If a game is tied after nine innings, the game would be decided by a half-inning showdown. The home team would decide whether to play offense or defense. If the offense scores, they win. If the defense holds, they win. The offense would start with a runner of their choosing on first base, and could line up five batters in any order they chose. Both the offense and defense could use any players on their active roster, even if they’d been previously subbed out of the game. The defense could use only one pitcher; that pitcher could only be removed if injured and immediately placed on the IL. Placing the runner on 1st base makes this pretty close to a 50-50 proposition for the offense and defense. Play ball!
A few years ago, I took a friend from Mainland China to her first baseball game. It's pretty tough explaining the game to someone who's never seen it, but I was doing my best, talking about innings, and what outs were, and what three outs meant. Each team's lineup was up on the scoreboard, and I said "So the Mariners start out with that guy, the leadoff hitter, and then the next guy bats, and if everyone gets a hit they keep hitting, but as soon as they make a third out they have to switch sides. And when the other team gets three outs they switch again."
"And when the Mariners bat again do they start at the top again?" she asked. "With the leadoff hitter?"
"No," I said, and began to explain how it worked, but a part of me was wondering: Wow, what would baseball be like if they played it that way? With Shohei Ohtani starting every inning and batting at least 8 or 9 times every game? It would be more like other sports, where you can keep feeding the superstar. Where one guy can make more of a difference.
I wouldn't make this rule change but it is a wild one.
Any HR beyond two in an inning is a double, or even an out. They did this in my softball league to keep the game fun. It also made me mad because the implication was that it was easy to hit HRs and I hit one in my life.
How about no pickoff throws to first base? All up to the catcher now. Maybe have a line a set distance from the bases that the runner can’t go past until the ball leaves the pitcher’s hand.
Adding to my move the pitching rubber back one foot - let's get rid of the pitching mound. That is what helps the pitcher with momentum to throw harder.
From AI:
Gravity: Stepping down a slope lets a pitcher put more body weight and force behind every throw.
Velocity: The downward momentum increases ball speed, making fastballs look faster.
Deception: The downward trajectory of the pitch makes it harder for batters to track and hit the ball cleanly.
Sorry Joe, but I’m just not down with any “wild” rule changes (anything wilder than zombie runners is a bridge too far) because baseball is the one sport where records still matter and wild rule changes desecrates records. How about a not so wild rule change? I’ve always thought it was absurd to not charge a pitcher with an earned run due to his own error. You make an error, you own the run(s).
Bat Over: Once a game a manager could determine that a batter who had been walked could be replaced at first with a pinch runner and bat over, get another turn at the plate.
In football, you can hand the ball to Jim Brown for ten consecutive runs; in hoop Michael Jordan can take the last ten shots — in baseball you have to wait your turn. And . . . if there's an open base (or not), you can always walk a great hitter intentionally (or unintentionally intentionally). In no other sport is a team's best player so thoroughly and passively neutralized.
You could always issue a walk again to the player batting over but that would be putting two men on base, a further strategic disadvantage.
At the end of the inning the pinch runner would be removed from the game and the hitter batting over would retain his spot in the batting order.
I see this as no more radical than the ghost runner in extra innings and would add even further excitement of close games especially. Aaron Judge would be walked in the late innings and the fans would chant "BAT OVER! BAT OVER!"
Ya know Joe, come on you can take Dramamine? Ok I get it but come on, a helicopter ride. You can just close your eyes. Ok so no on that too. Ok on to a baseball rule change - how about this -
if a player makes an error in the field, the batting team gets an extra out.
Here is my baseball rule change. Currently, a starting pitcher must complete 5 full innings of a game he started to obtain credit for the win. If the starter pitches for 4.66 innings he gets no credit for the win. Yet, the person who relieves the starter can get credit for a win after pitching .33 innings. I feel the current rule is wrong. I don't have an educated rule change but perhaps people like Jayson Stark or Joe P. or others could suggest one.
Strikeout automatically ends the inning. It is wild and never going to happen and I haven't even thought through the consequences. But it would increase balls in play drastically which makes the game more fun.
Heck, if there's so many folks in here pitching their ideas, I probably should: a player cannot be a DH in two consecutive games. Example, a player could DH in games one and three of a three-game series, but couldn't DH in game two. He could, however, pinch hit for a player in game two.
Joe, upon your return, I fully expect a 1/2 column or whole column on the sale of the Angels to another "he who shall not be named (HWSNBN)."
Seriously, enjoy your vacation in paradise - Hawaiian ices are the most delicious things on this earth!
If a game is tied after nine innings, the game would be decided by a half-inning showdown. The home team would decide whether to play offense or defense. If the offense scores, they win. If the defense holds, they win. The offense would start with a runner of their choosing on first base, and could line up five batters in any order they chose. Both the offense and defense could use any players on their active roster, even if they’d been previously subbed out of the game. The defense could use only one pitcher; that pitcher could only be removed if injured and immediately placed on the IL. Placing the runner on 1st base makes this pretty close to a 50-50 proposition for the offense and defense. Play ball!
A few years ago, I took a friend from Mainland China to her first baseball game. It's pretty tough explaining the game to someone who's never seen it, but I was doing my best, talking about innings, and what outs were, and what three outs meant. Each team's lineup was up on the scoreboard, and I said "So the Mariners start out with that guy, the leadoff hitter, and then the next guy bats, and if everyone gets a hit they keep hitting, but as soon as they make a third out they have to switch sides. And when the other team gets three outs they switch again."
"And when the Mariners bat again do they start at the top again?" she asked. "With the leadoff hitter?"
"No," I said, and began to explain how it worked, but a part of me was wondering: Wow, what would baseball be like if they played it that way? With Shohei Ohtani starting every inning and batting at least 8 or 9 times every game? It would be more like other sports, where you can keep feeding the superstar. Where one guy can make more of a difference.
I wouldn't make this rule change but it is a wild one.
Almost plausible: Cap pitching staffs
Wildly implausible (and it would be so unfair to billionaires): Relegation
Any HR beyond two in an inning is a double, or even an out. They did this in my softball league to keep the game fun. It also made me mad because the implication was that it was easy to hit HRs and I hit one in my life.
How about no pickoff throws to first base? All up to the catcher now. Maybe have a line a set distance from the bases that the runner can’t go past until the ball leaves the pitcher’s hand.
Adding to my move the pitching rubber back one foot - let's get rid of the pitching mound. That is what helps the pitcher with momentum to throw harder.
From AI:
Gravity: Stepping down a slope lets a pitcher put more body weight and force behind every throw.
Velocity: The downward momentum increases ball speed, making fastballs look faster.
Deception: The downward trajectory of the pitch makes it harder for batters to track and hit the ball cleanly.
No walks and no strikeouts. Every at-bat ends with a ball in play.
Why is this a vacation where all the activities are things you don’t want to do? That sounds more like a job.
Sorry Joe, but I’m just not down with any “wild” rule changes (anything wilder than zombie runners is a bridge too far) because baseball is the one sport where records still matter and wild rule changes desecrates records. How about a not so wild rule change? I’ve always thought it was absurd to not charge a pitcher with an earned run due to his own error. You make an error, you own the run(s).
Bat Over: Once a game a manager could determine that a batter who had been walked could be replaced at first with a pinch runner and bat over, get another turn at the plate.
In football, you can hand the ball to Jim Brown for ten consecutive runs; in hoop Michael Jordan can take the last ten shots — in baseball you have to wait your turn. And . . . if there's an open base (or not), you can always walk a great hitter intentionally (or unintentionally intentionally). In no other sport is a team's best player so thoroughly and passively neutralized.
You could always issue a walk again to the player batting over but that would be putting two men on base, a further strategic disadvantage.
At the end of the inning the pinch runner would be removed from the game and the hitter batting over would retain his spot in the batting order.
I see this as no more radical than the ghost runner in extra innings and would add even further excitement of close games especially. Aaron Judge would be walked in the late innings and the fans would chant "BAT OVER! BAT OVER!"
Thanks,
Karl Lindholm
Ya know Joe, come on you can take Dramamine? Ok I get it but come on, a helicopter ride. You can just close your eyes. Ok so no on that too. Ok on to a baseball rule change - how about this -
if a player makes an error in the field, the batting team gets an extra out.
Here is my baseball rule change. Currently, a starting pitcher must complete 5 full innings of a game he started to obtain credit for the win. If the starter pitches for 4.66 innings he gets no credit for the win. Yet, the person who relieves the starter can get credit for a win after pitching .33 innings. I feel the current rule is wrong. I don't have an educated rule change but perhaps people like Jayson Stark or Joe P. or others could suggest one.
Strikeout automatically ends the inning. It is wild and never going to happen and I haven't even thought through the consequences. But it would increase balls in play drastically which makes the game more fun.
I love Hawaii. Looks like Kauai to me...
Heck, if there's so many folks in here pitching their ideas, I probably should: a player cannot be a DH in two consecutive games. Example, a player could DH in games one and three of a three-game series, but couldn't DH in game two. He could, however, pinch hit for a player in game two.
Joe, upon your return, I fully expect a 1/2 column or whole column on the sale of the Angels to another "he who shall not be named (HWSNBN)."
Seriously, enjoy your vacation in paradise - Hawaiian ices are the most delicious things on this earth!
Eliminate pitchers completely. Use a tee.