OT MLB players reject pace of play changes, commish to implement regardless

[tarheelhockey]

Because there is no clock and no ties in baseball. Weird how that works!

What? That had nothing to do with the post you quoted.

The point stands, and it's a matter of fact, that baseball has fallen out of line with other pro sports experiences* in terms of game length. And it didn't used to be that way, when baseball was a lot more popular.


* the only exception is football, which is basically an all-day once-a-week event

 

[MNNumbers]

Well, we know the common perception, from media reports, is that interest is falling because of game length, which is related to high pitch counts and multiple pitching changes.

What I haven't seen are local TV ratings to suggest that. I am assuming that the Commissioner's Office has, because if it weren't true that there is some down side to things the way they currently are, there would be no push to a pitch clock and for these other changes.

I can appreciate AF24 for his opinion. Many many fans of sports are traditionalists, and don't like changes of any kind. There is nothing wrong with that.

From a pure business angle, is doesn't really whether the common fan is an idiot for not appreciating the game, or many other things in this thread. From a business standpoint, the only thing that matters is whether it's true that viewership, especially among youth, is down. If it is, why? and, what can be done to change it? You are not going to change the young people. So, if you are losing them, YOU have to change. And, I think that's what this is really about.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

The problem with average game length in baseball, as opposed to the other leagues, is how many games are in a season.

 

[Last Gleaming]

Too many pitches due to batters being too selective? Why not raise the top of the strike zone a modest amount, say, back up to the armpits?

 

[YEM]

in the 70's & 80's the average game length was about 2.5 hrs
but they won't sacrifice ad time
so they'll add silly rules

 

[golfortennis]

Too many pitches due to batters being too selective? Why not raise the top of the strike zone a modest amount, say, back up to the armpits?

Thing is they have tried all kinds of things(lowered to the top of the letters, changed which part of the knee), and the problem is, each ump has "their own strike zone." Which is absolutely ridiculous. I'm a pitcher's guy, but I don't buy the crap that a ball 2 inches off the plate called a strike is ok "if it's called on both teams." A hitter should not have to swing off the plate. But a ball above the belt over the plate at the letters is a strike, but because umps refuse to call it....

Call the damn strike zone and this selectiveness drops significantly. Batters aren't swinging because the pitchers are needing to hit thimbles to get a call.

Umps are terrific, and I mean, absolutely terrific at safe/out calls. But they can't call balls and strikes to save their lives.

 

[robert terwilliger]

"we'll really grow the game by alienating all of our die-hard fans to get the sweet, sweet cash of fans who don't even like the sport they watch!"

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

"we'll really grow the game by alienating all of our die-hard fans to get the sweet, sweet cash of fans who don't even like the sport they watch!"

this.

Changing a sport to try to appeal to people who are never going to like the sport anyways is suicide. You dont get the new fans and you alienate your core audience and are left with no audience.

for all the talk about baseball dying, they have set a new league revenue record, every year for the last 10 years.

 

[tarheelhockey]

for all the talk about baseball dying, they have set a new league revenue record, every year for the last 10 years.

So has every other halfway decent business. Revenue should not be down when the population is expanding and the currency is inflating.

 

[TheTotalPackage]

This isn't a generational value shift. From the 1950s through the 1980s, otherwise known as the glory years of baseball, games held a consistent 2:30 standard, same as hockey or basketball. During that time period (when long-attention-span Boomers were the dominant audience) if a game had run 3 hours the fans would have wondered what the hell was the holdup.

Millennials are perfectly willing to watch a 2:30 sporting event, just like the generations before them. They are annoyed by a 3-hour sporting event, just like the generations before them.

I don't know, I'm not overly convinced that a potential extra half hour is what is alienating fans. If people like/love baseball, they won't really notice the extra time. With the instant gratification desire these days, 2:30 or 3 hours...I think neither is really desired.

 

[BattleBorn]

I don't know, I'm not overly convinced that a potential extra half hour is what is alienating fans. If people like/love baseball, they won't really notice the extra time. With the instant gratification desire these days, 2:30 or 3 hours...I think neither is really desired.

That’s the issue. People that like/love baseball don’t mind, they were raised watching baseball on one of the 60 channels they got on cable, or, to go further back, they watched their team on one of the five channels they got or listened on one of the radio stations they had.

It’s not about them. I’m 35, and I’m pretty sure I’m the last group of kids that didn’t have ridiculous amounts of entertainment options when I got home from school, so the Cubs game was what I watched. That’s how I really discovered baseball. I traded baseball cards. Do kids even still do that?

Once I die and the people after me die, you’ve got to have someone to watch. The people that were raised with infinite entertainment options are the ones, and they like excitement and apparently eating Tide Pods. We’ve got to cater to them a little bit, IMO. Plus, like I said earlier, even I’m skipping the Cubs/Pirates game that takes 1:15 to plod through the first three innings.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I don't know, I'm not overly convinced that a potential extra half hour is what is alienating fans. If people like/love baseball, they won't really notice the extra time. With the instant gratification desire these days, 2:30 or 3 hours...I think neither is really desired.

We're not really talking about the length of the game as an isolated factor. What's causing the game to be 3 hours long is the bigger issue. Some of it is additional pitches, but a much bigger portion of it is just dead air. Honestly I do think that even hardcore fans notice this, but they're willing to put up with it in order to avoid rule changes.

A lot of hockey fans were the same way about interference during the Dead Puck Era... at some level they had to realize that the game was steadily losing entertainment value, but the god-given right to grab a guy's jersey was more important. You don't really hear people say that anymore, but it was very much a line people were willing to draw in the sand circa 2002.

 

[LadyStanley]

MLB restricts visits to mound, holds off on pitch clocks

Restricting visits to the mound to start, but holding off on the pitch clock for now.

 

[TheSituation]

"we'll really grow the game by alienating all of our die-hard fans to get the sweet, sweet cash of fans who don't even like the sport they watch!"

This is the classic "man shaking a hand at the sky" mentality. I love baseball, and I even I recognize that the pace of the game can be brutal. It shouldn't take a guy a minute to make a pitch with no one on base. It's absurd today.

For all the old geezers who want to reminisce, look at this A/B comparison made by a writer.

"The total time for the inaction pitches in 1984—the elapsed time between a pitcher releasing one pitch and his release of the next pitch—was 32 minutes and 47 seconds.

"The total time for inaction pitches in 2014 was 57 minutes and 41 seconds."

 

[robert terwilliger]

This is the classic "man shaking a hand at the sky" mentality. I love baseball, and I even I recognize that the pace of the game can be brutal. It shouldn't take a guy a minute to make a pitch with no one on base. It's absurd today.

For all the old geezers who want to reminisce, look at this A/B comparison made by a writer.

"The total time for the inaction pitches in 1984—the elapsed time between a pitcher releasing one pitch and his release of the next pitch—was 32 minutes and 47 seconds.

"The total time for inaction pitches in 2014 was 57 minutes and 41 seconds."

you'll get no arguments from me w/r/t pacing. but if you're really going to sit here and think that the game is the same now that it was 34 years ago we aren't going to agree.

 

[TheSituation]

you'll get no arguments from me w/r/t pacing. but if you're really going to sit here and think that the game is the same now that it was 34 years ago we aren't going to agree.

Sure, but the game has changed for a reason. What reason does a pitcher need a minute to throw a pitch.

 

[robert terwilliger]

in a 8-2 game on may 8th? no reason whatsoever. throw the f***ing ball.

in a tie game in the postseason? trying to figure out sequencing and working with his catcher on previous situations and sequences. maddux used to set up guys over the course of a season or multiple seasons, pitching guys differently in the regular season to "set them up" in the playoffs. as long as it's not every single pitch, i've no problem.

 

[hangman005]

I will never understand the allure of baseball, or even in commonwealth countries cricket. It's just so damn boring, if I wanted to watch grass grow I've got my very own lawn. Heck cricket has matches that last 5 f***en days... who the hell has time to watch a game that last 5 days let alone one as boring as that.

 

[MaskedSonja]

My own .05 from the cool story bro dept.

Ive never been a huge baseball fan. A few years ago i just decided to watch it more closely to see what it was all about. After a while i figured out what made it "work"(at least for its time)

Baseball is not a spectator sport as much as a social sport. It was a sport to watch on a saturday afternoon with friends. The sliw pace meant you sat and watched a chess game. You talked about strategy, stats, trades, other players in comparison as you munched your hotdog and oh hey theres a game going on as a bonus.

It is a sport from a time when you had a lot of time. It was a social event on a summer day or night. The time was passed by debating who was going to the series or who had the best on base stat or why the manager pulled the pitcher.

It wasnt about watching the game as socializing about it with the game as a backdrop.

The challenge now is the focus is on the game the social aspect is minimized as people have things to do. And other options.

It really is a game for another age and time.

I think unless you can get games done in 2.5 to 3 hrs regularly it will be tough to catch attention i think of new audiences. I think if things being cyclical perhaps down the road maybe culture wants to recapture an era of slowing life down and baseball maybe gets a rebirth.

No easy answers though.

 

[Killion]

I will never understand the allure of baseball, or even in commonwealth countries cricket. It's just so damn boring, if I wanted to watch grass grow I've got my very own lawn. Heck cricket has matches that last 5 ****en days... who the hell has time to watch a game that last 5 days let alone one as boring as that.

Broadcast audiences just in India & Pakistan alone, over 750 million +++, while globally well over a billion for major events. Melbourne Cricket Grounds or MCG as its referred to holds 100,000 while in places like India & Pakistan, facilities up to about 70,000.... mind blowing as like you, I fail to see the attraction & Ive both watched it live & even played it, tried it out & no thanks. Now, Baseball on the other hand, absolutely love it, but then, I'm older, the generation still interested, in love with the game and were dying off.

 

[MaskedSonja]

On the flip side. The number of americans watching curling and being fascinated by it is interesting. A us friend said " its shuffleboard on ice we totally get that". Its just interesting what makes a culture like or grab onto a sport

 

[adsfan]

Yea the no pitch intentional walk is moronic, not only does it pretty much make a negligible impact in game times, but it goes against the spirit of the game. If there are men on base the pitcher should be forced to lob it up there. Because we have seen guys buckle and throw it wide, or some hitter step in and try to put an intentional walk pitch into play.

There is nothing wrong with baseball and the game times are fine.

I saw Pete Rose do that. He hit a single to right. I saw a wild pitch on a IW maybe twice that I can recall. Johnny Bench dove and still couldn't catch it!

I am not sure that going to a softball pass to first base will shorten or improve many games. I also saw Bob Gibson pitch at Crosley Field in a game lasted less than 2 hours. That was around 1967. The last Brewers game that I attended went almost 3 hours because the two teams used 10 pitchers.

 

[adsfan]

On the flip side. The number of americans watching curling and being fascinated by it is interesting. A us friend said " its shuffleboard on ice we totally get that". Its just interesting what makes a culture like or grab onto a sport

Yes, I agree with your post.

Short track speed skating reminds me of the Roller Derby on TV when I was a kid. I would watch that at 2 AM if I had to.

 

[adsfan]

Broadcast audiences just in India & Pakistan alone, over 750 million +++, while globally well over a billion for major events. Melbourne Cricket Grounds or MCG as its referred to holds 100,000 while in places like India & Pakistan, facilities up to about 70,000.... mind blowing as like you, I fail to see the attraction & Ive both watched it live & even played it, tried it out & no thanks. Now, Baseball on the other hand, absolutely love it, but then, I'm older, the generation still interested, in love with the game and were dying off.

Both of my kids like baseball, although they are young adults now. The younger one has been to MCG. I can't imagine flying 14 hours from LA!

 

[adsfan]

you're not wrong about number of pitches being up

The average number of pitches thrown per game is rising » Baseball-Reference Blog » Blog Archive

there are 22 more pitches per game than in 1988. at 30 seconds per thats an extra 11 minutes to the game. There's your difference right there.

No amount of changing the game will get batters to swing at more pitches or get pitchers to throw more meatballs.

Too many pitchers are used. If it takes 5 minutes to change one, that adds nearly an hour to some games.