I have come to embrace a number of changes made in the last 2-3 years with some exceptions like the number of step offs by a pitcher and the facing three batter rule. This one sounds like a softball league adaptation to let your best hitter hit when you feel the need. I’d pass on this one although getting Lindor more ABs in a game is appealing until you realize that you’d have to face all teams best hitters more the usually. Or if they convey this to pitching, maybe the player who came out in the fifth could come back to face a batter in the 9th if the match up worked best.
At some point the statistics that we have always admired will become less important, like wins and complete games by pitchers which was always the mark of excellence and the fact that 300 wins and 500 HR have become outdated stats meaning entry into the HOF will be watered down to todays game instead of being held to the solid standards that stood for 100 years.
There are 28 members and I saw 22 of them play. My guess is you saw Mantle, which means you saw 23. And if you saw Eddie Mathews, you've seen 24 of them.
From 1876 to 1970, there were fewer than 10 guys to have hit 500 homers. If you asked a fan in 1970 to describe the level at which a lifetime HR mark was excellent, he would have been more likely to say 300 than 500. The 500-HR club was "invented" in our lifetime. There were generations of fans who never knew of it.
Baseball hasn't been some static game since the beginning of time. The rules have changed, the way people played the game has changed and what teams value has changed. For me, part of the joy of diving into the record books is to get a glimpse of how the game was played and what teams valued in earlier days.
Integration, night games, 162-game schedule, airplane travel, the switch to five-man rotations, divisional play, the DH, the proliferation of PEDs -- these are just a handful of the many, many things we have to consider when looking at the MLB record book.
This is so manifestly stupid words fail. Who gives a crap about the all star game, so implementing it there is meaningless. The game is worse than suffering through professional wrestling or whatever that is. I wish they would make the all star game an AL v NL pitch, hit, and run competition, like a baseball decathlon, with beer drinking at the end of each segment.
Putting it in baseball is not just a rule change, to represents a profound change to the game itself. It is why I have been a fan of NL baseball until the preposterous univeral DH took over. Whatnot that huge enough change? Just hitting the best person at some random time actually cheapens the magic that happens when events present themselves for a key moment, like Lindor HR in All or Alonsos in MIL. Manufacturing those moments is like claiming brown plastic furniture is wood. It fake. I care less about the record books and more about the game itself. Why not make the base paths 85 feet? Hell you want more HR? set a fixed OF dimension for every park.
Just further evidence that Manfred is terrible at this. A serious commish would never have entertained this idea let alone float up a trial balloon to the press. He’s not a baseball guy, he’s a carnival barker. Or to use a more updated reference, he’s one of those guys yelling “Jell-O shots” at passersby in front of a cheap bar in any city in the US.
This would be, in my opinion, the most ridiculous rule change ever. A complete gimmick and worse than the extra innings ghost runner. I understand being open to change, but this completely changes the core of the game where you have a team, that bats in order and everyone hits in their turn, unless they are pinch hit for and leave the game. What's next? Just have your best hitter take all of the at bats and have ghost runners if he gets on?
First off, TL;DR: I don’t care for the idea. Like, at all.
Though someone on Baseball Night in NY said, many of us were against things like ghost runners, pitch clocks, caps on mound visits and universal DH. Fair; but at least pitch clocks and mound visits addressed a need at a base level to keep the game moving. The other stuff like IBB, and just signaling was good didn’t waste pitches etc.
So on some level, it may address a need, like I equate it more like flags in football. Let’s say there’s an automatic first down when a team is fourth and goal, and it keeps the play running. Someone asked if Shohei Ohtani is on 2B, and then they use the golden at-bat. Theoretically you’d want Ohtani up if he’s your best bat, right? So how does that work? Does he get a pinch runner? Does he now bat in that spot if he stays in the game? It seems sort of asinine to me. Plus there’s like no guarantee he’ll come through! Even Willie Mays struck out with the bases loaded in Jerry Koosman’s first game.
Can’t script baseball. And you can’t script Ohtani being a hero when he’s already on base ready to score a run.
I have come to embrace a number of changes made in the last 2-3 years with some exceptions like the number of step offs by a pitcher and the facing three batter rule. This one sounds like a softball league adaptation to let your best hitter hit when you feel the need. I’d pass on this one although getting Lindor more ABs in a game is appealing until you realize that you’d have to face all teams best hitters more the usually. Or if they convey this to pitching, maybe the player who came out in the fifth could come back to face a batter in the 9th if the match up worked best.
At some point the statistics that we have always admired will become less important, like wins and complete games by pitchers which was always the mark of excellence and the fact that 300 wins and 500 HR have become outdated stats meaning entry into the HOF will be watered down to todays game instead of being held to the solid standards that stood for 100 years.
When did the "500 HR" club begin to have meaning?
There are 28 members and I saw 22 of them play. My guess is you saw Mantle, which means you saw 23. And if you saw Eddie Mathews, you've seen 24 of them.
From 1876 to 1970, there were fewer than 10 guys to have hit 500 homers. If you asked a fan in 1970 to describe the level at which a lifetime HR mark was excellent, he would have been more likely to say 300 than 500. The 500-HR club was "invented" in our lifetime. There were generations of fans who never knew of it.
Baseball hasn't been some static game since the beginning of time. The rules have changed, the way people played the game has changed and what teams value has changed. For me, part of the joy of diving into the record books is to get a glimpse of how the game was played and what teams valued in earlier days.
Integration, night games, 162-game schedule, airplane travel, the switch to five-man rotations, divisional play, the DH, the proliferation of PEDs -- these are just a handful of the many, many things we have to consider when looking at the MLB record book.
Ridiculous idea for regular games but exactly the right kind of idea for an exhibition like the all star game.
This is so manifestly stupid words fail. Who gives a crap about the all star game, so implementing it there is meaningless. The game is worse than suffering through professional wrestling or whatever that is. I wish they would make the all star game an AL v NL pitch, hit, and run competition, like a baseball decathlon, with beer drinking at the end of each segment.
Putting it in baseball is not just a rule change, to represents a profound change to the game itself. It is why I have been a fan of NL baseball until the preposterous univeral DH took over. Whatnot that huge enough change? Just hitting the best person at some random time actually cheapens the magic that happens when events present themselves for a key moment, like Lindor HR in All or Alonsos in MIL. Manufacturing those moments is like claiming brown plastic furniture is wood. It fake. I care less about the record books and more about the game itself. Why not make the base paths 85 feet? Hell you want more HR? set a fixed OF dimension for every park.
This idea sucks to high hell.
The golden at bat is ridiculous. Thats not even used in little league.
Just further evidence that Manfred is terrible at this. A serious commish would never have entertained this idea let alone float up a trial balloon to the press. He’s not a baseball guy, he’s a carnival barker. Or to use a more updated reference, he’s one of those guys yelling “Jell-O shots” at passersby in front of a cheap bar in any city in the US.
This would be, in my opinion, the most ridiculous rule change ever. A complete gimmick and worse than the extra innings ghost runner. I understand being open to change, but this completely changes the core of the game where you have a team, that bats in order and everyone hits in their turn, unless they are pinch hit for and leave the game. What's next? Just have your best hitter take all of the at bats and have ghost runners if he gets on?
I mean, I just have SO many questions (lol).
First off, TL;DR: I don’t care for the idea. Like, at all.
Though someone on Baseball Night in NY said, many of us were against things like ghost runners, pitch clocks, caps on mound visits and universal DH. Fair; but at least pitch clocks and mound visits addressed a need at a base level to keep the game moving. The other stuff like IBB, and just signaling was good didn’t waste pitches etc.
So on some level, it may address a need, like I equate it more like flags in football. Let’s say there’s an automatic first down when a team is fourth and goal, and it keeps the play running. Someone asked if Shohei Ohtani is on 2B, and then they use the golden at-bat. Theoretically you’d want Ohtani up if he’s your best bat, right? So how does that work? Does he get a pinch runner? Does he now bat in that spot if he stays in the game? It seems sort of asinine to me. Plus there’s like no guarantee he’ll come through! Even Willie Mays struck out with the bases loaded in Jerry Koosman’s first game.
Can’t script baseball. And you can’t script Ohtani being a hero when he’s already on base ready to score a run.