Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
04.30.2008 11:28 am

No innovations in baseball?

baseball_opt.jpgFreakonomics” author Stephen J. Dubner has an interesting post this week on innovations to make baseball more interesting. Last time we heard that kind of talk, the American League got the designated hitter rule. That’s not baseball as it ought to be.

Still, Mr. Dubner makes some interesting points. You can find his post here:

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/28/ideas-for-making-baseball-more-interesting/

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 4 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
4 comments

Comments are closed.

One of the “innovations” Dubner calls for is playing relief pitchers in the outfield for a batter or two, and then bringing them back to the mound to face a hitter. Cardinals fans will recall that Whitey Herzog did that 20 years ago, sticking righthanded reliever Todd Worrell in the outfield while he brought lefthander Ken Dayley in to face a lefthanded hitter or two (often Keith Hernandez and Darryl Strawberry of the Mets) and then calling Worrell back to mound.

Herzog would explain that he was fairly confident that Worrell and/or Dayley could catch a fly ball, but there some guys on his staff he wouldn’t take the gamble with.

As to baseball being boring, I quote the legendary sportswriter Red Smith: “Baseball is dull only to dull minds.”

— Kevin Horrigan
12:11 pm April 30th, 2008

The only interesting change that baseball has made recently was to add interleague games. Seeing teams like the Yankees, Tigers, and Red Sox play the Cards during regular season spices up a season that was heavy on Milwaukee and the Mets

My suggestions:
1- 6th strike on a foul ball is an automatic out. Foul balls stretch out the games way too long.

2- Home runs count for two runs instead of one. Upper deck homers count for four runs. The three point basket and two point conversion in bb and fb have spiced up those games.

3- DH in both leagues. Pitchers should pitch and hitters should hit. Nuff said.

4- Home field advantage in WS determined by season long advantage- not meaningless all star game.

5- Instead of “Take me out to the ballgame” in the 7th inning, how about the Cha Cha Slide??

6- More Fredbird!!!!

— PurpleDude
5:55 pm April 30th, 2008

Purple Dude, I hope you are never baseball commissioner.

1. Why would you want to destroy the wonderful entertainment of a 12 or 15 pitch duel between a tiring pitcher and stubborn batter? It’s called the national “pastime.” What’s the hurry? Does the overture stretch out the symphony way too long?

2. Home runs are already over rated. A home run in one park is a loud out in another. If you need the game “spiced” up perhaps you should forego baseball for hockey or wrestling.

3. Please say you’re not serious. The DH takes a tremendous amount away from the game. Player ability, offensive strategy, relief pitching, roster management, and other core aspects of the game are removed or diluted by that stupid marketing ploy.

4. One we can agree on.

5. Have you ever attended a major league baseball game?????

6. More opposite field line drives!!!!!

— Bb
10:56 am May 1st, 2008

Kevin #1: Thanks for the memories and Red Smith did say it best.

Baseball has developed over a hundred years. It is a cerebral contest where much of what occurs is subtle.

Battles between pitcher and hitter are often best when they are lengthy. For those who do not appreciate such things, there are other entertainments. Do not spoil baseball for those who appreciate its beauty.

The unnatural (to the game and its development) overemphasis on the home run in recent years has not enhanced the game, but instead diminished it. Baseball is like a symphony, where the whole is far greater than the sum of its parts. To overvalue the home run, and diminish the game’s other elements such as pitching, advancing runners, and strategy, makes the overall product less appealing.

Using the outcome of the All-Star Game to determine home field advantage in the World Series is another misguided “enhancement” of the 1990’s (known heretofore as the “Steroids Era” just as the decade immediately preceding Babe Ruth came to be known as the “Dead Ball Era”). That “improvement” should be reversed.

— 7dez7
3:08 pm May 2nd, 2008