The age of the MLB pitch clock may be upon us soon. Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic reported on Tuesday (subscription required and recommended) that MLB and the players’ union are working towards an agreement that could bring such a rule change to the major-league level as soon as next season. However, it’s also possible that the pitch clock could be introduced gradually over several years; the conversation is still in its early stages.
The potential for pitch clocks has been the subject of much controversy over the past couple of season, and began receiving test runs in Double-A as early as the 2015 season. The main reason is simple: the pace of play in baseball feels slow to younger generations, and Rob Manfred and his office are making wide-ranging attempts to take minutes off the game. We’ve seen small attempts towards this goal already, such as pitchers no longer needing to throw a baseball in order to intentionally walk a batter.
There are mixed feelings among players about the idea of a pitch clock. Jon Lester, for instance, has vocalized his distaste for years, complaining that it would take the “beauty” and “cat and mouse game” away from the pitcher-hitter battle (as ESPN Chicago’s Jesse Rogers wrote a couple of years back). However, many pitchers at the minor-league levels said they found the pitch clocks did not impact them negatively. Regardless, Rosenthal writes that Manfred seems “convinced” that such changes are necessary, which makes it seem as though the introduction of pitch clocks is not a matter of “if”, but “when”. The piece is a great read, providing insight into the nuances and challenges of the discussion at hand.
More from around the majors…
- Two-way Japanese phenom Shohei Otani’s potential earnings are severely by MLB’s international signing restrictions. But could teams circumvent those regulations by promising an early-career extension as part of their original signing agreement? Fangraphs’ Dave Cameron explores the hypothetical scenarios, suggesting that after one full year of service time — assuming Otani lives up to the hype — it’d be tough for the league to intervene with a contract extension so long as it carried some historical precedent. (Clubs do, after all, almost always attempt to secure young players on long-term deals.) A team would need to maintain plausible deniability, but the promise of an early-career extension could be a powerful incentive for Otani to join their club. With the ability to throw 100 mph and smack 400-foot homers, Ohtani could easily be a franchise icon, so it’s possible that some teams are already working on their “second offers” to him.
- While finding exact ways to quantify defensive value remains a difficult task, MLB.com’s Mike Petriello introduces a new metric intended to do just that by leveraging Statcast’s catch probability data: Outs Above Average (OAA). Twins center fielder Byron Buxton leads Major League outfielders in OAA, which is a counting metric that assigns value based on every catch made or not made over the course of a season. Petriello explains the metric in detail, but in essence, OAA gives credit for every catch made (+0.01 for making a catch to which Statcast assigns a 99% catch probability, +0.75 for making a catch with a 25% catch probability, and so forth) while also subtracting credit for catches not made (-0.01 for not making the 99% catch, -0.25 for not making the 25% catch, -0.75 for not making a 75% catch, etc.). Buxton has been 23 “outs above average” this season, while Atlanta’s Ender Inciarte checks in second (+17) and Tampa Bay’s Kevin Kiermaier is tied for fifth (+11) despite missing two months.
- Tyler Kepner of the New York Times wrote an interesting piece about how Kyle Boddy of Driveline Baseball has helped aspiring and current big league pitchers increase their velocity, including Indians right-hander Trevor Bauer and Marlins righty Dan Straily. Driveline’s training center reportedly has young pitchers throwing with weighted balls, and captures their biomechanics with high-speed cameras. The article is a long read but well worth the time.
In the piece about Ohtani I think you might be missing a word after severely
Unless they’ve outright said it, we have no exact way of knowing which fans MLB is targeting with the pitch clock, but if it’s true that they’re trying to appeal to the younger generation, as the article suggests, I feel like as a 16-year old I need to correct Manfred. Most of my friends and myself like the pace of play. We’re not all impatient and we don’t all need a fast game to keep our attention span. Instead of relying on stereotypes of teens and maybe those a little older than us as well, MLB needs to do some real market research, because young people that I know don’t want any part of a pitch clock.
Curious how many of your friends would watch MLB over the NFL or NBA?
Probably a little over half. I will admit I don’t have the most representative friend group of the population, but my point is more that I wish MLB conducted some more research into us, because my personal experience means little conclusively but does show that it’s very possible we don’t want a change, and that our consensus is nowhere near certain either way until that research is done.
People like you will watch regardless so you are not the target here. The target is the casual fan who will now watch because it won’t take 3 hours for a game.
An NFL game for example takes longer and people watch even preseason games in excellent numbers.
If your favorite mlb team only played 16 regular season games, they too would have 70,000+ fans in attendance (assuming their stadium could hold that many).
I was talking about on TV. In your scenario it would depend on the team..lol
TV or otherwise is of little matter. There is the option of multiple MLB games 7 days a week on TV and 81 home games for each team.
The NFL is already starting to dilute its product with a game added on Thursday and sometimes multiple contests on Monday night in addition to their regular Sunday fare from noon until 10 or 11pm. They also only have 8 home games available to their fanbase provided one isn’t in another country and force their season ticket holders to purchase 2 more home exhibition contests.
The NFL has had this format for years and they still have the highest ratings on TV. Whats your point?
It is NOT about the length of the game. It’s that the sport of baseball is not as easy to make into a media package. Consequently they’re trying to alter the game to make it more prime time ready.
Baseball is absolutely TANKING in terms of youth participation and it’s been doing so for years. Manfred seems to think that’s because occasionally games on TV are 1-5 minutes too long but something tells me that it’s a little deeper than that.
It definitely isn’t the length of the game – there are a lot of factors, it is too expensive to attend and watch regularly and usually requires a specific package to watch or an expensive membership, the blackouts don’t make sense, too much of a commitment long term – I am sure that there are a number of people that don’t want to commit to 165 if their team is out after the first month. The truth though is that a lot of younger people in general (millenials and younger) don’t watch sports at all or if they do they follow things like rocket league or extreme-type sports so you are already fighting an uphill battle.
Baseball is hardly the only pro sport in which teams sell their in-market media rights. Blackouts are a natural product of the ownership of these rights. With 30 teams all having the ability to market their media rights and make their independent deals with broadcasters, this situation is all but impossible to change or remedy. But it isn’t unique to baseball in any event.
They watch the NBA
Are you serious? Little League had record participation this year. Youth baseball and softball, in general, were on the rise.
foxsports.com/mlb/story/study-shows-youth-baseball-softball-participation-on-the-rise-051817
But is still not what it used to be…let alone close to youth football/basketball
More kids participated in Little League in 2017 than all other sports youth programs combined.
Ya instead it will take 2 hours and 57 minutes, so that will make a monumental difference….
I’m the same age and I agree.
There are some pitchers who take 25-30 seconds to pitch and there are some pitchers who take 15-20 seconds to pitch
If one pitcher throws 100 pitches and takes 26 seconds for each pitch , that’s 2600 seconds. If another pitcher takes 20 seconds , that’s 2000 which is 600 seconds apart which is exactly 10 minutes.
I haven’t been to many minor league games , but I don’t think I’ve ever been to a 9 inning game that was 3 hours long.
I like MLB the way it is however, but a pitch clock will certainly reduce the games at least 15 minutes.
What should be limited is the amount of times a catcher or pitching coach go to the mound. These guys are professionals. They don’t need mound visits 3-4x an inning (Okay yes there’s some exaggeration there but it gets really annoying when it’s non-stop)
MB923, 3-4 times doesn’t seem like an exaggeration where Gary Sanchez is concerned.
Don’t get me wrong, he’s an excellent young player–but enough with the mound visits, already.
Yep. As a Yankee fan I can’t stand how many times he visits the mound. Gotta be more than any other catcher.
Minor league games averaged 3:11 this year. Mostly because of leagues like the PCL and California leagues where you see games where 20-25 runs are scored on a regular basis and also because of the multiple pitching changes to keep pitch counts down.
Shouldn’t it be -0.99 for failing to make a 99% catch? Or are they saying there’s 99% chance that they will NOT catch it?
Yeah it’s a typo. It should be -0.99. Not -0.01.
CFD!
Manfred is the worst thing to happen to baseball since the strike.
Bugg Selig was a total creep, so I’ll take Manfred.
That’s like choosing Ptomaine over Salmonella.
Salmonella FTW!!!
Why? Because wanting to bring in pitch time clock? Automatic intentional walks?
I applaud him for coming down hard on domestic violence. He’s looking to expand, and personally I feel MLB should be 32 teams, with one additional team outside US, along with Toronto. I like that he’s pushing Cleveland to dump their logo. Odd to have that logo all over at a stadium named “Progressive Field”.
Selig to Manfred is a huge improvement in my eyes.
@Nste….I noticed that too….says “severely” and I am like severely what? Hampered or limited? Lol
@ Gotheem123….I was thinking the same…they only get docked -0.01 for missing an easy catch?
Does anyone actually, legitimately believe that making the game take a shorter total amount of time is going to make young inner city kids understand why it’s cool that a pitcher threw a curveball for a called strike on a 2-0 count?
As long as there are Ipods, Ipads and androids, kids are not going to spend their time in the hot sun unless there at a beach.
Pace of game rules in order to bring in fans has got to be the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard of. If you don’t get, or like, baseball then lowering the avg game time by 15 minutes or something close is not going to matter to you at all. If you don’t like baseball you’re not any more likely to watch a two hour thirty minute game as you would a 3 hour game. Meanwhile to someone who enjoys baseball, you’ll stay the extra time. I don’t see how a quicker game brings in one fan. I think youth movement needs to start at high school and collegiate level. High school baseball and college baseball are not nearly as big of a deal most places as football or basketball. MLB should focus efforts on changing that and giving money for more scholarships and boosting high school baseball. If you get hooked then, you won’t care how long games are. If you don’t, you likely never will.
Youth baseball is falling apart because it turned into a pay-to-play industry rather than a recreational activity. If you don’t play when you’re a kid you’re not going to watch much baseball going forward.
True story. Everybody I knew growing up was a baseball fan. We had a ball, glove and bat in our hands, traded baseball cards, all summer long, playing catch, over the line games, whatever, and we joined Little League even if we had no real athletic ability. I don’t see that happening anymore, at least where I live it’s AYSO and football. Baseball may be more profitable than ever, but you have to wonder how long that will last if the younger generations aren’t being brought up on the game.
Youth baseball as a whole is on the rise.
foxsports.com/mlb/story/study-shows-youth-baseball-softball-participation-on-the-rise-051817
Little League had a record year for participation in 2017.
I read that article and didn’t see “record participation” just an uptick from a decade ago. Forbes has a good article about the decline in youth baseball.
Tha article said nothing about Little League, just youth baseball in general. The fact that there was record participation in Little League is from the Littleleague.org
Since the facts show that Youth Baseball is on the RISE, then Forbes cannot say truthfully that it’s in decline.
Forbes articles are written by anyone that chooses to submit them and give up ownership to Forbes. You can write an article for Forbes. there is no fact checking by Forbes. I have written several on commercial real estate that have been published on Forbes as a marketing tool for my company. They didn’t change a word of my submissions, even the misspellings and grammar mistakes.
Just a little about kids sports in general.
vocativ.com/298019/youth-football-participation-is-plummeting/
When it comes to youth sports from ages 6-17, according to SFIA between 2009 and 2014 basketball saw a 6.8% drop in participation and football saw a 17.9% drop. Baseball saw a 4.3% drop.
Also according to the SFIA report of for 2017, baseball was the only sport that saw an increase in participation. You can buy a copy here: sfia.org/reports/512_2017-Sports%2C-Fitness%2C-and…
Little League participation fell from its previous peak in the 1990’s of nearly 3 million to 2.63 million in 2005. Participation has reached 3.01 million in 2017 so far. That includes baseball and softball.
I agree with most of what you said. When I went to college in the 70s, there were only 4 full scholarship athletes on our baseball team. Two more had partial deals. There were 85 on the football team and all 13 on the basketball team.
Wouldn’t it be minus .99 for a 99% chance catch.
I agree with that. I have kids involved in youth baseball and softball. Where I live, and a lot of places, in order to play in high school you have to be on select organization starting at about 11-12 years old at oldest. It’s super expensive involving a lot of games and travel. Basketball and football you are a lot more likely to wait until high school and still make team or play in local rec league and still have good chance to make high school team. Much more scholarship money for football and basketball then baseball. My kids( I have 4 ages 17, 14, 12, 7) all love baseball and will most likely watch for the rest of their lives regardless of how long or short the games are.
Same goes for basketball. My son was a good basketball player and I could afford to pay for him to be on the travel squads starting at 12. From 12-13 yrs old and on he was on the road all summer. If he had not been on those travel squads he would not have even been considered for his HS team. Way too competitive here in the Carolinas.
He eventually got a scholarship to play basketball at my alma mater, then chose to play baseball after 1 year. Made his dad proud, but lots lighter in the wallet when they took away his scholarship.
Football is a different story where most high schools dress 60-70-80 players.
As a fan of 60 years I dislike all of the recent changes.
As a fan of similar age I applaud most of the changes although I could use the extra time between innings for more frequent bathroom visits. lol
Tired of all the attempts to shorten the game. If you love baseball it’s not too long. If you really want to get through a quick game record it and fast forward through the hour of commercials.
Hard to believe pillar doesn’t crack the top 10 in the OAA stat
Cutting game time is easy but they won’t do it other than the little fixes. You want to cut game time? Cut down the amount of commercials between innings and no commercials when they make pitching changes. I hate that the game waits until the commercials are done to restart.
I’m a 45 year fan of baseball and I welcome a shorter game. A pitch clock with bases empty already exists. I see no added value in longer games in general or infinite batting glove adjustments in particular.
Common sense has to prevail here. If MLB wants to speed up the games, get rid of having replay for every single play….
I hear Otani loves cheesesteaks!
Philly needs to get this guy. Could boost their rebuild…. and they have the money to overpay anyone … yeah … you read that right! Anyone ….
Money’s not really the big issue with Otani. His is more about fit. Maybe he’d love Philly, idk, but my guess would be that he’d want to join a team with a more immediate path to contention and more present media exposure
Length of time doesn’t matter much if the game is a good one. Bad games can be long in the 2nd inning when you know it is essentially over.
Interesting debate regarding the official use of the pitch clock in hopes of speeding up the game. Of course, there are a host of other measures available in which to increase the pace of play aside from this one and the already implemented intentional walk option. Limiting catcher visits to the mound might be another consideration.
I have been a big fan of implementing advanced technology to improve the game be it with instant replay or the possibility of a pre-programmed laser strike zone for each batter. Why not utilize technology with signal calling instead of having the catcher. manager and coaches go through the tedious routine of signs for pitchers, hitters and base runners.
Btw-The implementation of a laser strike zone or “robo-umps” would in itself increase the pace of play like few other measures. An instantaneous call with no grounds for argument would surely speed up the game if that’s a primary objective with MLB.
minor league tests show insignificant delay in calling pitches
Really? I wasn’t aware that MiLB has already implemented a pre-programmed laser strike zone, “robo-umps” or even advanced communication technology between a pitcher and catcher to contradict my comment? Enlighten us all if you can.
someone wanted enlightenment. here it is. bleacherreport.com/articles/2652109-mlb-can-learn-…
That is because minor league baseball has not implemented robo-umps to call balls and strikes.
2 Independent league games is hardly a test.
better than no test
Anyone who wants laser automatic strike zones doesn’t understand baseball. Half of hitting and pitching is learning the umps zone and making adjustments. Then you eliminate the skill of pitch framing. All to the detriment of the game. If anything instant replay had shown how good umps are and how often they get it right.
As a long time fan of MLB since the early 1960’s I can do without inconsistent umpiring and the idiocy of the pitch-framing metric which never even existed back in the day.
What’s so great about having the reputation of veteran pitchers and hitters aid in dictating an umpires strike zone as opposed to technology which would be full-proof and instantaneous. No human could be even close to 100% accurate with the varying strike zones of every player in assorted stances, along with the velocity and breaking balls that most pitchers possess today.
“Then you eliminate the skill of pitch framing. All to the detriment of the game.” lol
Pitch framing might the MLB equivalent to “flopping” in the NBA, NHL and soccer. Deceiving an umpire to get a strike might be on a par with a player of those sports trying to draw a foul or penalty. In addition, MLB analytics actually has a stat for this! lmao
So what skill is actually represented by “pitch framing?” I’ve asked this question many times before and I can probably keep asking it until I am dead and never be offered even a discussable theory. Anything that can only be represented statistically and not be supported by any other form of reasoning or evidence deserves to be called a black art.
I’m actually against robo umps for pace reasons. I honestly think robo umps will slow the game down some, not the other way around, by calling more borderline pitches balls. Often times, umps miss today by expanding an inch or two off the plate, particularly to lefties, or below the knees. Sure, robo umps would reduce some arguments, but I think we’d honestly see substantially more walks with a stricter, more consistent zone.
Wouldn’t that depend on the strike zone that MLB eventually settles on? It has already changed numerous times over the years anyway. It could change even further after the implementation of the new technology depending on the direction MLB wants for its game. More offense? Defense? At least whatever changes are decided upon will be uniform for every pitcher and player during each of those seasons.
baseball isn’t slow because of intentional walks or time between pitches. it’s slowed down over the years by having too many commercials between innings.
I am an old guy. I grew up worshipping Rose, Seaver, Mays, etc. But when I watch a game and Pedro Baez is staring at the catcher for 30 secs, then steps off the rubber to scratch his nuts, it is just too much. It is boring to watch and slows the game to a crawl. I support the pitch clock. Yes the purists will cry, but so what? They cried when the NBA put in a shot clock and the NHL got rid of the 2 line pass rule.
1 pitcher that takes way too long shouldn’t cause a shift in rules for the entire game
there is already a rule about staying in the batters box that isn’t being enforced.
Yup. I’ve been wondering about that one too. Umpires never even seem to warn when batters go for a little stroll between pitches.
If it were up to me, robo umps will not only have the power of calling strikes with laser precision but to also use that same technology as a deterrent to hitters who insist on stalling in the batters box. RoboCop meets Westworld. lol
Thankfully it’s not up to you
Before any of the recent rule changes, there were pace of play rules that were supposed to be handled and enforced by the umpires. They didn’t do that. If the umpires enforce the rules that are already there, these wouldn’t be “issues”
some of us grew up when games were rarely over 2 1/2 hours long, some less than 2 hours. it was baseball then. now it just takes longer. some of the younger fans never witnessed those games.
A lot of that had to do with starting pitchers throwing 150 plus pitches in a game and not using bullpens very much, not near as much as today
They did not have TV.
i’m not that old
Teams will still be paying a posting fee of $20 million to Otani’s current NPB team. They are not going to do that and let him walk after a year. They have 6 or more years of control and you can be sure they will want to maximize that time. Even a few weeks in the minors will make that another year.
The team that signs him can extend Otani at any point after he is placed on the 40 man roster to start the 2018 season. The precedent for a large extension was already set by the Astros when they extended Jon Singleton to a $35 million deal back in 2014 before he ever played a day in the majors.
If Otani comes in, dominates in spring training and his first few starts of the regular season, you may see an extension through his arbitration years that dwarves what Singleton received within weeks of the season starting. 6 years and $70 million? Certainly not out of the question.
Have the umpires call the strike zone that is in the book (armpits to the knees) and no clock will be required. Players/teams that are always looking for a walk that leads to drawn out games will be forced to hack.
I spend a lot of time at minor league games and have spoken with lots of the pitchers who have said that the pitch clock doesn’t impact them at all. Why? Because all they have to do is step off the rubber and the clock starts over again. If anything, it has given them more time. If they are not connecting with the catcher on what to throw, they step off and start the signals and the clock over again.
I hope they change the clock to 25 hours. I can really use that extra hour of sleep.
The NFL takes 2 decades to run 6 plays from scrimmage. I’m sick of this conversation. This isn’t how you reach a more youthful generation. I’m 26 now. I’ve loved baseball my whole life b/c I was taught about the nuances of the game. I was taught about all of the awesome beauty of what it’s about. Obviously, as a Marlins fan, I’m lucky enough yo have seen 2 World Series Champions early in my lifetime, but I have also seen thenpettiness and disgusting existence in general of Jeffrey Loria. I still love this game more than any other. I have been able to even get people that never liked sports, or baseball, to become fans by teaching them. If you teach kids about the game the right way, they’ll be more interested. Playing some baseball as a kid also goes a long way.
I love football. Unfortu lately, there is no way for me to watch it, as it no longer exists. When Roger Godell became commissioner, and anointed himself God, judge, jury, executioner, whatever, and then the rules started changing and becoming ridiculous to the point the referees don’t even know what they are, it became unwatchable for me. That being said, the NFL has is a $17 billion industry b/c people watch it, despite the fact that it takes 5 hours to see 40 plays from scrimmage, at most. Pace of play isnt an issue there. Thats b/c parents teach their kids about it early on, and get them enthused. The same has been done, and can be done in baseball. No clocks. Stop trying to figure out what’s wrong with the game. What’s wrong is how we’re marketing it
…also, if you’re trying to increase offense, that will obviously increase the time of the game, and slow the pace a little, with more guys on base creating more pressure situations for pitchers….The idea that pace has anything to do with an issue of teaching young kids to love baseball is ridiculous