If you could change any rules in baseball.......

[james33]

No stepping out of the batters box between pitches.

[Todd Zola]

I never had a problem with the IBB. It often bites the team that does it. Like most tactical decisions, there is a risk to go with the potential reward. I wish that the inning would not have to go through the motions of 4 pitches. Just have the catcher tell the ump and send him to 1B.

It is not the same as, for example, taking a stance with your arm is in the strike zone.

J

Not that it matters, but I don't get your analogy at all. You get hit with a strike and the pitch is a strike.

[Ryno84MVP]

Eliminate the "vulture" wins, if you blow the lead, you should not be able to get credit for the win.

[bryanbutler]

fix the rules on holds. it simply makes no sense in many situations. saves too. the tying run should be at the plate, without you having put any runners on to make that be the case.

[YourPalChrisMal]

Eliminate the "vulture" wins, if you blow the lead, you should not be able to get credit for the win.

YES! I was just scrolling through all of the comments before I made mine. My complaint/change expands on what you said. Credit the "win" to whatever pitcher was most responsible for the team winning - period. There are few baseball stats that annoy me more than than a starter pitches something like 7 shut-out innings, is up 4-0 when he leaves, some schmoe comes in after him and blows the lead, the team comes back to win, and the "win" is credited to someone else who may have only pitched 1/3 of an inning. Ridiculous.

Or even if the start pitched 7 shut-out innings and left with the game tied 0-0. Why should the reliever who pitched a scoreless 8th get the win just because the team went ahead in the 8th? That's just sheer luck. And the guy who made that rule is sheerly stupid. Why would the "win" go to the guy who pitched ONE shut-out inning vs. the guy who pitched SEVEN of them? Just let the official scorer decide who gets the W. Sure it's subjective, but it's better than assigning the win based on some ridiculous rule. I'd even be OK with giving out "half wins" where it is a toss up over who was the pitcher most responsible for winning the game.

[Todd Zola]

I find it interesting that there are a bunch of scoring rules (no doubt at least buoyed by the fantasy aspect) as opposed to the game play itself.

[Grinch]

I find it interesting that there are a bunch of scoring rules.

.....which reminds me of my third rule change----official scorers would be MLB employees---NOT someone with home team bias. With the money guys get for records or milestones, one hometown call --for example--calling an error on a play that should have been a hit at the end of the year so his guy gets the ERA title, could lead to problems.

[Fresno Bob]

.....which reminds me of my third rule change----official scorers would be MLB employees---NOT someone with home team bias. With the money guys get for records or milestones, one hometown call --for example--calling an error on a play that should have been a hit at the end of the year so his guy gets the ERA title, could lead to problems.

100% agree with this

[Tuna]

[QUOTE=onejayhawk;146864]I would use a machine for the balls and strikes. Same ump for everyone.

"Same ump for everyone" got me thinking. What if the umpiring crew always worked the same base? The "same" umpire would always call balls and strikes, hopefully the "best" or "most consistent" would be rewarded that position. There would be 1/4 of the different strikes zones as there are now.

[Pauly]

I understand the love for double switches and pinch hitters, but watching pitchers take ABs is painful and I would rather see David Ortiz take swings instead of a crappy pitcher 10 out of 10 times. The DH makes the game better and more exciting and the NL should adopt it tomorrow. None of you would pay to see (insert SP here) take swings 3 or 4 times a game and having pitchers hit absolutely diminishes the impact and role of the guy hitting 8th in a lineup.

Others:
- One mound visit per inning maximum - either by the catcher, pitching coach or manager - but only one. *edit: this only applies to mound visits that do not accompany a pitching change.
- scioscia and mattingly are barred from managing baseball teams

[OaklandA's]

When a game is stopped before 5 innings because of rain, re-start the game from where it stopped, instead of starting over. All of those plays that occurred before the rain DID happen, and should show up in the official record. And when a team falls behind 8-0 and the rain starts to come down, they shouldn't be able to stall and hope the game gets called before the 5th inning is complete.

[Lucky]

When a game is stopped before 5 innings because of rain, re-start the game from where it stopped, instead of starting over. All of those plays that occurred before the rain DID happen, and should show up in the official record. And when a team falls behind 8-0 and the rain starts to come down, they shouldn't be able to stall and hope the game gets called before the 5th inning is complete.

I think I agree with you here, but I do have a couple of questions:

1. What was the rationale behind the "complete game" rule to begin with? Did it have anything to do with concerns about not being able to re-start the game exactly where it stopped, because of who was pitching, who was on the roster at the time, etc?

2. Don't the umpires have tools at hand with which to keep a team from stalling? They can make the pitcher pitch, they can make the batter get in the box, they can limit trips to the mound, and if you bring in a new pitcher, he has to pitch to at least one batter. I realize baseball can be pretty slow, but are there a lot of stalling tactics available? (When I was playing high school basketball, we had a guy who would "lose a contact" if things needed to slow down a little. That was back in the day when contacts were permanent and expensive.)

[bryanbutler]

When I was playing high school basketball...

lucky, driving to the hoop ...

[mgwiz22]

For those who like the dh I suggest it go further. Base ball can platoon like football. No more 2 way players. Teams will use a team for fielding and another made up of unathletic goons just to hit. We will see 9 David Ortiz's hitting. The hitters won't even run they will have designated runners standing next to the batters box who will run once the ball is hit. Nobody will be forced to see bad hitters, bad fielders or bad runners.

Personally, I think that a player's all around game doesn't qualify him to participate in all aspects of the game then he should retire.

[Grinch]

For those who like the dh I suggest it go further. Base ball can platoon like football. No more 2 way players. Teams will use a team for fielding and another made up of unathletic goons just to hit. We will see 9 David Ortiz's hitting. The hitters won't even run they will have designated runners standing next to the batters box who will run once the ball is hit. Nobody will be forced to see bad hitters, bad fielders or bad runners.

Personally, I think that a player's all around game doesn't qualify him to participate in all aspects of the game then he should retire.

Don't hold back....tell us how you feel...