MLB - What Would You Change?
by Stros Bro
on Oct 2, 2008 9:00 AM CDT
So here's the scenario. Bud Selig gets fired tomorrow and YOU are hired on as the commissioner to Major League Baseball. What changes would you make to baseball(if any) and why would you make them? My Changes Change # 1 - How the playoff teams are decided and to fix scheduling. I would get rid of the Wild Card and inter-league play and have a balanced schedule throughout the league. At the end of the season, the top 4 teams in each league would make it to the playoffs with the 1st seed playing the 4 seed, and the 2 seed playing the 3 seed. I would even at least really think about adding 2 more teams to the AL and even up the divisions at 16 teams each(assuming we have 2 markets that could support teams). I still don't understand why Las Vegas has 0 main stream Professional sports teams(MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL) and I would look there as expansion team 1. Expansion team 2 might be tough... Maybe Nashville? If that change would have been implemented this season, you would have the 1st round in the NL being between the Angels and the winner of a 1 game tie breaker between the Yankees and the White Sox, and the Red Sox and Rays playing. In the NL you would have the Cubs taking on the Mets, and the Phillies taking on the Brewers. Sorry Dodgers, no playoffs for you. There are 6 teams in the NL with more wins than the Dodgers. Change # 2 - The designated hitter. I know what I am about to say isn't going to go over well in an NL town... but here goes. Add the DH to the National league. WHAT?!?! Yes.... Let me go on record as saying that I am against the DH and think it should be removed from baseball... but I also understand that the MLB players union is a very strong union and no way would they ever allow the DH to be removed from the AL. So the 2nd option is to add the DH to the NL and make the leagues rules THE SAME!! It's unfair to have different rules for the different leagues. The only resolution in my mind is to make the rules the same. Change # 3 - Fire Angel Hernandez. Simple and well warranted. That's pretty much it. I think baseball is doing VERY well how it is and raking in the dough. I don't think it needs a lot of changes to it, just a few tweaks here and there. I think instant replay was needed and should stay in baseball how it is now. Maybe find ways to make it a little quicker, but I definitely keep it the way it is now(boundary calls on home runs only).
0 recs |
38
comments
Email
PrintComments
changes
1) alter the divisions so that there isnt a six team division in the nl and a four team division in the al. i think itd be cool to move us to the al west, but i can see why others wouldnt like that…
2) i think a lot of the reason why las vegas doesn’t have a professional sports team is because of the gambling industry. the potential for a conflict of interest is pretty great, especially if a local businessperson buys the team and they have casino ties. i know in the nfl, there was a problem with bob mcnair owning race horses
3) i agree with you on the dh. i don’t see why pitchers still bat in the nl. the leagues aren’t separate anymore, they have the same president, same umpires. there’s instant replay now. also, tony larussa’s “genius” would be diminished by not being able to bat the pitcher eighth.
by HighLeveragePerformer on Oct 2, 2008 9:28 AM CDT 0 recs
Response
1. You can’t even the leagues without adding more teams.. it creates a huge scheduling conflict or would require more interleague play.
2. This would seem to be easy to get around.
3. I prefer not having a DH in either league, but I realize the players associate will not allow it.. therefore I’d rather both leagues be the same. Also, I don’t think batting the pitcher 8th is smart.
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Oct 2, 2008 9:47 AM CDT
up
0 recs
yes...you can
5 team NL East
5 team AL East
11 Teams NL Central and West
9 Teams AL Central and West
Subtract Astros from NL and Add to AL West
10 Teams NL Central and West
10 Teams AL Central and West
Seems to make sense
by HighLeveragePerformer on
Oct 2, 2008 3:37 PM CDT
up
0 recs
now...
figure out a way to schedule it without interleague play and without a team per league being off every night and come back again. It creates a huge scheduling conflict… obviously I realize you can subtract a team from the NL and add to the AL to make the leagues even
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Oct 2, 2008 7:59 PM CDT
up
0 recs
i agree
it would never work, so it really bothers me when people continue to talk about it like it’s actually possible.
HLP, you’re better than that.
by littlevisigoth on
Oct 3, 2008 12:50 PM CDT
up
0 recs
you know what
i reread this comment and realized how much of an asshole i sound like, so i’ll preemptively apologize. i’ll just respectfully take the position that i don’t think odd numbers of teams in each league would ever be practical.
by littlevisigoth on
Oct 3, 2008 1:44 PM CDT
up
0 recs
don't worry
I display my genius around here so frequently, it must be scary when I make a mistake in judgment…hehe
by HighLeveragePerformer on
Oct 3, 2008 2:10 PM CDT
up
0 recs
HUH?
It works like this all the time…you have teams play other divisions…I fail to see the issue.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Oct 3, 2008 1:44 PM CDT
up
0 recs
every day
you’d have to have at least one AL team playing an NL team, OR have one team in each league with a day off (or several days off in a row). this would either massively increase the number of interleague games or massively increase the length of the season.
it’s just not practical to have an odd number of teams in each league, unless, like with the NFL, you just completely break down barriers between the leagues and have everybody play everbody. i don’t think that would be in the best interest of the game.
by littlevisigoth on
Oct 3, 2008 2:10 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Would it not though?
I mean you’d allow the fans to see every team, the schedules would be far more balanced than they are today, and it would force some resolution to the DH conundrum. It’d would likely end in reestablishing parity between the leagues.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Oct 3, 2008 5:06 PM CDT
up
0 recs
It's not logical
if you are going to have an interleague play game every night, then you need to combine the leagues in to 1 league..
Having 2 leagues with an odd number of team is impossible to do logically without making teams travel every night, playing interleague games every night or without having a team not play every night.. if you have a team not play every night you are going to cause the season to be even longer and drag on until at least the end of November(probably longer… )
It’s just not logical
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Oct 3, 2008 8:07 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Vegas has
a AAA team, so it doesn’t seem like too much of a leap to think they could get a MLB team.
by littlevisigoth on
Oct 3, 2008 1:43 PM CDT
up
0 recs
My take
There’s no excuse for a DH, no time, never. Expanding the DH is unconscionable. So what if the leagues are different? So what if it gives the AL an advantage in the World Series? The only championship that matters is that of the league that actually plays baseball, which is the NL.
My changes:
1) Do my absolute best to eliminate the DH.
2) No “interleauge” abomination.
3) Balance the schedules.
4) No playoffs. This isn’t football; we play enough games that we don’t need ’em. The champions of the leagues can play each other in an exhibition called the World Series.
I know it’s considered heretical for the champion of the league to be the team with the best record in the league, but anything else is bogus.
by Xan on Oct 2, 2008 10:39 AM CDT 0 recs
you're saying
eliminate the World Series as we know it? The most long standing championship in American sports, and you’re saying eliminate it? I guess, if you’re the commish you can do anything you want. And no playoffs? So I guess you didn’t enjoy watching the Astros beat the Braves and Cardinals in the 05 playoffs…
by HighLeveragePerformer on
Oct 2, 2008 3:41 PM CDT
up
0 recs
No...
That’s what the World Series /is/; it’s an exhibition played after the season between the champions of the two leagues.
by Xan on
Oct 2, 2008 11:13 PM CDT
up
0 recs
well thats true
but the playoffs, the wild card have made the post season much more exciting, and i think most will agree with me. i know mlb used to do it where just the team with the best record made it from each league, but after all the changes and the addition of the wild card, i just cant imagine october baseball being one series. yea, that one series would be HUGE, but the Astros would have only really been in it one year as long as ive been a fan. as such, i doubt id be as big a fan.
by HighLeveragePerformer on
Oct 3, 2008 12:09 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Would have enjoyed
the Astros winning the 1998 pennant and going to the World Series as the clear best team in the league.
by Xan on
Oct 2, 2008 11:15 PM CDT
up
0 recs
The DH is alright
it’s not the travesty that some people make it out to be. Baseball has changed a lot over the years, and while the DH is a big change, I don’t think it suddenly made the AL “not baseball.” However, it’s really fine the way it is right now.
1) Expand again. The minor league talent can take it – Latin America and Asia continue to produce new talent, as does the US system. I’d say Mexico City and Las Vegas are good candidates for expansion, but what do I know?
2) Have greater ties with Japanese baseball. How sweet would it be for the World Series winner to face off against the Japan Series champion? Obviously, travel makes this difficult, but it could be done.
3) Fix the draft. Either enforce a hard “slot requirement” or get rid of it entirely. All the current system does is screw over smaller teams.
4) Get rid of interleague play. I don’t care about playing the Rangers, and I’m tired of MLB forcing the stupid series down our throats. More to the point, it really unbalances the schedule.
5) If you’re going to keep interleague, get rid of that damn Silver Boot. The Astros and Rangers can play for Nolan Ryan, instead – whoever wins gets to put him on display for the season.
6) Offer more incentives for teams and players to enter arbitration. It helps out the league’s average players and should reward them for their labor.
by Only_A_Lad on Oct 2, 2008 12:23 PM CDT 0 recs
Slot requirements should not be enforced
The draft just needs to be overhauled because it screws over everyone involved.
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Oct 2, 2008 1:10 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Oh, I agree
there’s no reason why a player shouldn’t be able to negotiate for a higher bonus with his team. The problem is that the current system takes the worst features of either alternative. If the MLB doesn’t want to have an actual slot requirement, then get rid of the “suggestions.”
by Only_A_Lad on
Oct 2, 2008 1:14 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Three changes
( 1 ) DH bats only for the starter. This keeps the DH and provides a place for good-hit-no-field types and beloved stars who have become defensive liabilities. Yet it also restores the strategic dimension of pinch hitting or letting the pitcher bat to keep him in the game.
( 2 ) Only teams under the cap can qualify for wildcards. Rewards the small market teams that follow the rules. Makes the ‘luxury tax’ teams actually win their divisions. No more buying your way into a wildcard — this means you, Boston and NY.
( 3 ) TV money goes into the pension fund. Players become 10% ‘vested’ for each year they play for a team with amounts determined in the same way as arbitration. When they move, the new team must buy out the investiture. This tends to keep veteran players with the same team, while still allowing young players to move to where they will best succeed.
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
by Caradoc on Oct 2, 2008 2:04 PM CDT 0 recs
It finally just popped in my head
TangoTiger, of the fan defense scouting survey I heckled everyone about, proposed some of the best rule changes I’ve ever come across in April this year over at the Hardball Times.
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on Oct 2, 2008 2:51 PM CDT 0 recs
The suggestions that I think are truly genius and should strongly be considered are
The Mid-Inning Pitching change penalty
The 4-0 Walk Penalty
and the Floating DH — that is just a stroke of genius.
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Oct 2, 2008 2:57 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I completely disagree
with basically everyone of those rule changes
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Oct 2, 2008 7:57 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Yeah, those are pretty gimmicky
I might buy the “Home-Plate Commit Line,” though.
by Only_A_Lad on
Oct 2, 2008 9:30 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Really?
You don’t think it add more drama to the game, make the pacing a lot better, and return baseball back to its roots a little more?
Or the converse, you think that they’re all so outlandish and inane that there’s not merit to any of them?
He raises a lot of good points to make the games themselves a lot more enjoyable.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Oct 2, 2008 11:56 PM CDT
up
0 recs
One of the great things about baseball
is how (relative to other sports, at least) there are a few basic rules, and all of the strategy and action and planning come as logical results of those rules. It’s how the universe works, and it’s tremendously elegant.
There are only a couple of “holes” in the game that have to be patched with weird rules (that I can think of at the moment). Those are the balk and the infield fly.
We don’t want to turn into football, where you can do A only before 5 yards, you can tackle by grabbing here but not here, whatever you do don’t hit a kicker no matter what, etc. Every year they come up with some random rule out of whole cloth that everyone has to add to the encyclopedia of rules in their head. This is how chemistry class works, as opposed to physics class, and it’s the main reason why it sucks. (But I’m digressing.)
That said, most of these proposed rules aren’t so bad.
The good: The one-and-done and floating DHs are very clever (assuming we must have a DH). I can see the mid-inning relief penalty making some sense. Hit batter misconduct, I guess, although not having a DH would fix this too.
The in-between: pickoff-called-ball. The idea’s not bad, but the commit line idea is terrible. The ump would spend all his time watching some arbitrary line. Maybe if the commit line were halfway between the bases.
The bad: The 4-0 walk penalty is a pretty arbitrary rule affecting one of the basics of the game: four balls is a base on balls. And the home plate commit line suffers from the same problems as above, in addition to being one of those “whole cloth” rules out of nowhere. Besides, if the catcher doesn’t want to take the hit, he doesn’t have to. But he does, because he’s a man, and he’s got a job to do. Don’t take that away from him.
by Xan on
Oct 3, 2008 12:20 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Maybe my affinity for these rules comes from the fact the I love me some chemistry...
The mid-inning relief rule change is my favorite and I think by far the most legitimate. It takes 15 minutes to go through the pitching changes in the 7th or 8th inning of a baseball game. It’s monotonous and it’s trying to exploit a small statistical platoon split advantage. However, wouldn’t it make more sense just to have a bull pen arms that are capable of facing off against anyone. I mean, why employ or train someone to only be able to perform such a specialized role that they are essentially useless any other situation?
The rule change would add to the pacing on of the game and allow for teams to allocate their rosters in more intelligent manner, i.e. having a decent bench. If a manager really was scared of a lefty coming up to the plate, they could bring in the LOOGEY, but a hitter with a 2-0 count (no matter the hitter) has a better BA/OBP/SLG than Poo-holes career numbers. It doesn’t kill the strategy, it just makes less likely to be abused.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on
Oct 3, 2008 10:47 AM CDT
up
0 recs
I've never been bothered by the DH differences between the leagues.
In fact, I kind of like it. It adds some spice to inteleague play. It is interesting to see how teams adapt to playing the game with/without the DH when they are a visitor in interleague and World Series competition. For instance, it was interesting to see what the Red Sox would do with Ortiz when they played in Denver in the WS last year. The dual system gives fans of each side (DH or pitcher batting) a league to watch and root for. As for me, I prefer the NL rules.
by clack on Oct 2, 2008 7:56 PM CDT 0 recs
I'll give you interesting..
but it’s also unfair when they play against each other.
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Oct 2, 2008 7:57 PM CDT
up
0 recs
That reminds me
( 4 ) Ditch interleague play. The novelty has worn off and it’s just not fair.
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
by Caradoc on
Oct 3, 2008 1:29 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Oh, yeah
( 5 ) Either shorten the season or move the Series to a neutral warm-weather site. These midnight freeze outs are a travesty.
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
by Caradoc on
Oct 3, 2008 1:31 AM CDT
up
0 recs
I've pushed changes #1 for years.
During the season, with all 16 NL teams fighting for four spots, you’d see teams rise and drop in the standings on a daily basis . It ’d be exciting.
I’d think San Antonio, Portland, and Buffalo would like a team, too.
I am not a fan of the DH. I understand your logic, but given a choice of two evils I’d choose no DH in NL.
Take out Angel Campos, too. He’s an Angel Hernandez in trainig.
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on Oct 4, 2008 6:35 PM CDT 0 recs
One minor change.
No coaching visits to the mound except for injury or to change the pitcher.
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on
Oct 4, 2008 6:39 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Catcher's only? Any limit to how many times the catcher can go?
How about Bucknor? He’s also on my list of umps I dislike… although I don’t hate him like Hernandez.
Go 'Stros!
by Stros Bro on
Oct 4, 2008 7:09 PM CDT
up
0 recs
My concern is the manager or pitching coach stopping the game
to help his pitcher with mechanics or strategy. They don’t do it in tennis. They do it in Basketball and football, but it costs them a time out. To me they should talk strategy in the dugout between innings, not on the mound.
Consequently I don’t mind the pitcher and catcher getting together.
Astros fan for life
by Joe in Birmingham on
Oct 4, 2008 9:34 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
New FanPost
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chicago
|
97 | 64 | .602 | 0 | Lost 4 |
|
Milwaukee
|
90 | 72 | .555 | 7.5 | Lost 1 |
|
Houston
|
86 | 75 | .534 | 11 | Won 1 |
|
St. Louis
|
86 | 76 | .530 | 11.5 | Won 6 |
|
Cincinnati
|
74 | 88 | .456 | 23.5 | Lost 5 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
67 | 95 | .413 | 30.5 | Won 1 |
(updated 11.18.2008 at 4:56 PM CST)
