(04-30-2014 08:52 AM)NicevilleWRC Wrote:  FYI, MLB already has a pitch clock, it's just never enforced:

Quote:8.04
When the bases are unoccupied, the pitcher shall deliver the ball to the batter within 12 seconds after he receives the ball. Each time the pitcher delays the game by violating this rule, the umpire shall call “Ball.” The 12-second timing starts when the pitcher is in possession of the ball and the batter is in the box, alert to the pitcher. The timing stops when the pitcher releases the ball.
The intent of this rule is to avoid unnecessary delays. The umpire shall insist that the catcher return the ball promptly to the pitcher, and that the pitcher take his position on the rubber promptly. Obvious delay by the pitcher should instantly be penalized by the umpire.

Also, I'm curious - would you rather have the Astros in the AL, or the Astros in the NL with an unbalanced number of teams in the leagues and divisions, thus making it easier for some teams to make the playoffs and win the WS? The latter seems worse to me (more unfair) but I'm not sure everyone here would agree. And no copping out by moving another team or inventing other teams to even it up.

1) The Brewers moved from the AL to the NL... they should move back before forcing an established team to move.

2) When the Rockies and Diamondbacks were awarded expansion teams, one of them was supposed to be AL and they "refused".

3) Houston had a long history as a NL city, first as a Cardinal farm team, then with the Astros. All of that was thrown away.

4) Maybe all of the NL should have rotated as an AL team for one year?

5) Just get rid of the All Star game. The World Cup of Baseball is far more interesting.






Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(04-30-2014 09:48 AM)Memphis Owl Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 08:52 AM)NicevilleWRC Wrote:  FYI, MLB already has a pitch clock, it's just never enforced:

Quote:8.04
When the bases are unoccupied, the pitcher shall deliver the ball to the batter within 12 seconds after he receives the ball. Each time the pitcher delays the game by violating this rule, the umpire shall call “Ball.” The 12-second timing starts when the pitcher is in possession of the ball and the batter is in the box, alert to the pitcher. The timing stops when the pitcher releases the ball.
The intent of this rule is to avoid unnecessary delays. The umpire shall insist that the catcher return the ball promptly to the pitcher, and that the pitcher take his position on the rubber promptly. Obvious delay by the pitcher should instantly be penalized by the umpire.

Also, I'm curious - would you rather have the Astros in the AL, or the Astros in the NL with an unbalanced number of teams in the leagues and divisions, thus making it easier for some teams to make the playoffs and win the WS? The latter seems worse to me (more unfair) but I'm not sure everyone here would agree. And no copping out by moving another team or inventing other teams to even it up.

1) The Brewers moved from the AL to the NL... they should move back before forcing an established team to move.

2) When the Rockies and Diamondbacks were awarded expansion teams, one of them was supposed to be AL and they "refused".

3) Houston had a long history as a NL city, first as a Cardinal farm team, then with the Astros. All of that was thrown away.

4) Maybe all of the NL should have rotated as an AL team for one year?

5) Just get rid of the All Star game. The World Cup of Baseball is far more interesting.


Opps... that should be World Baseball Classic.



Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(04-30-2014 08:52 AM)NicevilleWRC Wrote:  Also, I'm curious - would you rather have the Astros in the AL, or the Astros in the NL with an unbalanced number of teams in the leagues and divisions, thus making it easier for some teams to make the playoffs and win the WS? The latter seems worse to me (more unfair) but I'm not sure everyone here would agree.

The alleged "unfairness" never bothered me a wit. I never considered it "unfair" that the two leagues had different numbers of teams. Apparently, for many years, no one else did either.

Even if, in my slow-headed dullness, I had managed to perceive the alleged unfairness, I would have realized pretty quickly that the proposed remedy does much more harm to my team than the alleged wrong -- which has turned out to be exactly the case.

(04-30-2014 09:48 AM)Memphis Owl Wrote:  1) The Brewers moved from the AL to the NL...

2) When the Rockies and Diamondbacks were awarded expansion teams, one of them was supposed to be AL and they "refused".

These examples tend to suggest that no team, given a choice, would voluntarily choose the AL. Which is exactly why Selig was anxious to make sure that Houston was not given a choice.

(04-30-2014 10:08 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 09:48 AM)Memphis Owl Wrote:  1) The Brewers moved from the AL to the NL...

2) When the Rockies and Diamondbacks were awarded expansion teams, one of them was supposed to be AL and they "refused".

These examples tend to suggest that no team, given a choice, would voluntarily choose the AL. Which is exactly why Selig was anxious to make sure that Houston was not given a choice.

Not that it matters to Astros fans, but it's worth noting that Milwaukee was an NL town as well, having been home to the Braves.

The Brewers were moved from Seattle (the 1969 Pilots) in part because many felt Milwaukee had been done a great disservice by the Braves move (Milwaukee had great attendance throughout the 1950's and early 60's . . . as an NL team.)

I don't understand why one of the expansion teams wasn't originally forced into the AL, although it may have been difficult to expand interleague play back then (which is required with 15 team leagues.

Really, the answer is to go to 32 teams, and have four 8-team leagues:

AL (mostly original 8 team AL) NY Yankees, Boston, Cleveland, Washington, Chicago WS, Baltimore, Toronto, Detroit
NL (mostly original 8 team NL) St. Louis, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Kansas City
PCL (West Coast Teams) Dodgers, Angels, Giants, Padres, A's, Mariners, Colorado, Arizona
AA (Midwest-southern teams) - Texas, Houston, Atlanta, Miami, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, 2 southern expansion teams

Play 16 against your league (112) and 6 (48) against one of the other leagues (rotating every 2 years). Playoffs between the two leagues that played each other, and World Series between the two left standing.

Rather than knocking the AL, Houston has a long NL tradition that should not have been thrown away. I do not want the DH but it looks like we stuck with it since it gives old players who are slow in the field a chance to stay in the lineup. I do not like the idea that we will develop a rivalry with the Rangers since I was happy being for the Astros in the NL and the Rangers in the AL.

Now my NL team is the Nats. I enjoyed going to the game last night with the roof open. I bought a seat at the bottom of the top deck on the first base side and saw the sun set over downtown Houston. I got to see Rendon play. I am going to get tickets to see the Rockies and Rangers when I am in Denver and Fort Worth this summer.

(04-30-2014 10:08 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 09:48 AM)Memphis Owl Wrote:  1) The Brewers moved from the AL to the NL...

2) When the Rockies and Diamondbacks were awarded expansion teams, one of them was supposed to be AL and they "refused".

These examples tend to suggest that no team, given a choice, would voluntarily choose the AL. Which is exactly why Selig was anxious to make sure that Houston was not given a choice.

I don't mind the AL or the DH, except that games with the DH always seem to take longer. And when the DH is an over the hill guy trying to accumulate numbers, it really slows things down on the bases, and I think the running game is most exciting. But I got to see 8-2/3 of a perfect game, and Andy Pettitte's last game, and got to attend a goodbye tribute to Derek Jeter already this year, none of which would have happened without the league switch, so overall I'm not disappointed with how it has affected me personally.

But I don't care to see pitchers get up there and wave at three strikes either. If I had my way, what they would have done is simply eliminate the pitcher's spot and go to an 8-person batting order. I'd rather see Albert Pujols or Miguel Cabrera get an extra plate appearance than watch some washed-up old-timer trying to accumulate stats. But that ship has sailed, and we will never go there.

I agree that the whole thing was orchestrated over a number of years for the purpose of establishing Milwaukee in the NL. It makes no sense to me to have two AL teams but no NL team in Texas and two NL teams but no AL team in the intermountain west. That seems to be a really bad marketing move on the part of MLB. The counter-argument is that moving Arizona or Colorado to the AL means that both Rangers and Astros are in divisions where they are the only Central time zone teams, and that hurts TV, while moving Astros to AL at least gives each of them another division opponent in the same time zone. Of course, given the disaster that is the current Astros TV deal, what difference does that make as far as Houston is concerned?

That's the real issue here, if Astros can't get the TV deal resolved, they're going to have a huge problem holding on to players through the primes of their careers. And that would really be sad because this bunch--Correa, Appel, McCullers, Springer, Singleton, et al--looks to have every bit as much potential as the late-60s group that all got frittered away--Morgan, Wynn, Staub, Dierker, Wilson, Cuellar, Giusti, Geronimo, Jackson, Colbert, Mayberry, Watson, Cedeno. Had that group stayed together, Astros in the 70s would have competed with the Dodgers and the Big Red Machine and we would not be having this conversation today. But that didn't happen.

The Astros are currently losing fan base to the Rangers because of the television issue. It is almost impossible to see an Astros game on television here in Angleton except when they are playing the Rangers and then you can see them on the Rangers spot on Fox SW. The Astros will have to work to get their fan base back when the TV situation is finally worked out and the Astros start winning again.

(04-30-2014 09:20 AM)Antarius Wrote:  Milwaukee should have moved back to the AL. Not sure how that is copping out, especially since they were originally an AL team.

I already know Astros fans think keeping the Astros in the NL and moving another team is the ideal solution, but I wasn't sure about options 2 and 3.