http://alturl.com/oewvm
I'm not really a Verducci fan, but I do agree with him about the Barry Bonds Rule. Batter can wear all the armour he wants, but if he gets hit in the armour he does not get first base.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Thanks for posting this, MTH. I agree with some of what Verducci proposes and disagree with others:
1. Expand replay to fair/foul calls down the line (in addition to just home runs), and to trapped balls - agree. My hesitation about replay in general has been because I like the human element in umpiring, but I am just fine with leaving the human element to ball/strike calls. I'm not sure how I feel about safe/out calls on the basepaths; I'd probably leave the human element in charge there too.
2. Uniform Roster sizes in September. I support this. I've never really understood why the game is played with different roster rules down the stretch than the other 5/6ths of the season. I'd actually support this proposal, which would delay the start of the minor league season and allow for expanded rosters at the beginning of the season rather than the end, as well. As the article explains, there are lots of benefits to this in addition to not having pennant races affected by differing roster sizes in September.
3. Barry Bonds rule - yes, sir, please. I'm with Verducci and MTH on this - no award of first base if you get hit anywhere of the thousand or so places you've decided to armour up to avoid the consequences of taking the inside part of the plate away from the pitcher.
4. The J.C. Martin rule (get rid of the 45-foot running lane to first base) - disagree. Not sure I am convinced there is a problem with the way it is now.
5. The Jorge Posada rule (limit catcher visits to the mound; give two visits per inning, with subsequent visits resulting in a ball being awarded) - mostly agree that the game needs to be sped up, but am not sure it can't already be enforced within current rules.
6. The Carlos Beltran rule (get stopwatches out of the hands of first base coaches) - meh. Don't really care. The information will be available (though maybe not as much in real time) anyway. Frankly, I think the rule on no electronic devices in the dugout is dumb - at least as long as they aren't being used for communication with players on the field - and since this proposal is just an extension of that one, I am ambivalent to antagonistic to it.
7. The Johnny Damon rule (treat a broken bat flying toward an infielder the same way you do runner interference with the fielder making a play) - I wouldn't change this, just continue to come up with standards to improve bats and make them less likely to shatter in this way. The suggestion that a batter could intentionally break his bat to gain an advantage, or that breaking a bat WOULD give him an advantage more often than not, is kind of laughable to me.
8. The Sam Holbrook rule (get rid of outfield umpires for postseason play and umpire the way you do all year long) - agree.
9. The Paul Blair rule (reduce LCS to 5 games in order to reduce "playoff fatigue" from too much playoff expansion) - OK. Don't feel all that strongly about it, but 37 postseason games in 23 days *is* a lot.
And for a bonus rule change Verducci didn't talk about, consider this:
Why have the draft, if teams are allocated draft money? Auction!
Interesting proposal from Tangotiger.... I like it.
1. Expand replay to fair/foul calls down the line (in addition to just home runs), and to trapped balls - agree. My hesitation about replay in general has been because I like the human element in umpiring, but I am just fine with leaving the human element to ball/strike calls. I'm not sure how I feel about safe/out calls on the basepaths; I'd probably leave the human element in charge there too.
2. Uniform Roster sizes in September. I support this. I've never really understood why the game is played with different roster rules down the stretch than the other 5/6ths of the season. I'd actually support this proposal, which would delay the start of the minor league season and allow for expanded rosters at the beginning of the season rather than the end, as well. As the article explains, there are lots of benefits to this in addition to not having pennant races affected by differing roster sizes in September.
3. Barry Bonds rule - yes, sir, please. I'm with Verducci and MTH on this - no award of first base if you get hit anywhere of the thousand or so places you've decided to armour up to avoid the consequences of taking the inside part of the plate away from the pitcher.
4. The J.C. Martin rule (get rid of the 45-foot running lane to first base) - disagree. Not sure I am convinced there is a problem with the way it is now.
5. The Jorge Posada rule (limit catcher visits to the mound; give two visits per inning, with subsequent visits resulting in a ball being awarded) - mostly agree that the game needs to be sped up, but am not sure it can't already be enforced within current rules.
6. The Carlos Beltran rule (get stopwatches out of the hands of first base coaches) - meh. Don't really care. The information will be available (though maybe not as much in real time) anyway. Frankly, I think the rule on no electronic devices in the dugout is dumb - at least as long as they aren't being used for communication with players on the field - and since this proposal is just an extension of that one, I am ambivalent to antagonistic to it.
7. The Johnny Damon rule (treat a broken bat flying toward an infielder the same way you do runner interference with the fielder making a play) - I wouldn't change this, just continue to come up with standards to improve bats and make them less likely to shatter in this way. The suggestion that a batter could intentionally break his bat to gain an advantage, or that breaking a bat WOULD give him an advantage more often than not, is kind of laughable to me.
8. The Sam Holbrook rule (get rid of outfield umpires for postseason play and umpire the way you do all year long) - agree.
9. The Paul Blair rule (reduce LCS to 5 games in order to reduce "playoff fatigue" from too much playoff expansion) - OK. Don't feel all that strongly about it, but 37 postseason games in 23 days *is* a lot.
And for a bonus rule change Verducci didn't talk about, consider this:
Why have the draft, if teams are allocated draft money? Auction!
Interesting proposal from Tangotiger.... I like it.
On TangoTiger's suggestions concerning the draft: All a team like the Astros needs is to be encouraged to sell their draft portion of capital. Under an owner like former owner Drayton McLain, and this years guy(Crain) who paid the top choice less than the second pick, the Astros might just skip the draft and pocket the money or waste it on a one dimensional guy like Lee(free agent) that they wish they could dump two years later.
quote:2. Uniform Roster sizes in September. I support this. I've never really understood why the game is played with different roster rules down the stretch than the other 5/6ths of the season. I'd actually support this proposal, which would delay the start of the minor league season and allow for expanded rosters at the beginning of the season rather than the end, as well. As the article explains, there are lots of benefits to this in addition to not having pennant races affected by differing roster sizes in September.
All teams are allowed to bring up an additional 15 players. They can choose to do so or not. That's THEIR decision. The Brewers need to quit whining already!
quote:4. The J.C. Martin rule (get rid of the 45-foot running lane to first base) - disagree. Not sure I am convinced there is a problem with the way it is now.
From the RH batter's box that 45-foot running lane causes him to run a path other than a straight line.
quote:On TangoTiger's suggestions concerning the draft: All a team like the Astros needs is to be encouraged to sell their draft portion of capital. Under an owner like former owner Drayton McLain, and this years guy(Crain) who paid the top choice less than the second pick, the Astros might just skip the draft and pocket the money or waste it on a one dimensional guy like Lee(free agent) that they wish they could dump two years later.
While I won't argue the Carlos Lee bit, I think the Astros drafted well this year. By underpaying Correa, they were able to draft and sign McCullers and Ruiz, two highly regarded prospects that were perceived to be difficult to sign. Buxton signed for slot money with the 2nd overall pick. If he had been drafted by the Astros and received slot money, he would've been paid $2.4 million more than Correa. I don't think anyone felt as though Buxton was $2.4 million more of a prospect than Correa, and the fact that they were able to draft prospects that were perceived as first round talent in later rounds due to the excess capital they had available essentially made the decision smart, in my opinion.
While I agree JH, there was a persistant rumor that the Astros told the top five prospects what they were going to pay and the first one to accept was the number one draft choice. I'm not sure that's how it should be done. But if you're right about their reasoning, then it may have been a good plan. It's just that by doing things the way the Astros did it, you could end up similar to the Matt Bush first pick by the Padres several years ago, who was in no way deserving to be the top pick and has been an utter flop as a ss and a pitcher.
Usually a draft drops off in talent quite a bit after the first six or eight picks, sometimes even sooner and I feel the first pick should go for the best talent available. I don't feel all first round picks are anywhere near equal in other words. But good point.
Usually a draft drops off in talent quite a bit after the first six or eight picks, sometimes even sooner and I feel the first pick should go for the best talent available. I don't feel all first round picks are anywhere near equal in other words. But good point.
Every draft is different. The '11 draft class was considered the strongest in a long time. The '12 class wasn't as talented overall. You're right in almost every circumstance, unless of course there is a talent like Strasburg or Harper that is simply THAT much better than everyone else available.
With the new limitations on the draft teams are beginning to have to take new routes to successfully implementing their scouting process. The draft is by and large a crapshoot, and being financially responsible and performing with relative efficiency isn't a bad thing. In the particular instance of the '12 draft, I think the Astros did a solid job balancing their prospects and enabled themselves to begin moving forward in a long term plan.
With the new limitations on the draft teams are beginning to have to take new routes to successfully implementing their scouting process. The draft is by and large a crapshoot, and being financially responsible and performing with relative efficiency isn't a bad thing. In the particular instance of the '12 draft, I think the Astros did a solid job balancing their prospects and enabled themselves to begin moving forward in a long term plan.
I agree with all 9 proposed rule changes, but not with the same level of support.
I strongly support 2, 5, 7, 8, and 9. The others I am positive to, but not strongly. I like the "Barry Bonds" rule, but enforcing it how? Short of a replay, I don't see how the plate umprie could determine if a ball hit, skimmed, or just missed a piece of protective gear.
I strongly support 2, 5, 7, 8, and 9. The others I am positive to, but not strongly. I like the "Barry Bonds" rule, but enforcing it how? Short of a replay, I don't see how the plate umprie could determine if a ball hit, skimmed, or just missed a piece of protective gear.
Bulldog- I have sent you a PM. Plese review and provide your thoguhts. 
On the Barry Bonds armor rule:
How are you going to distinguish if it hit armour or skin and armour??
I would morph the college rule: if it hits you in the box, take your base. If the ball isn't in your batters box and hits you, so what, it's a ball or a strike.
How are you going to distinguish if it hit armour or skin and armour??
I would morph the college rule: if it hits you in the box, take your base. If the ball isn't in your batters box and hits you, so what, it's a ball or a strike.
quote:Originally posted by J H:
Every draft is different. The '11 draft class was considered the strongest in a long time. The '12 class wasn't as talented overall. You're right in almost every circumstance, unless of course there is a talent like Strasburg or Harper that is simply THAT much better than everyone else available.
With the new limitations on the draft teams are beginning to have to take new routes to successfully implementing their scouting process. The draft is by and large a crapshoot, and being financially responsible and performing with relative efficiency isn't a bad thing. In the particular instance of the '12 draft, I think the Astros did a solid job balancing their prospects and enabled themselves to begin moving forward in a long term plan.
I am with JH on this about the Astros and the draft. While it wasn't a really strong draft class, the GM who got those players to sign is the same guy (Jeff Luhnow) who was the scouting director for the cardinals (since 2005 I think), and look how well his drafts with them has been.