I heard MLB Commissioner, Rob Manfred, interviewed yesterday on a national telecast. He was asked whether he thought the idea of the “Golden At-Bat” had a chance of ever becoming a reality in major league baseball. The idea is that once per game a team could allow any hitter, even one already in the line-up and without waiting for his turn in the order, to hit in a key situation.
He replied that “the purists and the tradition of baseball” would probably not seriously consider it for a long time, if ever. Really? They have put time limits on pitchers to deliver a pitch and limits on their number of pick-off attempts, but they will not seriously consider something positive to integrate more excitement and fan interest in the game?
This caused me to think about the reasons why fan interest in the NFL and the NBA is greater than in the MLB. Sometimes if one opens their mind, the answer is obvious. Those leagues put their best product on the field and court at all times.
Think about it. What is the single biggest difference between the NFL, the NBA, and even the NHL, from the MLB? Those other leagues have very few limits on aligning the best versus the best at any moment of the contest.
And why are most of the suggestions for what to do about the increasing dominance of pitchers ideas to restrict the pitchers or make changes to the field, e.g., pushing back the mound? How about we start with the most obvious idea.
If I were the MLB Commissioner for a day, every team would be allowed to put its nine best players on defense and its nine best hitters on offense at all times. Just like the most popular sport in America, the NFL, a player would not be required to play defense to play offense and a player could play defense and not be required to hit. A player would be allowed to do both, but they would not be required to do so.
Why have just one “Golden At-Bat”? Why not have nine!
The average MLB pitcher physically looks more like an NFL tight end or an NBA power forward every year. Their velo has increased to the point where every staff has at least one pitcher that sits at 100 mph and their arsenal has “off speed pitches”, including change-ups”, faster than the average MLB fastball just 15 years ago.
On offense, I would still require a batting order of nine players, but a pinch hitter not in the order would be allowed at any time to counter a pitching match-up or to take advantage of a game situation, e.g., bunt or squeeze. And just like in the NFL, the NBA, and the NHL, the player being substituted for is allowed to re-enter the game to give the offense or the defense the best possible strategic advantage.
A left-handed hitter would be allowed to face a right-handed pitcher and vice versa at any time as long as they hit in the same spot in the order each time. In other words, for example, two players could pinch hit for each other at any time in the game as long as it was in the same spot in the line-up.
So I am not in favor of the “Golden At-Bat” concept of allowing a hitter to hit more than one time in the nine player rotation, even if it was once per game, but I am in favor of allowing the best nine hitters to face the best nine defensive players at all times.
And since pitchers are getting more dominant every year and I think more offense is better for fan interest, I would still limit pitchers to one appearance in the game. When you’re out, you’re out, no re-entry for pitchers. The other players on defense, however, could be freely substituted once per hitter with a time limit to make the change.
Maybe it’s just because the MLB team I root for lead the league in strikeouts per game by an offense in the majors last year, but I’m positive fans across the country would rather see more offense than more strikeouts. And I know Rob Manfred would love the MLB to be not just America’s Past Time, but the most popular sport in our country now, too.
So why not do the obvious - our best, versus your best, all of the time.
He replied that “the purists and the tradition of baseball” would probably not seriously consider it for a long time, if ever. Really? They have put time limits on pitchers to deliver a pitch and limits on their number of pick-off attempts, but they will not seriously consider something positive to integrate more excitement and fan interest in the game?
This caused me to think about the reasons why fan interest in the NFL and the NBA is greater than in the MLB. Sometimes if one opens their mind, the answer is obvious. Those leagues put their best product on the field and court at all times.
Think about it. What is the single biggest difference between the NFL, the NBA, and even the NHL, from the MLB? Those other leagues have very few limits on aligning the best versus the best at any moment of the contest.
And why are most of the suggestions for what to do about the increasing dominance of pitchers ideas to restrict the pitchers or make changes to the field, e.g., pushing back the mound? How about we start with the most obvious idea.
If I were the MLB Commissioner for a day, every team would be allowed to put its nine best players on defense and its nine best hitters on offense at all times. Just like the most popular sport in America, the NFL, a player would not be required to play defense to play offense and a player could play defense and not be required to hit. A player would be allowed to do both, but they would not be required to do so.
Why have just one “Golden At-Bat”? Why not have nine!
The average MLB pitcher physically looks more like an NFL tight end or an NBA power forward every year. Their velo has increased to the point where every staff has at least one pitcher that sits at 100 mph and their arsenal has “off speed pitches”, including change-ups”, faster than the average MLB fastball just 15 years ago.
On offense, I would still require a batting order of nine players, but a pinch hitter not in the order would be allowed at any time to counter a pitching match-up or to take advantage of a game situation, e.g., bunt or squeeze. And just like in the NFL, the NBA, and the NHL, the player being substituted for is allowed to re-enter the game to give the offense or the defense the best possible strategic advantage.
A left-handed hitter would be allowed to face a right-handed pitcher and vice versa at any time as long as they hit in the same spot in the order each time. In other words, for example, two players could pinch hit for each other at any time in the game as long as it was in the same spot in the line-up.
So I am not in favor of the “Golden At-Bat” concept of allowing a hitter to hit more than one time in the nine player rotation, even if it was once per game, but I am in favor of allowing the best nine hitters to face the best nine defensive players at all times.
And since pitchers are getting more dominant every year and I think more offense is better for fan interest, I would still limit pitchers to one appearance in the game. When you’re out, you’re out, no re-entry for pitchers. The other players on defense, however, could be freely substituted once per hitter with a time limit to make the change.
Maybe it’s just because the MLB team I root for lead the league in strikeouts per game by an offense in the majors last year, but I’m positive fans across the country would rather see more offense than more strikeouts. And I know Rob Manfred would love the MLB to be not just America’s Past Time, but the most popular sport in our country now, too.
So why not do the obvious - our best, versus your best, all of the time.
RSS Feed