Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 16:21 pm
What does the board think?
If you pull your starting pitcher prior to completing five innings, then you lose a designated hitter for the rest of the game.
I believe the original rule tested, stated completing six settings, but given the state of the game, five innings seems more appropriate.
I’m in favor of. Too much micromanaging is starting pitchers by the stat heads.
Chances are if your starter doesnt last 5 innings, its cuz he is pitching terribly.
So if a teams starter is getting torn apart, you are encouragsd to leave the failing starter in longer or the losing team now has to deal with a comeback being even harder cuz they lose one of their best hitters the rest of the game if they pull their starter thats getting batting practiced
Essentially you are making it even harder for the team thats already losing to come back in the game- thus making the game less interesting and competitive. Dont like it.
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 16:21 pm
What does the board think?
If you pull your starting pitcher prior to completing five innings, then you lose a designated hitter for the rest of the game.
I believe the original rule tested, stated completing six settings, but given the state of the game, five innings seems more appropriate.
I’m in favor of. Too much micromanaging is starting pitchers by the stat heads.
Chances are if your starter doesnt last 5 innings, its cuz he is pitching terribly.
So if a teams starter is getting torn apart, you are encouragsd to leave the failing starter in longer or the losing team now has to deal with a comeback being even harder cuz they lose one of their best hitters the rest of the game if they pull their starter thats getting batting practiced
Essentially you are making it even harder for the team thats already losing to come back in the game- thus making the game less interesting and competitive. Dont like it.
The game needs to revive the image of the ace / workhorse starting pitcher. They've taken the star of the show and marginalized it.
Can you imagine the NFL marginalizing the QB position?
ecleme22 wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 21:50 pm
Honest question: what problem is this solving?
What is the problem with the opener pitcher?
What is the problem if a manager goes w a reliever after 4 innings?
Seriously, what is the problem?
I was going to ask the same questions. What problem is the OP trying to solve? To me, if a starting pitcher doesn't have his best stuff, and it happens to almost all pitchers, you're intentionally penalizing that team, putting them at a double disadvantage. Why?
Another sister said this idea would put more emphasis on forcing pitchers to work later in the game. No. This rule would not make pitchers better. It would not make pitchers stronger.
This "hook rule" might be as gimmicky as the ghost runner.
Yeah why are some so obsessed with starters going late into games?
ecleme22 wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 21:50 pm
Honest question: what problem is this solving?
What is the problem with the opener pitcher?
What is the problem if a manager goes w a reliever after 4 innings?
Seriously, what is the problem?
I was going to ask the same questions. What problem is the OP trying to solve? To me, if a starting pitcher doesn't have his best stuff, and it happens to almost all pitchers, you're intentionally penalizing that team, putting them at a double disadvantage. Why?
Another sister said this idea would put more emphasis on forcing pitchers to work later in the game. No. This rule would not make pitchers better. It would not make pitchers stronger.
This "hook rule" might be as gimmicky as the ghost runner.
Yeah why are some so obsessed with starters going late into games?
Because it is better theater. Baseball is better when you have starters going toe to toe deep into games. The game has erased that... which sucks.
ecleme22 wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 18:49 pm
I don’t like it.
In fact, since they deployed the pitch clock and the game is so much faster, I want mlb to eliminate the three batter rule for relievers.
The manager has x amount of arms. He should be able to use them how he sees fit.
No. Pitchers should be able to throw to 3 batters.
Funny how many dislike the DH, but want LOOGY/ROOGY back
All pitchers can throw to 3 hitters.
Some pitch better to certain hitters.
Gee, really?
Sailed over your head. Not surprised.
This isn’t little league.
An mlb team should be able to deploy their talent as they see fit
MLB didn't see it that way and it slowed the game down
Baseball is better with that rule.
Now, I do think they should allow the shift...Much like proving you belong in the bigs by having to pitch to 3 batters, hitters who are strictly pull hitters, would need to prove they can hit to other fields.
Raising the bar for the level of competency in each of those situations. Face 3 batters, allow the shift. This isn't tee ball
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 16:21 pm
What does the board think?
If you pull your starting pitcher prior to completing five innings, then you lose a designated hitter for the rest of the game.
I believe the original rule tested, stated completing six settings, but given the state of the game, five innings seems more appropriate.
I’m in favor of. Too much micromanaging is starting pitchers by the stat heads.
Chances are if your starter doesnt last 5 innings, its cuz he is pitching terribly.
So if a teams starter is getting torn apart, you are encouragsd to leave the failing starter in longer or the losing team now has to deal with a comeback being even harder cuz they lose one of their best hitters the rest of the game if they pull their starter thats getting batting practiced
Essentially you are making it even harder for the team thats already losing to come back in the game- thus making the game less interesting and competitive. Dont like it.
The game needs to revive the image of the ace / workhorse starting pitcher. They've taken the star of the show and marginalized it.
Can you imagine the NFL marginalizing the QB position?
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 16:21 pm
What does the board think?
If you pull your starting pitcher prior to completing five innings, then you lose a designated hitter for the rest of the game.
I believe the original rule tested, stated completing six settings, but given the state of the game, five innings seems more appropriate.
I’m in favor of. Too much micromanaging is starting pitchers by the stat heads.
Chances are if your starter doesnt last 5 innings, its cuz he is pitching terribly.
So if a teams starter is getting torn apart, you are encouragsd to leave the failing starter in longer or the losing team now has to deal with a comeback being even harder cuz they lose one of their best hitters the rest of the game if they pull their starter thats getting batting practiced
Essentially you are making it even harder for the team thats already losing to come back in the game- thus making the game less interesting and competitive. Dont like it.
The game needs to revive the image of the ace / workhorse starting pitcher. They've taken the star of the show and marginalized it.
Can you imagine the NFL marginalizing the QB position?
It used to be about running backs...
Can you list the most recent Super Bowl winners that were lead by a star running back and not an alpha quarterback?
ecleme22 wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 18:49 pm
I don’t like it.
In fact, since they deployed the pitch clock and the game is so much faster, I want mlb to eliminate the three batter rule for relievers.
The manager has x amount of arms. He should be able to use them how he sees fit.
No. Pitchers should be able to throw to 3 batters.
Funny how many dislike the DH, but want LOOGY/ROOGY back
All pitchers can throw to 3 hitters.
Some pitch better to certain hitters.
Gee, really?
Sailed over your head. Not surprised.
This isn’t little league.
An mlb team should be able to deploy their talent as they see fit
MLB didn't see it that way and it slowed the game down
Baseball is better with that rule.
Now, I do think they should allow the shift...Much like proving you belong in the bigs by having to pitch to 3 batters, hitters who are strictly pull hitters, would need to prove they can hit to other fields.
Raising the bar for the level of competency in each of those situations. Face 3 batters, allow the shift. This isn't tee ball
The pitch clock has sped up the game to where adding a LOOGY back makes sense
ecleme22 wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 21:50 pm
Honest question: what problem is this solving?
What is the problem with the opener pitcher?
What is the problem if a manager goes w a reliever after 4 innings?
Seriously, what is the problem?
I was going to ask the same questions. What problem is the OP trying to solve? To me, if a starting pitcher doesn't have his best stuff, and it happens to almost all pitchers, you're intentionally penalizing that team, putting them at a double disadvantage. Why?
Another sister said this idea would put more emphasis on forcing pitchers to work later in the game. No. This rule would not make pitchers better. It would not make pitchers stronger.
This "hook rule" might be as gimmicky as the ghost runner.
Yeah why are some so obsessed with starters going late into games?
Because it is better theater. Baseball is better when you have starters going toe to toe deep into games. The game has erased that... which sucks.
Agree to disagree.
It’s only good theater to me if the pitcher is pitching well.
Basil Shabazz wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 16:21 pm
What does the board think?
If you pull your starting pitcher prior to completing five innings, then you lose a designated hitter for the rest of the game.
I believe the original rule tested, stated completing six settings, but given the state of the game, five innings seems more appropriate.
I’m in favor of. Too much micromanaging is starting pitchers by the stat heads.
Chances are if your starter doesnt last 5 innings, its cuz he is pitching terribly.
So if a teams starter is getting torn apart, you are encouragsd to leave the failing starter in longer or the losing team now has to deal with a comeback being even harder cuz they lose one of their best hitters the rest of the game if they pull their starter thats getting batting practiced
Essentially you are making it even harder for the team thats already losing to come back in the game- thus making the game less interesting and competitive. Dont like it.
The game needs to revive the image of the ace / workhorse starting pitcher. They've taken the star of the show and marginalized it.
Can you imagine the NFL marginalizing the QB position?
It used to be about running backs...
Can you list the most recent Super Bowl winners that were lead by a star running back and not an alpha quarterback?
I don't expect you to love this question.
Terrel davis? Emmitt? OJ Anderson?
Last edited by scoutyjones2 on 31 Aug 2025 12:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.
ecleme22 wrote: ↑30 Aug 2025 18:49 pm
I don’t like it.
In fact, since they deployed the pitch clock and the game is so much faster, I want mlb to eliminate the three batter rule for relievers.
The manager has x amount of arms. He should be able to use them how he sees fit.
No. Pitchers should be able to throw to 3 batters.
Funny how many dislike the DH, but want LOOGY/ROOGY back
All pitchers can throw to 3 hitters.
Some pitch better to certain hitters.
Gee, really?
Sailed over your head. Not surprised.
This isn’t little league.
An mlb team should be able to deploy their talent as they see fit
MLB didn't see it that way and it slowed the game down
Baseball is better with that rule.
Now, I do think they should allow the shift...Much like proving you belong in the bigs by having to pitch to 3 batters, hitters who are strictly pull hitters, would need to prove they can hit to other fields.
Raising the bar for the level of competency in each of those situations. Face 3 batters, allow the shift. This isn't tee ball
The pitch clock has sped up the game to where adding a LOOGY back makes sense
Nope. That slows it down again
Teams are better if you can have pitchers that can get a lefty and a tightly out.
