Rod Carew "speaking out - to the commissioner"

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

Definitely too many commercials, and don't get me started on extra innings...there are no words to describe how much I hate the zombie runner!!

If a guy was throwing a perfect game through 9 innings, would a zombie runner ruin it? Suppose the zombie stole third and home to win the game? The pitcher never allowed a batter to reach base (perfect game) yet loses.

How can any baseball purist reconcile that?

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by Mark17

If a guy was throwing a perfect game through 9 innings, would a zombie runner ruin it? Suppose the zombie stole third and home to win the game? The pitcher never allowed a batter to reach base (perfect game) yet loses.

How can any baseball purist reconcile that?

Definitely an issue. My biggest problem with it is that it just feels so artificial...it's like if the NBA decided the baskets will be moved from 10 to 7 feet for Overtime.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by Mark17

If a guy was throwing a perfect game through 9 innings, would a zombie runner ruin it? Suppose the zombie stole third and home to win the game? The pitcher never allowed a batter to reach base (perfect game) yet loses.

How can any baseball purist reconcile that?

I am not disagreeing with you but the chances of this happening is extremely unlikely as pitchers no longer seem to go 9 and as mentioned before with pitch counts and specialist relievers.

[Seven]

The game has lost its way.

"Efficiency" isn't always better in the sake of the sport. I say this as someone that wasn't even alive in the 1970's, go back and watch a game. The game goes on quicker, the pitchers go deeper into games, watching the game is just more enjoyable. Players seemingly played harder, pitchers threw more and a good portion of them had long lasting careers. As a side note, The rule changes against sliding, and blocking the plate took another great aspect out of our game.

Baseball was better when it was more true to its roots. When it was simple, yet strategic. When the quality of play on the ballfield was actually worth the price of admission. Players used to be tougher, I'm not just saying that either. You don't get players that even play all 162 games anymore, they have to be rested because their investments now.

[butchie_t]

Just how long before they reduce balls and strikes to 3 and 2. In the attempt to reduce the game time. I always hated that when they did that crap in softball. Next stop MLB.

Then I am gone, and not that I watch much as it is now. Just no interest in that as there once was. And I agree with every word that Mr. Carew spoke. I don’t give a tinkers damn about WAR and any of that statistical mumbo-jumbo.

Can a batter move a runner if he has to bunt, yes or no. Can a batter hit to the opposite field and score a runner from third, yes or no. Someone puts a shift on, FREAKING LEARN TO HIT THE BALL WHERE THEY AIN’T and quit bitching about the shift……Shelia.

Cheers,

Butch

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by butchie_t

. Someone puts a shift on, FREAKING LEARN TO HIT THE BALL WHERE THEY AIN’T and quit bitching about the shift……

Do you think no one has ever considered this? Have you ever asked yourself why thousands of high level professional baseball people have never tried what you're suggesting? Or is it possible that maybe they HAVE considered it and know that it either doesn't work or actually benefits the defense?

Hint: it's not that they haven't thought of your suggestion.

[Snapolit1]

More pitches. Less contact. Doesn’t have a damn thing to do with bunting or guys not learning (wrong) baseball strategy.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Do you think no one has ever considered this? Have you ever asked yourself why thousands of high level professional baseball people have never tried what you're suggesting? Or is it possible that maybe they HAVE considered it and know that it either doesn't work or actually benefits the defense?

Hint: it's not that they haven't thought of your suggestion.

sometimes it can take years to implement...launch angles were discussed for 20 years and exit velocities as well...heck even analytics for 50 years...cant just flip a switch

you make more money hitting single into the hole of the defense or make more money hitting 25 homers doing it the other way which may not translate to wins perhaps but will make you more money.....

i dont know which way will lead to wins, but i do think you go to give more time to let it play out.. NBA used to have illegal defense rule with a zone defense and got rid of it..

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Do you think no one has ever considered this? Have you ever asked yourself why thousands of high level professional baseball people have never tried what you're suggesting? Or is it possible that maybe they HAVE considered it and know that it either doesn't work or actually benefits the defense?

Hint: it's not that they haven't thought of your suggestion.

How much do they get paid to hit a ball?

Hint: More than enough to figure it out and do it.

Butch

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by butchie_t

How much do they get paid to hit a ball?

Hint: More than enough to figure it out and do it.

Butch

I mean this in all seriousness: have you ever given any serious thought to why they don't do what you're suggesting?

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by butchie_t

Someone puts a shift on, FREAKING LEARN TO HIT THE BALL WHERE THEY AIN’T and quit bitching about the shift

I 100% agree. If a team wants to shift 6 players to one side, when a dead pull hitter is up, it should have this right. A team should have the ability to place players anywhere on the field that it wants.

Lay down a bunt to the other side, or learn how to hit to the opposite field. Adjust, and show you can adjust, and shifts would end. Banning a shift reduces strategy and gamesmanship.

[1952boyntoncollector]

(Sacrifice flies were counted as at-bats in 1941; under today's rules, Williams would have hit between .411 and .419, based on contemporaneous game accounts.[61])

we worried about how they change stats? What arent Sac flies outs? ..so now you want to keep the sac in but they arent out? Seems like encouraging them already....how dare we change what a perfect game can be broken up in the 10th with a runner on 2nd...but changing what makes a .300 hitter doesnt matter..

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Tyruscobb

I 100% agree. If a team wants to shift 6 players to one side, when a dead pull hitter is up, it should have this right. A team should have the ability to place players anywhere on the field that it wants.

Lay down a bunt to the other side, or learn how to hit to the opposite field. Adjust, and show you can adjust, and shifts would end. Banning a shift reduces strategy and gamesmanship.

I agree with this however its still a business...just like the off chance someone pitches a perfect game into the 11th..what about if tv ratings and attendence went down 75% because of the shift...i would make the shift illegal to save baseball if too boring etc...again i am against it but in the off chance baseball was in danger to lose huge market share, you got to do what you got to do..not saying thats what happening now...

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by mrreality68

I am not disagreeing with you but the chances of this happening is extremely unlikely as pitchers no longer seem to go 9 and as mentioned before with pitch counts and specialist relievers.

In today's game, yes. But someday there will be a throwback manager who won't be afraid to let his pitchers actually throw the ball more than 80 times a game.

Or a knuckleball pitcher who isn't putting any strain on his arm.

[insidethewrapper]

Another aspect of the game is no more manager/umpire arguments. It's an auto ejection. That was entertaining for the fans.

I still like HR, BAve, On-Base and Runs Scored and RBI's. You win games by getting on base, scoring runs and batting them in.

WAR - How is it calculated after every at bat ? If it was, then it would be more interesting to watch, like the other stats.

Who saves the most runs in the field ? Watch any game and it is the first baseman. Without a good first baseman, there would be a lot more errors from throws from the other infielders.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Mark17

If a guy was throwing a perfect game through 9 innings, would a zombie runner ruin it? Suppose the zombie stole third and home to win the game? The pitcher never allowed a batter to reach base (perfect game) yet loses.

How can any baseball purist reconcile that?

part of a perfect game is the team aspect, your team needs to score for you to win the game, if you throw 11 perfect innings and your team scores zero you dont get a perfect game either....really a trivial point

i worry about rules that impact winning or losing a game versus trophy names for accomplishments.

if you dont field your position as a pitcher and make an error you lose a perfect game....not allowing a runner to score from 2nd base with no outs would be your job since your team didnt score for you..part of the team aspect.

your example out of all the issues in baseball to worry about seems marginal even from a purist standpoint

[Snapolit1]

Rod is right and also wrong. The game can be slow. But that’s not because guys aren’t sacrificing or playing the same strategy that was gospel truth three decades ago. A good deal of what Rod and his generation believed - sacrificing bunting — has been pretty clearly shown not to be optimal strategy to win ballgames with the skill sets players have today. None of that stuff is affecting time of play.

It’s a different game. Would love to know how many times the Dodger or Yankees have sacrificed bunted their ways to the impressive win totals they have.

I do hate all the chatter on exit velocities and launch angles.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Rod is right and also wrong. The game can be slow. But that’s not because guys aren’t sacrificing or playing the same strategy that was gospel truth three decades ago. A good deal of what Rod and his generation believed - sacrificing bunting — has been pretty clearly shown not to be optimal strategy to win ballgames with the skill sets players have today. None of that stuff is affecting time of play.

It’s a different game. Would love to know how many times the Dodger or Yankees have sacrificed busted their ways to the impressive win totals they have.

I do hate all the chatter on exit velocities and launch angles.

Agree. A lot of this is the game was better in my day sort of chatter that occurs all too often in all aspects of society. But even I will say that when I heard a 12 year old caring about his launch angle (happened once) I rolled my eyes. Maybe I’m wrong of course.

[Shoeless Moe]

The most exciting play in baseball:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsNLLi1fKG8