MLB: Four Ideas To Actually Improve The Game

Commissioner Rob Manfred and ESPN’s Buster Olney both have ideas to change the game in MLB. What changes could baseball make that would actually benefit fans and players alike?

On Thursday, Major League Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred indicated that MLB will be considering rule changes that will restrict the usage of relief pitchers, a puzzling idea as it will impede upon the very tactics and strategy that make the game what it is.

The idea is that pitching changes would be restricted, assumingly to speed the pace of play and ramp up offense in the late innings of games. As specialization and velocity in bullpens have increased, the argument goes, hitters are at a distinct disadvantage.

“You know the problem with relief pitchers is that they’re so good,” said Manfred. “I’ve got nothing against relief pitchers, but they do two things to the game; the pitching changes themselves slow the game down and our relief pitchers have become so [dominant] at the back end that they actually rob action out of the end of the game, the last few innings of the game. So relief pitchers is a topic that is under active consideration. We’re talking about that a lot internally.”

So the argument is that big league bullpens have become too good, too big of a weapon at a manager’s disposal, and that this somehow hurts the game. This sounds eerily similar to the kind of arguments that have been made against defensive shifting.

“We’re gonna change the way you play the game and the way you try to win games?” New York Yankees manager Joe Girardi said on Thursday night. “I think that’s completely too drastic. If you want to shorten the game, make it seven innings.”

Manfred also spoke during the all-star break of the possibility of returning to a 154-game season, an idea that would certainly benefit players, but cut roughly five percent of the season.

“Can something be done? Yeah, things can be done,” Manfred said in speaking with the BBWAA. “There are ways to produce more off days in the schedule. Some of those have very significant economic ramifications that — if in fact we’re going down those roads — those economic ramifications are going to have to be shared by all of the relevant parties. You want to work less, usually you get paid less. But we are prepared to discuss the schedule issues and make proposals that are responsive to the ones that we’ve received from the MLBPA.”

Also on Thursday, ESPN baseball insider Buster Olney wrote a column ($) on nine changes MLB should consider making, most of which seemed either equally as peculiar as Manfred’s or just clearly ineffectual. Among them were also a suggestion on restricting bullpen usage, on shortening games to seven innings (that lacked Girardi’s sarcasm), and retiring Roberto Clemente’s No. 21 throughout baseball in the same way as Jackie Robinson’s No. 42, among others.

The average time it has taken to play a game in 2016 is just over three hours, which may be a bit too long. Baseball is a business, and it does need to take the fan experience into account. But to suggest that fewer games, shorter games, or handcuffing teams trying to win games is good for the fan experience seems shortsighted.

Part of the beauty of baseball, as opposed to football or basketball, is that there is no ticking clock. The game lasts as long as one team keeps avoiding outs, keeps hitting, keeps scoring runs. That said, there are subtle changes that could be made to cut down the length of games, increase “action,” and ramp up the fan experience, changes that do not infringe on the tactics or usage available to managers.

Next: Pitchers shouldn’t rake

Change #1: Universal Designated Hitter

Since 1973, the American League and National League have played under two different sets of rules thanks to the creation of the designated hitter. The AL takes the bat out of the pitcher’s hands and allows a more skilled hitter to step into the box, while in the NL pitchers still hit for themselves.

Historically, this has meant more run scoring in the AL, and less emphasis on small ball. The differences may seem subtle, but thus far in 2016 American League clubs are averaging 4.58 runs per game (6,518 runs total) compared to 4.37 runs per game (6,240 runs total) in the National League. The league average ERA is 4.12 in the senior circuit and 4.25 in its younger counterpart.

The argument for bringing the DH to the NL can also be made quite simply by stating the obvious fact that pitchers as a whole flat-out can’t hit anymore. In 2015, the collective slash line for pitchers across MLB was a putrid .132/.160/.170, and it’s no wonder as high school, college, and minor league baseball all employ the DH. For every Madison Bumgarner, there are scores of pitchers who just can’t hit.

If “action,” as Manfred calls it, is what the game needs more of, instituting the DH in the National League, or at the very least in interleague games and the World Series, is one way to go about it. Would fan’s watching the Fall Classic rather see David Price or David Ortiz at the plate in an NL park with the game on the line? Would a sacrifice bunt by the former or a towering home run by the latter bring about more “action” in the game?

And there may be traction for this change, though it is still likely a few years away.

“Twenty years ago, when you talked to National League owners about the DH, you’d think you were talking some sort of heretical comment,” Manfred said in January. “But we have a newer group. There’s been turnover. And I think our owners in general have demonstrated a willingness to change the game in ways that we think would be good for the fans, always respecting the history and traditions of the sport.”

Next: Restrict pitchers the right way

Change #2: Don’t Limit Pitching Changes, Limit The Time They Take

This season, MLB instituted a clock for pitching coaches and managers making visits to the mound, after having tested the idea in the minor leagues. When a pitching coach or manager takes a trip to the mound to speak with their pitcher, they have just 30 seconds from the time they leave the dugout to do so, and a timer can be seen in each of the 30 big league ballparks.

There are several ways the same sort of idea could be applied to other facets of baseball that would cut down on the length of games. The minor leagues are currently employing a time limit on inning breaks, a pitching change timer, and a pitch clock, all of which provide incentives to teams to speed up the pace of play.

Going one step further, Neil Weinberg of FanGraphs and Beyond the Box Score had an interesting take on how mid-inning pitching changes can be sped up:

Except in the case of an injury that causes a pitcher to enter a game cold, limiting the number of warmup pitches would cut down on the time pitching changes take, which would appear preferable to restricting the changes and taking strategy out of a manager’s hands.

“Fundamentally, when you begin to restrict things, rather than being able to use your roster at your disposal, that begins to artificially control the game,” Red Sox manager John Farrell said. “I understand the need to keep the pace of the game going. Without knowing what options would exist and what are the alternatives being considered, that’s my first gut reaction.

“In the moment [as a manager], I’m not worried about the pace of the game. As a person who works in the game, sure, we’re always looking for ways to make it more attractive to fans, to grow our fan base, to attract young fans. We are all aware of that challenge. We’re all open to ways to grow that. But in the seventh inning in a bases-loaded situation, I’m not thinking about pace of games.”

Nor should a manager have to worry about it. As Brian Kenny wrote in his book Ahead of the Curve, the game is always on the line, and players and managers are paid an incredible amount of money to win those games, not be concerned with how long doing so takes.

Next: Challenge the challenge rule

Change #3: Limit The Time Replay Reviews Take

Replay review in baseball has very few friends regardless of how effective it is. Purists deride the use of instant replay in MLB as taking the human element of umpires out of the equation, while even proponents of it agonize over the way it has been implemented. The fact is that, while replay ensures, to some extent, critical moments in ballgames are called correctly, its use grinds games to a halt.

Replay reviews lasted an average of 1 minute 51 seconds in 2015, and 1 minute 46 seconds in 2014, but have increased to 1 minute 55 seconds in 2016. The longest replay review to take place thus far since the system was implemented was 6 minutes 25 seconds in a game between the Toronto Blue Jays and Boston Red Sox at Fenway Park on August 29, 2015.

The 2016 season is on pace for more than 1,600 replay reviews, which given the average review time, adds some 51 hours or so onto the lengths of games league-wide. Replays should be limited to 60 seconds, and if a conclusion cannot be drawn within that time frame, the call on the field should stand.

There is also the problem of manager challenges, which often cause delays in the middle of innings. We’ve all seen it: after a bang-bang play at first, the runner stays at first as the manager ascends to the top step of the dugout, looking over his shoulder at the team’s replay coordinator. For upwards of half a minute, the game is stalled until the manager decides to challenge the play or wave his man back in. And this might happen multiple times per game for both teams.

Eliminating the manager’s challenge or enforcing a strict timer on the ability to do so would save valuable time. While there are several other issues with the current implementation of the replay system, it is clear that changes are needed if MLB is really concerned with pace of play.

“If we do reach the conclusion that we have a time problem, I am open to that idea,” Manfred said in May. “It’s a cost-benefit [analysis]. At some point, everyone focuses on the four-minute replay, or whatever the heck it is. At some point, I recognize the fact that that one additional call correct comes at the cost of a four-minute delay. You’ve got to ask yourself whether it’s worth it or not.”

Next: Mismatched demographics