MLB looking at changes to strike zone

[LBHalos17]

The buzz on MLB Network today is about how MLB is considering tinkering with either the strike zone or mound, in order to pump-up offense.

 

Personally, I don't like either idea and would rather leave it to the hitters to continue to scout pitchers and swing at their pitches according to the counts and situations.

 

Maybe college baseball will provide the solution tho... The NCAA is introducing a "flat-seam" ball this season (Today is Opening Day!), that is supposed to be more lively.  I saw a picture of the new ball compared to last years' model, and it even looks slightly larger.  I hope it helps, because they've been rumoring about bringing-in the iconic wall at Blair Field.

 

What do you all think about all this tinkering with the old game?

 

*Forgot to add my link

 

http://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/article/2015-02-11/flat-seam-baseballs-definitely-more-lively-could-boost-offensive

Edited February 13, 2015 by LBHalos17

[WallyWorld]

to me the strike zone in mlb is already ridiculously small

[ukyah]

the ncaa's mistake was too extreme of a change to the bats. they're basically playing with dead bats now. rather than mess with the ball, the ncaa should just change the rules to a modest representation of what the bats were 4 or 5 years ago.

[fan_since79]

If Hamilton could make a change in his perception of the strike zone, that would really be nice.

[ScottT]

Better idea than banning defensive shifts.

[Tank]

a smaller strike zone would cause cj wilson to have to retire.

[OregonLAA]

Maybe lower the mound back to how it was before. Didn't they raise it in the middle of the steroid era. Now that steroids are mostly out of the game, they should put it back

[Vegas Halo Fan]

Maybe lower the mound back to how it was before. Didn't they raise it in the middle of the steroid era. Now that steroids are mostly out of the game, they should put it back

 

This is a better idea than messing with the strike zone, which already varies from umpire to umpire.

[Docwaukee]

I just can't imagine them messing with the strike zone.  Umps with many years of experience calling the game a certain way.  Pitchers whose success is very much reliant upon getting those calls.  The teams that paid them millions of dollars based on that success.  Hitters who have an advantage by being able to hit the low ball (like Trout).  etc.  The farm systems that are filled with guys whose success is based on command and not velocity.  

 

There would be and even greater degree of natural selection toward high velocity max effort guys promoting greater risk for injury.  Same with lowering the mound.  

 

You can't do something that could have a dramatic effect on some players and less of an effect on others.  

 

Just add the DH to the NL.  

Edited February 13, 2015 by Dochalo

[Docwaukee]

It's like telling a pitcher they are not allowed to throw above 90 or that curve balls can't break too much.  

 

They might as well just take away a defender for the first 5 innings.  Or add a second DH.  

[Sully151]

Just give the hitters aluminum bats and call it a day.

[Blarg]

Lowering the strike zone would only help Trout.

[AngelsLakersFan]

I didn't know offense was a problem....

[Jason]

Umpires change the zone from inning to inning so why does it matter?

[Second Base]

There's A LOT I'd change about baseball, but defensive shifts, mound height, ball and strike zone aren't among them. What's wrong with a pitching heavy period? I like 4-3 games just as much if not more than 10-8.

What would I change?

1. Electronic strike zone. No more Country Joe West BS. That way it's always the same, even, fair.

2. Realign divisions. I'd love to see MLB play off their geographical rivalries. A Pacific Division with the Angels, Dodgers, A's, Giants and Padres would be must-see ball.

3. No more HFA decided by the all star game. We've gotta be smarter than that.

4. International Draft. Stop letting large market teams manipulate the market by taking the elite talent.

5. Mandatory drug testing every month and at random times. Stricter penalties too. First offense, 50 game suspension, forfeiture of salary, team forfeits 2 wins at the end of the season. Second offense, full season suspension, forfeiture of pay, team forfeits 3 wins and institutes weekly testing. Third offense, life time suspension, team is automatically disqualified from playoffs.

6. Pitch clock. Keep it at 20-25 seconds, batters must keep one foot in box.

7. Restructure FA market. Give players a specific year and salary limit based on a number of factors, that way both small market and large market teams can offer the same contract more often.

[moccasin]

Electronic strike zones would certainly give the offense a lift.

Instead of having to swing with 2 strikes because a pitch is "too close to take", hitters can let them go if they're confident.

Good MLB hitters have a great idea of the strike zone. Let them utilize that gift.

[arch stanton]

From what I read the change would be to get the umps to rasie the bottom of the zone back to the top of the knees. I wouldn't mind seeing that.

[Glen]

I've been watching baseball for decades and at this point I have no idea what the strike zone is supposed to be. I seem to recall that at one point it was from the knees to the chest.

[ScottT]

It's not just a lack of scoring... there's also less action in baseball these days... and it isn't just because hitters don't care about strikeouts

[Angels Never Die]

I'd like more offense, but when I think about how small the strike zone is already (I mean really, is knees to waist really players' contact zones? Come on, most hitters are comfortable hitting pitches above their waist,) you're just making it unreasonably difficult on pitchers and punishing them for being more talented.  As far as I'm concerned, pitchers are just out-evolving hitters in terms of talent, and honestly, I think pitching is just the naturally more dominant position. The pitcher always has the obvious statistical advantage, and also I think the position is more based on pure physical talent than hitting is, IMO.  I think both are highly developed skills, but I think hitting is more based on skill and finely tuned physical traits (eyesight, hand-eye coordination, reaction time, quick-twitch muscles) than pitching is. 

 

IMO, don't do anything that would require a significant adjustment period for one position over the other, such as a strike zone or mound change. One change that might make things more fair, is universal dimensions. I know this would take a very long time to institute since it would require stadium reconstruction, but I think it's kind of ridiculous that baseball is pretty much the only sport that doesn't have universal dimensions with their playing field. At the very least, make foul territory the same area for every stadium.

Edited February 14, 2015 by Angels Never Die

[Ohtaniland]

It's not just a lack of scoring... there's also less action in baseball these days... and it isn't just because hitters don't care about strikeouts

I'm a big fan of the Vlad strike zone. Get in the box and swing at the pitch. I'm not a fan of the Iannetta approach. Get in the box and pray for a walk.

[Troll Daddy]

The strike zone has never been the knees to the waist.

[Troll Daddy]

I believe the idea is to keep the strike zone above the knees and below the letters.

A big thumbs down on anything electronic calling balls and strikes.

Edited February 15, 2015 by Troll Daddy

[ScottT]

I'm a big fan of the Vlad strike zone. Get in the box and swing at the pitch. I'm not a fan of the Iannetta approach. Get in the box and pray for a walk.

Vlad is a freak.

Most people can't hit bounced pitches.

[AngelsSurfer]

An electronic strike zone would certainly make things fairier, IMHO. The strike zone does seem to change with the umpire, which team is up and the inning.