Union Rejects 'Pace of Play' Proposal

CoachAF

New Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2016
Messages
716
Reaction score
27
http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/22146240/players-association-rejects-mlb-proposal-institute-20-second-pitch-clocks-limits-mound-visits
 
 
The players' association rejected Major League Baseball's latest pace-of-play proposal Thursday, increasing the likelihood that baseball will unilaterally implement a pitch clock and a limit on mound visits in advance of the 2018 season, two sources told ESPN.
 
Union executive director Tony Clark and assistant general counsel Matt Nussbaum informed MLB of the decision in a phone call to deputy commissioner Dan Halem late Thursday afternoon. While Clark and commissioner Rob Manfred are scheduled to meet next week, a source familiar with the negotiations said the sides remain far apart on the issue and are not optimistic they will reach an agreement through further talks.
 
 
Personally, I am in favor of Manfred over-ruling and implementing the changes. Game times have just gotten longer and longer and longer. Keep the batters in the box, limit mound visits, and pitchers need to pitch faster. The formula is simple, but the players won't agree to it because it inconveniences them. As commish, Manfred's job is to make decisions in the best interest of the sport. Baseball is in a good spot right now, but this is the one thing that needs to be addressed. 
 

Giantmetfan07

Shocking The World
ADMIN
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
34,763
Reaction score
561
I'm fine with limiting mound visits. No need for any more changes aside from that.

In all seriousness - with recent changes (pitch clock [which I thought was already implemented? I saw it at met games I attended], limiting pitching coach visits to the mound) how much time, on average, has the game been shortened by? Is there an estimate on the impact these proposed changes will have? How much time? If the average game is shortened 5 minutes will that many more people tune in? Because I don't think so. I can't picture these chsnges shortening the game drastically. It's going to be minimal.
 

catman

Moderator
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
38
The deal Manfred will have to implement will not be as favorable to the players as this one is.  He is going to do something to speed up the games, as the average game is about 15 minutes longer than it was just a few years back.  Mound visits are good in strategic situations, but having the catcher go out 5 times in an inning is a bit too much.  Hitters get in the box and be ready to hit.  Pitchers, get on the mound, take your sign and throw the ball.
 

snipezo

Well-Known Member
Hall of Fame
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
29,592
Reaction score
474
GMF1991 said:
I'm fine with limiting mound visits. No need for any more changes aside from that.

In all seriousness - with recent changes (pitch clock [which I thought was already implemented? I saw it at met games I attended], limiting pitching coach visits to the mound) how much time, on average, has the game been shortened by? Is there an estimate on the impact these proposed changes will have? How much time? If the average game is shortened 5 minutes will that many more people tune in? Because I don't think so. I can't picture these chsnges shortening the game drastically. It's going to be minimal.
I agree. Baseball will always be a slow paced sport despite the changes Manfred tries to implement.
 

CoachAF

New Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2016
Messages
716
Reaction score
27
GMF1991 said:
I'm fine with limiting mound visits. No need for any more changes aside from that.

In all seriousness - with recent changes (pitch clock [which I thought was already implemented? I saw it at met games I attended], limiting pitching coach visits to the mound) how much time, on average, has the game been shortened by? Is there an estimate on the impact these proposed changes will have? How much time? If the average game is shortened 5 minutes will that many more people tune in? Because I don't think so. I can't picture these chsnges shortening the game drastically. It's going to be minimal.
https://www.milb.com/milb/news/toolshed-pitch-clocks-do-their-job-in-debut/c-152478810
 
looks like the pitch clock by itself had anywhere from no effect to cutting 16 minutes on average. On average in all MiLB, it cut 6 minutes. 
 

CoachAF

New Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2016
Messages
716
Reaction score
27
That article has some interesting quotes from Lucas Giolito. He basically said that he worried about it at first, but then realized that if he just pitched at his normal pace, he was okay. 
 
And that's what people who are freaking out don't understand. The pitch clock won't affect 90% of all pitchers. It will just force the ones who pitch painfully slow to pick up the pace. 
 
Here's another great article from B-R http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2714961-the-worst-offenders-of-baseballs-biggest-problem-the-games-still-too-slow
 

CameronCrazy06

Sight On Six
Hall of Fame
Commish
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
60,151
Reaction score
2,039
Im fine with everything mentioned. Where I draw the line is trying to speed up extra innings by putting runners on and trying to limit pitching changes.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Who Wins Game 5?

  • Tampa Bay Rays (Away)

    Votes: 5 33.3%
  • Houston Astros (Home)

    Votes: 10 66.7%
Top