| Starting this summer, sources tell The Athletic, in eight Atlantic League parks from Kentucky to Long Island, that pitcher’s rubber will creep 12 inches farther from the plate than it has been at any time since 1893 – to an unfamiliar distance of 61 feet, 6 inches. |
I don't subscribe to the Athletic so I didn't get to the part about the double hook but it seems more intriguing than the mound move. The gist is both teams start with the DH and when you pull the SP you lose your DH. It would keep strategy in the game when the DH comes to the NL.
Moving the mound, the ‘Double Hook’ — what MLB and the Atlantic League are trying out next - (
New Window )
This won't generate more offense from the standpoint of doubles and triples. It will just result in more HR's.
The way they are playing carnival games with baseball lately is ridiculous.
You might also risk injury by going with your starter far longer than you should so you wouldn't lose the DH. Health and Safety
This won't generate more offense from the standpoint of doubles and triples. It will just result in more HR's.
The way they are playing carnival games with baseball lately is ridiculous.
Moving the rubber alone...true. But deadening the ball will keep more in play.
Players are now swinging for HR's and high bat speed. All deadening the ball will do is result in more flyouts for most batters, not more doubles and triples.
Plus, even with a deadened ball, it would have to be significant. HR's will still come due to the high bat speeds being generated while moving the mound back will likely result in more arm injuries due to more strain. Plus, it will screw up years of learning fundamentals of off-speed pitches.
This is a terrible rule idea.
I don't know how you get there though. Deadening the ball would have to be significant - and then that starts messing with the integrity of records. Players are bigger and stronger and learning swing techniques for optimal loft for HR's. Pitchers are throwing faster.
Not only would change take years, it would change the type of players who become stars. Willie Wilson was fun to watch, but I wouldn't have wanted him as the poster boy of baseball.
As far as the mound, I think you are risking too many arm injuries to pitchers. Increasing size of ballparks, deadening baseball, etc. would help the game more. If it was easier to get singles and doubles you would not see players selling out for the home run.
Quote:
Baseball needs a little more offense. Combine that with deadening the ball a little more. There are far too many strikeouts and homeruns. Bring back the double and triple.
This won't generate more offense from the standpoint of doubles and triples. It will just result in more HR's.
The way they are playing carnival games with baseball lately is ridiculous.
Agree 100%. Baseball does not need changes. The only change I would be on board with is a rule change that 2 IFers need to be at to the left of 2B when the pitch is thrown, and 2 to the right
Once you start deadening ball, moving back bases or the mound, you impact the integrity of the game. and it isn't assured to make for a more enjoyable game.
Even rule changes with the shifts, I don't know what to think. I don't think you should legislate against strategy. If you want to beat the shift, sacrifice the power numbers and go the other way. Unfortunately, for the power hitters, the analytics say the chance of a HR outweighs the benefit of the single. I don't know how that is since a professional hitter should be able to be proficient enough to slap the ball the opposite way at least 50% of the time, but it is the way it is.
Instead of treating the game like there is something fundamentally broken about it, how about promoting the game, promoting the players, and embracing fun. The game has NEVER had the insane amount of young talent than it does right now. This should be like shooting fish in a barrel.
Yes. I believe so. It would require a learning curve, no pun intended, that will certainly have a huge impact on current pitchers.
That is the worst idea of all. Who knows what effect it will have on that. Could it cause an increase in arm injuries due to possibly more strain on the arm from throwing the increased distance? So much potential for issues with this one.
Once you start deadening ball, moving back bases or the mound, you impact the integrity of the game. and it isn't assured to make for a more enjoyable game.
Even rule changes with the shifts, I don't know what to think. I don't think you should legislate against strategy. If you want to beat the shift, sacrifice the power numbers and go the other way. Unfortunately, for the power hitters, the analytics say the chance of a HR outweighs the benefit of the single. I don't know how that is since a professional hitter should be able to be proficient enough to slap the ball the opposite way at least 50% of the time, but it is the way it is.
Moving the rubber and adjusting the pitching area has plenty of history behind it as well.
The first 100ish years of baseball saw plenty of rule changes, the "rules are set in stone" mindset is a relatively recent phenomenon.
Yes, but keep in mind, this is an independent league, and most of the guys don't advance to the affiliated minors. Not none obviously, and it could be a real disservice to those who do get attention from mlb franchises, but for the most part, this is an experiment being tried on guys who aren't advancing anywhere. (Though with the reduction in the # of affiliated minor league teams, there could be more independent league guys with shots to get signed to advance to the affiliated minors).
I don't like it, and I don't like the double hook either. It really disadvantages teams that have to go to a long relief man early, and disadvantages "openers."
In terms of moving the mound back, I'm not sure 1 inch is going to be of monumental consequence, but I do think tinkering with that aspect of the game is very dangerous.
Use of the DH should be a game time decision made by the home team manager. He'd then be able to take advantage of a good hitting pitcher or force his opponent to sit their star DH. Add a bit of pre-game strategy not currently employed.
It might also effect the way teams build their rosters.
I don't like it, and I don't like the double hook either. It really disadvantages teams that have to go to a long relief man early, and disadvantages "openers."
In terms of moving the mound back, I'm not sure 1 inch is going to be of monumental consequence, but I do think tinkering with that aspect of the game is very dangerous.
It is in the minor league, but it isn't moving back the mound an inch, but a foot.
Quote:
I prefer NL ball, but it's an inevitability. Owners just using it as a bargaining chip at this point.
Use of the DH should be a game time decision made by the home team manager. He'd then be able to take advantage of a good hitting pitcher or force his opponent to sit their star DH. Add a bit of pre-game strategy not currently employed.
It might also effect the way teams build their rosters.
Coin toss before the game. Winner gets to choose DH or no DH. Would be a throw back to when teams would flip a coin for batting first or second (cricket still does this, baseball realized the advantage of last licks in the 9th which is why the home team always bats 2nd)
Starter feels a twinge but thinks he has to keep pitching or let the team down?
Or he takes a comebacker off his foot in the first inning, and can't land without pain, but is put in a similar position?
Yikes.
I think it's hard to predict the effect of moving the mound, though. Curveballs might be even tougher to hit. It would give hitters more time to react, but also make the strike zone "smaller" because the target is farther away. Pitchers may have to ease off their fastball just to have control, and in that event you could see HRs spike, as predicted above.
The double hook is an interesting idea. No strong opinion on that.
The big change that no one ever talks about is making gloves smaller. Like, a lot smaller. Fielders are amazing in 2021, that's dinging BABIP. The gloves are too big -- too big an advantage for today's players.
I can't even believe anyone would entertain the idea.
There are more K's because hitters are taught to maximize bat speed. Sacrificing contact. Moving the mound doesn't solve that problem.
I don't think anyone is complaining that there are a ton of defensive battles because that isn't happening. so why the need for more offense? Isn't that the root of most complaints?
I think it's hard to predict the effect of moving the mound, though. Curveballs might be even tougher to hit. It would give hitters more time to react, but also make the strike zone "smaller" because the target is farther away. Pitchers may have to ease off their fastball just to have control, and in that event you could see HRs spike, as predicted above.
The double hook is an interesting idea. No strong opinion on that.
The big change that no one ever talks about is making gloves smaller. Like, a lot smaller. Fielders are amazing in 2021, that's dinging BABIP. The gloves are too big -- too big an advantage for today's players.
There also was no mound in 1893
The only one that remotely made sense, in universal DH, they did away with. Personally, I am a fan of reverting back to pitchers hitting. But, with the universal DH in the minors, that no longer makes sense. Now young pitchers in the NL may not have hit for a few years or more and they are counted on at least 2 times a game.
Baseball is my love, but I am becoming disgusted with the product they are giving us.