Originally Posted by :
he MLB commissioner's office is reportedly considering a rule change that would require starting pitchers to play at least six innings per game.
MLB officials spoke to ESPN and expressed that the league is looking to both have starting pitchers spend more time in the game and also cut back on injuries. While these two viewpoints seem contradictory, the league also reportedly wants more balance in terms of strikeouts versus hits. A pitcher who knows he has to stay in the game longer may take some velocity off his pitches, making it easier for the batter.
"We are interested in increasing the amount of action in the game, restoring the prominence of the starting pitcher and reducing the prevalence of pitching injuries," an MLB official told ESPN. "There are a whole host of options in addressing those issues."
The alleged objective is to prioritize starting pitching but also avoid leaving in a struggling pitcher simply to meet the six-inning minimum.
To counteract this possibility, some caveats would have to be carved out. Some of the suggested exceptions would allow a pitcher to leave the game after:
Throwing 100 pitches
Giving up 4+ earned runs
An injury followed by mandatory time on the injured list
In regards to the minimum, Kansas City Royals starting pitcher Seth Lugo said "I do that anyway."
"We all want to go at least six," he added.
"It's such a bad idea," baseball analyst Gary Sheffield Jr. told Blaze News. "So bad that it would never be considered by the players."
Sheffield stressed that requiring such a pitch count would be extremely detrimental to young pitchers.
"At the velocities they're throwing these days most young arms would explode."
Arizona Diamondbacks General Manager Mike Hazen suggested pulling back on velocity would be an inevitable result.
"That's a tough thing, because that's where you get outs," Hazen explained.
According to Bleacher Report, MLB starters are averaging 5.25 innings in 2024 while Triple-A starters are averaging 4.3. This appears to reveal that development would be required in the minor leagues to extend the life of a starting pitcher another .75 innings in the majors.
Teams have become much more strict in terms of pitch counts for their starters in recent years, so much so that only 21 pitchers have thrown complete games in 2024. Just three pitchers — Kevin Gausman (TOR), Max Fried (ATL), Cristopher Sanchez (PHI) — have more than one.
Aside from the minimum-innings rule, the league has also reportedly considered limiting the size of pitching staffs and implementing the double-hook DH rule.
Currently being experimented with in the independent Atlantic League, the double-hook DH rule causes a team to lose their designated hitter if they remove their starting pitcher from the game.
Originally Posted by :
Currently being experimented with in the independent Atlantic League, the double-hook DH rule causes a team to lose their designated hitter if they remove their starting pitcher from the game.
Originally Posted by Bowser:
I'm old enough to remember Luke Hochevar giving up 8 runs in the first inning on opening day.
Hard pass, thanks.
June, 2016. Edison Volquez faced 15 Astros hitters in a Royals’ 13–4 loss to Houston at Kaufman Stadium. He retired three of them. The other 12 came around to score. Game logs going back to 1913, but in the 103 1/2 seasons covered by that data, Volquez is the first pitcher ever to be charged with 12 runs without recording an out in the second inning of a game he started. [Reply]
If this is implemented, it will have to be a penalty for doing so, (like losing your DH as mentioned in a previous comment) not a blanket “you can’t do it.” [Reply]
How about we just lose the pitcher's position all together and let the batter hit off of a tee, or better yet, install a pitching machine on the mound? With today's technology, the manager would select the pitch type*, placement** and speed***.
(*all pitches must be preapproved by the league)
(**pitching machines will be set so that no pitches will be allowed outside of the strike zone, to further increase game speed.)
(***maximum speed to be determined by the league.)
Think of it. No more charging the mound on a brush back pitch, because there won't be any.
No more pickoff moves. (They'll be taken away by the league with the advent of the pitching machine replacing the hurler on the mound).
No more balks.
A fast, efficient and money saving move by MLB.
Bye bye over priced multi-million dollar pitchers. Hello, long ball. [Reply]
Would love this. Baseball has changed massively over the past decade and very much not for the better. This would at least be some small step back to what it was rather than just watching teams micro manage using 10 RPs a game with very few balls in play and little offense overall. [Reply]
This is, without a doubt, the stupidest idea I’ve ever heard in my entire life. The mere fact this is even being proposed should get people fired. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lewdog:
****, Canadians probably like it too.
/Idiots
I know you haven’t watched much baseball over the past decade until this year due to the Royals being irrelevant, but the sport has been getting worse for while now as teams have allowed analytics to dictate every single decision made on the field.
Creating a pitch clock was a good start, but this would go a long way to increasing balls in play again instead of just watching an endless slog of pitching changes and strikeouts every single game. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
I know you haven’t watched much baseball over the past decade until this year due to the Royals being irrelevant, but the sport has been getting worse for while now as teams have allowed analytics to dictate every single decision made on the field.
Creating a pitch clock was a good start, but this would go a long way to increasing balls in play again instead of just watching an endless slog of pitching changes and strikeouts every single game.
I'm always here bitch. I haven't gone anywhere away from baseball, unless you count all the times I go to your mom's house! [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Would love this. Baseball has changed massively over the past decade and very much not for the better. This would at least be some small step back to what it was rather than just watching teams micro manage using 10 RPs a game with very few balls in play and little offense overall.
Remember when Jose Bautista got jacked in the fucken face or were you too busy glazing Lebron [Reply]
Originally Posted by lewdog:
I'm always here bitch. I haven't gone anywhere away from baseball, unless you count all the times I go to your mom's house!
Then you would know that baseball used to be a sport of action and devolved into something far from that. Starting pitchers pitching to contact to get through innings efficiently to get deep into games and batters putting balls in play rather than just selling out for power (it’s literally how the Royals fluked their way to a WS a decade ago).
Nah, wouldn’t want to get back to that again. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Jewish Rabbi:
Remember when Jose Bautista got jacked in the ****en face or were you too busy glazing Lebron
I remember Jose Bautista sweeping that Rangers team out of the playoffs. Back when baseball was far more watchable and wasn’t completely dictated by Harvard Econ grad spreadsheets and strategies. [Reply]
People cried and bitched about the pitch clock too until they realized it was the best thing to happen in baseball for years. Guarantee this would be similar if they ever had the guts to implement it. [Reply]