By RYAN WALKER
On Sept. 9, Major League Baseball made rule changes most of us knew were going to happen sooner or later. MLB will be implementing a pitch clock of 30 seconds and a defensive shift restriction, plus other minor details.
Baseball fans, players, and managers seem to be evenly split on opposing sides of the argument about whether or not this is a good or a bad thing.
Some would say these new rules attack the traditions of the sport and what makes it unique. Others would say it will improve the game from a business and an entertainment standpoint for younger generations.
Let’s take deeper dive into the changes individually.
PITCH CLOCK
The pitch clock discussion has been going on for a few years now and has been implemented in the minor leagues.
An overview of the rule will be that pitchers have 30 seconds to throw a pitch, or they will be given a ball in the count. Hitters are not off the hook, though, where they have to have two feet in the batter’s box before the eight-second mark. If they fail to do so, pitchers will be awarded a strike.
There hasn’t been much of a complaint about the rule itself. In fact, more people are starting to get on board with it, including me. I tend to swing towards a traditional style of baseball, especially since I was a pitcher my entire life through the collegiate level. However, the statistics have changed my mind, along with the response from pitchers out there.
ESPN’s Jeff Passan reported in April that the sample of 132 minor league baseball games had shaved off an average of 20 minutes per game. He also reported that in those games, the number of runs scored went from 5.11 to 5.13 per game, essentially no difference.
So, what’s the deal?
Most pitchers will not feel the effects, but some will have to change their tempo. According to the MLB’s Baseball Savant statistics page, the highest average time between pitches was 26.1 seconds from the St. Louis Cardinals’ Giovanny Gallegos. Although his time between throws is lower than a pitch clock, pitchers like Gallegos will likely feel rushed and need to change their routine with the focus on a timer.
Pitchers already have to worry about pitch sequencing, sign stealing, baserunners, and, oh, executing a pitch.
With that being said, I still think the rule change is good for the game. Players with proper practice in the off-season and in spring training should be able to adjust just fine to the rule without giving up more runs, according to the minor league studies.
The only issue I see is that I enjoy going to the field and watching a game. Cutting down time will shorten my trip to the ballpark, but if it means getting more fans in the stands, I’m OK with it.
DEFENSIVE SHIFTING
This one is either way for me, and I see both sides of the argument.
From an entertainment perspective, this is exactly what fans should be looking for and might be the best solution for more game action.
All fans get excited about offense. Hitting the ball is what drives the excitement in baseball. Allowing for more of them through the infield, even on a dinky ground ball, could be a step in the right direction to get more eyes on the game.
On the other hand, baseball traditionalists (like me) are queasy at considering baseball’s uniqueness and strategy being taken away.
Not long ago, the shifts were not much more than a few steps in one direction. Recently, the game has changed with a major shift for pull-heavy hitters where three infielders are on one side of second base and just one on the opposite side. An infielder might even be playing a short right or left field.
It looks funky, but it works. That’s why every organization does it and continues to get guys like Joey Gallo out without any damage (a .200 hitter for his career with power for 40 home runs a season).
I’m willing to give the ban on shifting a try, but if there’s too much offense, then I might be hesitant to get on board with it. I think there’s still value for a hitter who can hit to all fields and adapt to a shift.
I also think there’s value for an infielder to be dominant at his position, and he should play it on the field.
But when it comes down to it, if the game benefits by having more fans and creating and keeping younger generations of fans, I think baseball traditionalists like myself can wait and see what happens.
sports@news-banner.com
