Making the Safe Call Topic

I wanted to start a separate thread to discuss something that keeps coming up in the “My Six Months” thread.  A number of posters are supporters of rules changes that would do away with the trend today of bringing in pitchers, sometimes multiple pitchers, to face just one batter. My position is to leave the game alone, it’s self-correcting, although I completely agree that the practice drives me crazy as well. What I’d really like to discuss is Jack McKeon.
 
Actually, I’d like to discuss a comment he made in a post-game interview when he was a fill-in manager for the Marlins back in 2011. He was questioned about not bringing in a reliever to create a ‘proper’ matchup, and he replied that his starter was pitching fine and he saw no reason to pull him. He then went on to say that was the problem with managers today: they manage for the post-game interview. If you make the ‘correct’ call according to the book (lefty-lefty or righty-righty matchup, for example) and it doesn’t work, you can always say when asked about it “We went with what we felt was the best matchup; it just didn’t work this time.” Read between the lines: I made the right call according to the Book, so it’s not my fault it didn’t work. However, if you DON’T make the Book call and it doesn’t work you get pilloried.

I believe that over time managers will get over their love affair with matchups and realize that, for many reasons, it’s often better to leave the starter in (I also feel this will apply to the ridiculous amount of shifts we see today – that, and the fact that batters will start going the opposite way, but that’s a topic for another thread). Baseball will self-correct, just as it has swung from pitching domination to batting domination without making rules changes, the 1920 changing of the baseball and the 1969 lowering of the mound the two exceptions of note – not bad for 131 years.
8/6/2015 10:08 PM
unfortunately, the shift , and lefty one out guy are productive, don't like them,,but,,,,,if it works,,throw 50 flag effin football passes a game and win the superbowl,,or don't,,,the way it goes
8/6/2015 11:13 PM
imagine ruth and Gehrig with the shortstop on the bag
8/6/2015 11:16 PM
eventually, maybe, but name some batters hit outside pitches to beat the shift,,,not many
8/6/2015 11:19 PM
u don't shift on ichiro, or boggs or robin yount, u do on Ortiz, davis, or bonds
8/6/2015 11:24 PM
I like shifts but it drives me crazy when they do it on someone who hits to all fields. Ex. Robinson Cano, Jose Altuve. I even saw a mini-shift for my man Miggy Cabrera. Why dafuq would you bring the second baseman on the bag for Miggy
8/7/2015 1:16 AM
The shift and situational (one-batter) pitchers will be in vogue for a while.  Baseball will adapt - just as the shift and situational pitchers were adaptations themselves.  Don't force the change.
8/7/2015 2:22 AM
your right on pinotfan hitters will adjust i also hate the shift but soon i think managers and management will use the opposite field single as some sort of " new revelation to change the way the game is played" as if they invented it and we will see that taught again to the younger players coming up. i also think that the loss of the opposite field hit from the 90's on, has hurt the excitement of the game.

i also want to thank you pinot for my new word for the day PILLORIED i have always enjoyed the english language and it's not often that i read a word i have to go look up.  things like that make my day  :)
8/7/2015 5:59 AM
Posted by cleansox on 8/6/2015 11:13:00 PM (view original):
unfortunately, the shift , and lefty one out guy are productive, don't like them,,but,,,,,if it works,,throw 50 flag effin football passes a game and win the superbowl,,or don't,,,the way it goes
Excellent points, and not just because they support me (although that helps ...).  Football, unlike baseball, is boring for the VAST majority of people when it is low-scoring.  A 7-3 football game is probably a ton of three-and-outs, dull by just about anyone's standards.  Over the course of a few years they liberalized the rules to add scoring, and the net result is what we see today.  Frankly, I think they changed too much too fast, the NFL should have given each rule change a few years for teams to adjust, and we might have arrived at a balance in which the traditional running back is not basically an anachronism 

Baseball, however, has fans who love high-scoring games ('chicks did the long ball'), and those who favor pitching duels.  I'm in the latter camp; I love 1-0 games, where one pitch or at-bat can change the game.  I think we're seeing a balance develop.  Yes, there are a lot of great pitchers right now, then you have the Blue Jays who are averaging 5.3 runs a game.  The pitching depth is a result of the offensive growth of the 1990s and 2000s: more emphasis was put on pitching development.  The game corrects itself, and as much as I don't like the parade of one-batter pitchers and the overuse of the shift, I'd rather put up with a couple years of that and let the game evolve, than force rules changes that change the game and may have unforeseen consequences.
8/7/2015 11:29 AM
I like most sporting events in the low scoring category,,baseball, 3-2, 1 zip etc,,,like football games close (17-13, 10- 7 etc) ,,and yes, all sports cycle to correct themselves,,thankfully we see very few 71-68 nba playoff games from the 90s these days,,that was boredom
8/7/2015 12:40 PM
Making the Safe Call Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.