I’ve had enough sleep and naps today so I’ve decided to write something here instead of watching a baseball game.
As a baseball purist I continue to struggle with “changes” the baseball principals make to how the game is played and the constant pressure they are under regarding innovation.
The reasoning seems to go something like this: It worked in the minor leagues so it’ll be fine in the majors.
No, and forgive me, but there’s a reason they call anything other than Major League baseball the minors. Let the minors do what they want but leave baseball at its highest level alone, please.
All the changes made to date besides the designated hitter were introduced to curtail the typical length of time it takes for the major leagues to play a game.
I never liked being on the clock when it came to baseball. If there were extra innings so be it. No need to stop the game after a certain length of time because it was 2 a.m.
I get it that time is money, and baseball games are not removed from tinkering with. It’s just that to me at least anyway, baseball has always been different than other sports.
When I was a kid the prospect of not getting home from a game until the next day was part of the charm of the game.
If you wanted to get your money’s worth you needed to stay until the game was over–simple as that.
Analytics
Analytics continues to backfire. I like the great trivia games that can be conducted with analytics. It would prompt discussions like, “Hey, check this out, Bud. That was the first time in a week of Sundays that so and so struck out while it was still daylight and that record dates all the way back to when Wrigley Field did not have night games due to lack of lighting.”
Also, I would suggest that if analytics dictate starting pitchers going five innings is a good outing I would say let all pitchers get more complete games. But, that will never happen as there are millions of dollars invested in the arms of pitchers and we must trust the pitch count (or else possibly face Tommy John surgery).
The main thing I didn’t like about the old days was the fact the baseball stadiums were built using support posts that obstructed views, but that was something that was out of the average fan’s ability to change, especially if they waited until it was getting close to the actual date of the game. Seats went fast in the old days.
The possibility of obstructed views never seemed to upset the average fan, however. It was just accepted and we moved on from complaining about this.
New stadium designs solved this architectural issue. But combining a clear view with analytics does not necessarily put fannies in the seats. So, what did the designers do? They were faced with incorporating smaller venues to hold the game sellouts of fans that would come, as baseball in its heyday (1920s-1960s) routinely seated 50,000-60,000 fanatics. High amounts of empty seats doesn’t look good on TV, and hence the smaller ballparks “selling out” a game with 40,000 or thereabouts in attendance became a thing.
Finally, if analytics were and are such a panacea, why have men and women tasked with working with them getting fired regularly? Because baseball is a game that can regularly be counted on to defy other than traditional baseball statistics.
My pitch count is getting close to 100 so, I’m going to exit prematurely and get in the sauna, or is it the large wash tub filled with ice and water? We won all our challenges and were not assessed penalties for pitching in a timely fashion.
Are we not entertained?