July 22, 2016

Commissioner Rob Manfred "In Favor" Of Limiting Use Of Relief Pitchers

MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred said Thursday that he would be "in favor" of restricting the number of relief pitchers a team could use in an inning or in a game.
You know the problem with relief pitchers is that they're so good. I've got nothing against relief pitchers but they do two things to the game: The pitching changes themselves slow the game down, and our relief pitchers have become so dominate at the back end that they actually rob action out of the end of the game, the last few innings of the game. So relief pitchers is a topic that is under active consideration. We're talking about that a lot internally.
This is quite honestly the absolute dumbest idea I have heard in a long time. Is this actually being considered in MLB's offices? Is Manfred trying to drive long-time fans away from the game? (More shockingly, will Manfred actually make people wistful about Bud Selig?)

But if Manfred is serious, I've got a few other ways to not "slow the game down":
1. Limit the number of pitches that a team can throw in a game. Too many pitches = long games. Can't have that. ... Ding! Sorry, Astros, you just threw pitch 150. The game is over!

2. Batters can see no more than five pitches in any plate appearance. Depending on whether there are more balls or strikes after pitch #5, the batter will be awarded a walk or be called out on strikes.

3. Slower pitches obviously slow the game down, so pitchers will be allowed to throw no more than six off-speed pitches per inning. (Steven Wright will be banned from MLB.)

4. Keep commercial breaks the same length (local games 2:25; national games 2:45; postseason: 3:00+).


Ian said...

This proposal doesn't seem to realistic, but I certainly applaud any attempts to tweak and improve the game. I don't think time of game is the real issue as much as lack of action in the game. I'd be in favor of doing away with defensive shifts, lowering the mound, shrinking the strike zone or other measures that increase scoring. If anything, those measures might increase the time of game, but it would also increase the excitement.

wilson said...

Why nine innings? How about three. Five pitches is an excellent idea, two strikes for an out three balls you walk and do away with the foul ball,everything should be in play - think of how many more exciting home runs there would be.

Kara Keenan said...

That's just dumb as fuck.

Johnny said...

3 balls = walk
2 strikes = strikeout
That oughtta do it!

Jim said...

I'm still waiting for a regular baseball writer to call out Manfred for the mediocre, status quo, sometimes idiotic, corporate shill that he is. You know, even make it easy by leading with the standard "honeymoon is over" theme.

allan said...

How about having NO relief pitchers?

Starters will go as long as the managers deem prudent and when one manager says "enough", then the game is over. So Team X trails 2-1 and Manager X wonders if he should let his starter throw another inning, pushing him over 140+ pitches, because he thinks his bats might come back and win. DRAMA!

allan said...

Some games might go 6 innings, some might go 11. You never know what will happen. EXCITEMENT!

allan said...

3 balls = walk
2 strikes = strikeout
That oughtta do it!

Steve Phillips suggests 3 balls for a walk and 2 strikes for a strikeout. For real.