Double Hook Rule

[Basil Shabazz]

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.

[Cardinals4Life]

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.

Nah, I'd rather they just go back to NL rules.

[Absolut]

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.

Nah, I'd rather they just go back to NL rules.

Yes. And lose interleague play and the ghost runner

[An Old Friend]

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.

Yeah I kind of love it. No more openers or bullpen games.

[ecleme22]

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.

[kscardsfan]

After watching our Pitching? Oli already leaves em in too long.

[JuanAgosto]

After watching our Pitching? Oli already leaves em in too long.

Oli would be dumb enough to misinterpret the rule and use a pitcher as the DH.

[dugoutrex]

After watching our Pitching? Oli already leaves em in too long.

Oli would be dumb enough to misinterpret the rule and use a pitcher as the DH.

don't the Dodgers do that every 5 games or so ?

[JuanAgosto]

After watching our Pitching? Oli already leaves em in too long.

Oli would be dumb enough to misinterpret the rule and use a pitcher as the DH.

don't the Dodgers do that every 5 games or so ?

Yeah. Point out the Cardinals pitcher that is anywhere close to Otani.

[ScotchMIrish]

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.

Nah, I'd rather they just go back to NL rules.

We agree. Much simpler.

[pitchingandefense]

The double hook rule is a great idea that should be implemented immediately along with a couple additional rules: limit pitchers on the roster to 12 and limit the amount of transactions between the minors and majors so teams quit burning up bullpen guys and then immediately replacing them with another AAA pitcher throwing max effort on his way to TJ surgery after 6 appearances.

The benefits would ripple across the game. The emphasis on starting pitchers being able to work deep into games would return. Old school baseball card numbers that we all grew up watching for starting pitchers would be tracked again, like wins and innings pitched. More starting pitchers would be household names again, and they would have to develop the ability to once again work through a lineup a third time rather than throwing max effort for 4 innings and then being done.

Offense would see an uptick because they get to see a pitcher for a third time while also not spending half of their at-bats facing some unknown flamethrower.

Defense would be emphasized again with strikeouts dropping. Athletic fielders with range would be more important again and we as fans would get to see more web gems on a daily basis.

MLBPA would be on board because the price of quality starters who can work deep into games would increase. And they get to keep the DH spot on rosters across the league.

Strategy would be more important for the coaching staff as they navigate when to pull the starter.

Injuries for pitchers would hopefully decrease. This emphasis on max effort has resulted in a generation of unprecedented TJ surgeries. These guys are being used up before they have a chance at a decent pay day, similar to NFL running backs.

The pitch clock has been a successful move for interest in the game, and rules like the double hook while limiting the number of pitchers a team can roster would further help bring the game back to its roots when it was most popular.

Sorry for the long read, but as a fan this is a small move that I believe could have big implications that help return the game to being a better product.

[CorneliusWolfe]

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.

Nah, I'd rather they just go back to NL rules.

Yes. And lose interleague play and the ghost runner

Agreed. At a minimum, I’d like to see a rule that if a pitcher hits a guy, he has to stand in for the DH AB. Lol! Ok maybe that’s a bit far-fetched, but I hate that a guy can purposely hit batters and go hide in the dugout and never have to stand in themselves. It might make them think twice before nonchalantly throwing up and in to intimidate.

[Basil Shabazz]

The double hook rule is a great idea that should be implemented immediately along with a couple additional rules: limit pitchers on the roster to 12 and limit the amount of transactions between the minors and majors so teams quit burning up bullpen guys and then immediately replacing them with another AAA pitcher throwing max effort on his way to TJ surgery after 6 appearances.

The benefits would ripple across the game. The emphasis on starting pitchers being able to work deep into games would return. Old school baseball card numbers that we all grew up watching for starting pitchers would be tracked again, like wins and innings pitched. More starting pitchers would be household names again, and they would have to develop the ability to once again work through a lineup a third time rather than throwing max effort for 4 innings and then being done.

Offense would see an uptick because they get to see a pitcher for a third time while also not spending half of their at-bats facing some unknown flamethrower.

Defense would be emphasized again with strikeouts dropping. Athletic fielders with range would be more important again and we as fans would get to see more web gems on a daily basis.

MLBPA would be on board because the price of quality starters who can work deep into games would increase. And they get to keep the DH spot on rosters across the league.

Strategy would be more important for the coaching staff as they navigate when to pull the starter.

Injuries for pitchers would hopefully decrease. This emphasis on max effort has resulted in a generation of unprecedented TJ surgeries. These guys are being used up before they have a chance at a decent pay day, similar to NFL running backs.

The pitch clock has been a successful move for interest in the game, and rules like the double hook while limiting the number of pitchers a team can roster would further help bring the game back to its roots when it was most popular.

Sorry for the long read, but as a fan this is a small move that I believe could have big implications that help return the game to being a better product.

Great post

[ecleme22]

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?

[RamFan08NY]

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.

[Quincy Varnish]

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.

Nah, I'd rather they just go back to NL rules.

Yes. And lose interleague play and the ghost runner

Excluding the pandemic, when have baseball rules been reverted to previous versions?

1887 comes to mind, when an out was 4 strikes.