and 60s because those were the eras when I was young and really invested.  But baseball has always changed.  They lowered the mound after 1968 - the Bob Gibson Rule.  The original pitching position was in a box where the pitcher could move around. In 1893 they raised the mount and put in the rubber.  It was 60 1/2 feet from home plate.  

1857 was the first rule on bases - they had to be 1 foot square.    Check out the link - a lot of issues went into the foul line and base placement. 

Rules have changed often in the history of baseball.  No more spitters, Sacrifice fly was adopted - dropped and brought back.  Ground rule doubles were home runs then they weren't.  1969 the strike zone was shrunk.  The DH was added and then there are the unwritten rules, the changes in statistics and metrics, the PEDs, the allowance of Blacks to enter MLB.  

It is hard to get a handle on what Tradition really is and I still want it to go back to my era. 

Great response.  Thank you for your thoughts.  I too go back to the 50's and 60's!

[Craig Arko]

I figured it was some Freudian cigar envy of the NFL.

[Game7-91]

Great to have an explainer on this, and a good idea to reduce injuries.

But then I wonder why is homebase flush and 1-3 raised? Flush bases would seem safer for wrist, ankle, calf, hammy injuries.

Heres sone interesting from espn 2014, this is not a recent issue. Jack Corbett Hollywood Bases....I never knew this stuff:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/10902301/mlb-game-bases-hazard-player-health

[Nine of twelve]

56 minutes ago, Game7-91 said:

Great to have an explainer on this, and a good idea to reduce injuries.

But then I wonder why is homebase flush and 1-3 raised? Flush bases would seem safer for wrist, ankle, calf, hammy injuries.

 

I don't know for sure, but here's my guess. Raised bases allow the fielder to place his foot on the side of the base instead of directly on it, reducing the risk of injuries to both players from the foot being stepped on. Raised bases also enable the baserunner to grab the base and make it easier to slide to the edge of the base and also not to overslide. I think it's pretty obvious that home plate has to be flush due to considerations regarding a pitched ball.

[Melissa Berman]

15 hours ago, The Mad King said:

The "shortened" distance between bases also means the same thing to the defence and throws. They cancel out...

That makes sense to me. The MLB doesn't seem to have thought of that in their rationale 

[Melissa Berman]

12 hours ago, tarheeltwinsfan said:

Well thought out and well written article. Thank you.

Thanks for the kind words! ?

[Melissa Berman]

12 hours ago, Squirrel said:

I didn't really get this one, so thanks for explaining it 

Thanks for the kind words- it was interesting to look into, but the truth is no one knows too much yet- so we'll see how much of a difference it really makes, if any!

[h2oface]

Familiar with the reasoning. I don't  buy it will make a difference. This change is just dumb and unnecessary.