June 15, 2021: Compromise

How about this, instead of banning the shift you say two IFs have to be on either side of second base. After that, put `em where you want.

Okay, fine, what's your idea?

35 thoughts on “June 15, 2021: Compromise”

      1. I'm not sure about the best way to do it. Just want to keep teams from pitching a guy one day and sending him down the next. Longer IL (like you mentioned) is one way to do it.

        1. There's a rule now that when you send a guy down, he has to stay down a minimum number of days. You could have a similar rule that said when you bring a guy up, he has to stay up a minimum number of days. I haven't thought through all the implications of that, but it might be something to consider.

    1. I’m for most of these, but not a limitation on roster moves. Rather, I’d prefer to add the following to your list:

      - Enforce a pitch clock; shorter recovery/tighter pacing will limit pitchers from throwing max effort on every pitch. That will lower velocity & spin a bit.
      - Limit the number of pitchers on the active roster to fewer than half. That incentivizes teams to develop starters who go deeper into games (and fireman-style, multi-inning relievers), and it also forces starters to further ration their max effort pitches, relying on defense handling balls in play. More balls in play makes things more exciting.
      - More balls in play returns some equilibrium to player performance & development by restoring the premium on agile, capable defenders.

        1. MLB does have a minimum outfield distances already — 400’ to dead center, 325’ to the corners — for any ballpark built after 1 June 1958. Here are the parks that have been granted exceptions:

          Ballpark Opened Field Distance Height
          Oracle Park 2000 CF 391' 10’
          Dodger Stadium 1962 CF 395' 8'
          Angel Stadium 1966 CF 396' 8'
          Petco Park 2004 CF 396' 7'
          PNC Park 2001 CF 399' 10'
          Minute Maid Park 2000 LF 315' 21'
          Camden Yards 1992 RF 318' 21'
          Oracle Park 2000 RF 309' 24'
          Petco Park 2004 RF 322' 10'
          PNC Park 2001 RF 320' 21'
          Tropicana Field 1990 LF/RF 315'/322' 11'/11'
          Yankme Stadium 2009 LF/RF 318'/314' 8'/8'

          One of these is not like the others.

            1. This is one of the reasons I included fence height. I’m not familiar with all the criteria that go into granting an exception, but I suspect height of the outfield wall in the affected dimension is a consideration for teams. Notably, both Oracle & PNC Parks abut bodies of water that limit their dimensions to straightaway right field, and both teams chose to mitigate that shorter distance with higher outfield walls than the typical 8’ wall.

              Some of these dimensions also reflect adjustments made after a significant observation period, like those at Oracle & Petco Parks. Environmental factors can and should inform exceptions to the minimum, particularly when related to issues like atmospheric density or weather patterns that can’t be mitigated by re-siting the park or building structures to alter wind patterns.

              There simply is no excuse for Yankme Stadium’s exceptions. They perpetuate a phony historicism that gives the team an unearned, unfair structural advantage.

              1. unearned, unfair structural advantage.

                I won't quibble with the rest since it's right, but their home run park factor is in the middle of MLB. Going backwards in time and the left-handed home run park factor tends to be first or second. They however don't seem to target left-handed hitters though. Most of the lineup is right-handed.

                  1. I don't have the option to select pull versus opposite field in park factors. If the left-handed home run park factor is above the overall, then right-handed must be lower.

Leave a Reply