my pet idea for making baseball more exciting -- subtract a fielder. Have six fielders plus the catcher and pitcher, instead of seven. Either two outfielders instead of three, or eliminate the shortstop. Instantly the cost/benefit between hitting the ball in play vs a home run changes radically, and instantly athleticism and speed is far more important, both in fielding and in running out hits. A simple change that would shake up the game radically. Of course, I don't expect it to happen.
It's funny to me that you use the NBA as a comparison point because the NBA is increasingly unwatchable - at least during the regular season. Baseball may be slow but at least the players pretend to care about their season. NBA regular season games might as well be the pre-season because players take it about that seriously and it's about that enjoyable at this point.
I've never liked baseball, but my heart twinged with pity when learning the 2020 World Series couldn't beat an almost deliberately unfunny, anti-comedic "sitcom" like "Young Sheldon" in the TV ratings.
"Or you could decide to become a fan of this instead."
Well, my understanding is that basketball is undergoing the same kind of thing, with the 3-pointer becoming the dominant shot in much the same way that you say baseball's only hit is the home run. The problem is that ever since the industrial revolution people who care about numbers more than people have been trying to turn people into machines and it's ruining literally everything. Sports are just relative latecomers to this unwelcome development.
A lot of this rings true, but comparing anything to the superbowl is unfair. The superbowl is a television event and even people who don't watch football can go to parties and watch parts of the game and enjoy it (and there are always lots of people around to explain the weird rules).
You're right on young people not knowing much about baseball. I helped coach a kids team a year or two ago and the main coach had to recommend -- to the kids playing baseball -- that they watch some games on tv to learn about it!
I think the major sports leagues need to be more open to rules changes. I don't even know what would work here, but the MLB rules aren't biblical. We can change them if we want.
I've wondered if flattening the mound (like they do in softball) would help. Pitchers would have less leverage, which should mean fewer strikeouts. It wouldn't change the hitter's approach, however.
The game time shit also needs to be fixed. I think batters should be stuck in the box during the at bat. Ump won't call time unless there's an injury. I'd love a pitch clock too, even with runners on base.
As for 7 innings, that's really funny. I used to attempt local minor league games all the time, and I don't think I ever saw an 8th inning. Baseball is fun... for like 2-2.5 hours.
Funnily enough, one of the big areas where analytics has affected the NFL is by increasing the number of fourth down attempts and two point conversions, which has made games more fun to watch. It's cool to see teams go for it! Of course that could change as analytics gets more advanced and every team starts pursuing the same "optimal" strategies, but it does suggest there's interaction between the rules and analytics.
I read box scores. I watch baseball all the time. I take children to MiLB games. I go to college BB, I watch Tampa Bay Rays and Atlanta Braves (WS winners). I even watch Winter baseball and follow spring training--Grapefruit and Cactus leagues. I attend Little League games. It is not boring ever. The stat heads are a sidelight.
One night I saw a NH on a Thursday in Tampa with Matt Garza. I've seen the cycle. Well, not to be a baseball bore, but I am not no one and I watch baseball--and listen to baseball on the radio a lot. It is not unwatchable.
I was physically at Game 162--baseball's greatest night.
I think that the problem is the ball. When I was a kid, a major league ball did not bounce very high if you bounced it on concrete. Now it's almost a superball. Go back to a less resilient ball, and it will stay in the park more.
I think the ball also should be slightly bigger, because pitchers' hands have gotten bigger, and that enables them to throw faster with more spin. They wear out their arms trying to miss bats. It takes a lot of pitches and a lot of time to finish a game.
With a less resilient ball that is slightly bigger, pitchers will get used to batters making contact and putting the ball in play, not over the fence. There will be more action. My hope is that pitching won't be so intense and hard on the arm, in which case fewer pitchers will be used per game, which will help speed things up.
I was a huge fan of the Tigers during the peak Miggy/Verlander years and watched as many games as I could. Now that my team sucks I find myself completely checked out of the sport. I probably watched 2 innings of baseball total this season and that's just cause it was on in a bar. I think there are youngish fans that basically follow their team, and can even be pretty invested in their team, but have no interest in the sport as a whole. And even that is getting more challenging. There's still something to be said for going to a game on a nice summer night for example. Beautiful views of a downtown skyline at sunset, crack of the bat, etc. Classic Americana. It's a nice evening for a family or group of friends. But it's unaffordable for a lot of people that would like to go. Or maybe they can afford to go once a year but if it was cheaper they'd go once a week. I think one simple way to engage more young families and young adults would be to simply lower ticket prices and (especially) concession prices. Seems like it would be a good business move in the long term.
P.S. I disagree about the rule changes in the NBA though. You really like watching 7 footers shoot 28% from three, rather than slugging it out on the block? It's so monotonous. College basketball has so many more styles of play, which makes it way more entertaining imo
This is the Fermi Paradox of baseball. The sport has naturally evolved through technology, but that progress is killing it by essentially attempting to remove all of the randomness of the game.
I used to like analytics, back when it was rare for teams to embrace that kind of approach, but I was suspicious of the broader movement once people started calling for robotic umpires. The want to take away the subjective aspect of the game - the one part that can offer true surprise, the thing that keeps hitters on their toes, that drives pitchers to nibble - seemed completely insane to me no matter how many bad calls umps make.
"Strikeouts are boring. Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls...it's more democratic."
-Crash Davis (Catcher, Durham Bulls)
my pet idea for making baseball more exciting -- subtract a fielder. Have six fielders plus the catcher and pitcher, instead of seven. Either two outfielders instead of three, or eliminate the shortstop. Instantly the cost/benefit between hitting the ball in play vs a home run changes radically, and instantly athleticism and speed is far more important, both in fielding and in running out hits. A simple change that would shake up the game radically. Of course, I don't expect it to happen.
It's funny to me that you use the NBA as a comparison point because the NBA is increasingly unwatchable - at least during the regular season. Baseball may be slow but at least the players pretend to care about their season. NBA regular season games might as well be the pre-season because players take it about that seriously and it's about that enjoyable at this point.
I've never liked baseball, but my heart twinged with pity when learning the 2020 World Series couldn't beat an almost deliberately unfunny, anti-comedic "sitcom" like "Young Sheldon" in the TV ratings.
Fucking ouch, man, ouch.
Agree with you on sabermetrics making game less enjoyable.
However there is a demographic change in game's favor which is that Hispanic population seems to enjoy attending games.
Did you go to Yankee Stadium in 2021?
Huge proportion of intergenerational Hispanic families. Have had similar experiences on West Coast and in Southwest.
"Or you could decide to become a fan of this instead."
Well, my understanding is that basketball is undergoing the same kind of thing, with the 3-pointer becoming the dominant shot in much the same way that you say baseball's only hit is the home run. The problem is that ever since the industrial revolution people who care about numbers more than people have been trying to turn people into machines and it's ruining literally everything. Sports are just relative latecomers to this unwelcome development.
A lot of this rings true, but comparing anything to the superbowl is unfair. The superbowl is a television event and even people who don't watch football can go to parties and watch parts of the game and enjoy it (and there are always lots of people around to explain the weird rules).
You're right on young people not knowing much about baseball. I helped coach a kids team a year or two ago and the main coach had to recommend -- to the kids playing baseball -- that they watch some games on tv to learn about it!
But fans like home runs. They're exciting to see.
I think the major sports leagues need to be more open to rules changes. I don't even know what would work here, but the MLB rules aren't biblical. We can change them if we want.
I've wondered if flattening the mound (like they do in softball) would help. Pitchers would have less leverage, which should mean fewer strikeouts. It wouldn't change the hitter's approach, however.
The game time shit also needs to be fixed. I think batters should be stuck in the box during the at bat. Ump won't call time unless there's an injury. I'd love a pitch clock too, even with runners on base.
As for 7 innings, that's really funny. I used to attempt local minor league games all the time, and I don't think I ever saw an 8th inning. Baseball is fun... for like 2-2.5 hours.
Funnily enough, one of the big areas where analytics has affected the NFL is by increasing the number of fourth down attempts and two point conversions, which has made games more fun to watch. It's cool to see teams go for it! Of course that could change as analytics gets more advanced and every team starts pursuing the same "optimal" strategies, but it does suggest there's interaction between the rules and analytics.
I am not no one.
I read box scores. I watch baseball all the time. I take children to MiLB games. I go to college BB, I watch Tampa Bay Rays and Atlanta Braves (WS winners). I even watch Winter baseball and follow spring training--Grapefruit and Cactus leagues. I attend Little League games. It is not boring ever. The stat heads are a sidelight.
One night I saw a NH on a Thursday in Tampa with Matt Garza. I've seen the cycle. Well, not to be a baseball bore, but I am not no one and I watch baseball--and listen to baseball on the radio a lot. It is not unwatchable.
I was physically at Game 162--baseball's greatest night.
https://talkingpointssports.com/mlb/game-162-10-years-later/
I think that the problem is the ball. When I was a kid, a major league ball did not bounce very high if you bounced it on concrete. Now it's almost a superball. Go back to a less resilient ball, and it will stay in the park more.
I think the ball also should be slightly bigger, because pitchers' hands have gotten bigger, and that enables them to throw faster with more spin. They wear out their arms trying to miss bats. It takes a lot of pitches and a lot of time to finish a game.
With a less resilient ball that is slightly bigger, pitchers will get used to batters making contact and putting the ball in play, not over the fence. There will be more action. My hope is that pitching won't be so intense and hard on the arm, in which case fewer pitchers will be used per game, which will help speed things up.
Preach, Freddie, preach!
I was a huge fan of the Tigers during the peak Miggy/Verlander years and watched as many games as I could. Now that my team sucks I find myself completely checked out of the sport. I probably watched 2 innings of baseball total this season and that's just cause it was on in a bar. I think there are youngish fans that basically follow their team, and can even be pretty invested in their team, but have no interest in the sport as a whole. And even that is getting more challenging. There's still something to be said for going to a game on a nice summer night for example. Beautiful views of a downtown skyline at sunset, crack of the bat, etc. Classic Americana. It's a nice evening for a family or group of friends. But it's unaffordable for a lot of people that would like to go. Or maybe they can afford to go once a year but if it was cheaper they'd go once a week. I think one simple way to engage more young families and young adults would be to simply lower ticket prices and (especially) concession prices. Seems like it would be a good business move in the long term.
P.S. I disagree about the rule changes in the NBA though. You really like watching 7 footers shoot 28% from three, rather than slugging it out on the block? It's so monotonous. College basketball has so many more styles of play, which makes it way more entertaining imo
Ricky Henderson was my favorite player growing up. And the competition, for a time, between him and Vince Coleman was so much fun. A damn shame.
This is the Fermi Paradox of baseball. The sport has naturally evolved through technology, but that progress is killing it by essentially attempting to remove all of the randomness of the game.
I used to like analytics, back when it was rare for teams to embrace that kind of approach, but I was suspicious of the broader movement once people started calling for robotic umpires. The want to take away the subjective aspect of the game - the one part that can offer true surprise, the thing that keeps hitters on their toes, that drives pitchers to nibble - seemed completely insane to me no matter how many bad calls umps make.