"MLB's Rule Changes: Enhancing the Game or Going Too Far? Exploring the Impact"

Baseball, America’s Pastime. Dating back as far as the 1780s, baseball has grown over the years. Despite that evolution however, the game at its core has remained unchanged, until recently that is. Citing overwhelming feedback from fans, commissioner Rob Manfred orchestrated a series of rule changes hoping to increase the pace of play and improve fan engagement. We can attribute some of these rule changes to the game growing as it has for decades. The question is though, where is the line between evolution and unnecessary change? Does it even exist? I am just a fan and I’m only one man. But I felt compelled to give my two cents, so to speak, about the recent evolution of the game I’ve loved since I was a kid.

When I first heard of the rule changes that might come to Major League Baseball, the first change that stuck out in my mind was the universal DH. I tried to remain objective and keep my personal allegiances out of it, but as a Braves fan that grew up watching baseball in the late 90s and early 2000s, I became accustomed to the way the National League did things; the DH didn’t exist, and the pitchers came to the plate in the 9th spot in the order. I used to love watching Bobby Cox manage his bullpen and bench late in games. Though he is well-known for finding himself watching the latter half of games from the clubhouse, Bobby was a brilliant strategist in managing his team late in games. The universal DH takes that part of the game away. Most fans don’t care about that stuff unless they’re baseball nerds like me, but the purist in me misses it.

Though I don’t care for it as a fan of baseball matchups and strategy, the universal DH has its advantages. Anyone who remembers seeing Freddie Freeman at third base as a way of keeping himself and Matt Adams in the lineup on the same day will see what I’m talking about. Every team has someone who is best used when the team limits–or eliminates–the need for them to play the field. The DH rule also allows pure hitters to showcase their talent without risking injury playing in the field. Though he broke into the league as a third baseman, Edgar Martinez made a hall of fame career out of being a prolific DH. David Ortiz is also a name that deserves to be in that conversation, though he came up as a first baseman. Though the universal DH takes away a part of the game that some of us enjoyed, it creates opportunities for some that may not otherwise be in the starting lineup.

Aside from the obvious strategic element, my main gripe with the universal DH (I know I will be in a small circle with this one, if not by myself) is taking opportunities away from pitchers that can hit, like to hit, or both. Though they can’t all be Shohei Ohtani, I’m certain that the Max Fried’s, Madison Baumgarner’s, and Zach Grienke’s of the world will miss stepping up to the plate. The major arguments for the universal DH has been a risk of injury to pitchers at the plate or on the bases and the lack of ability that some pitchers have at the plate because of playing their entire amateur and professional careers to this point with a DH. But I must once again put on my purist hat and say that is why sacrifice bunts existed and there was an extra incentive for the guys at the bottom of the order to produce so the pitcher wouldn’t lead off the next inning. As much as I don’t care for the universal DH, it appears to be here to stay. Fans like me will do what we’ve always done, we’ll adapt and find other reasons to continue loving the game we love.

My biggest gripe of all the rule changes has to be the extra inning “ghost runner.” I could write a full article on this alone if I wanted to. The rule to have the player who made the last out in the previous half-inning be placed at second base to start the next inning was designed to increase action and also was yet another attempt to shorten games (I guess nobody likes 18 inning games anymore). But all I feel it has done is ensure the pitcher that takes the mound in that inning is all but guaranteed to give up at least one run unless he gets a strikeout or two, or he is lucky with balls put in play, all from a runner that is on base that he didn’t put there. MLB countered by making such a run unearned, thus not counting against the pitcher’s stats. Unearned run or not, I wouldn’t want to come into a game on the mound and be on the ropes right away. I also feel like this rule favors the home team. I say this as a fan that benefited from such an occasion on April 10th in Atlanta where the Braves were down a run in the bottom of the 10th when Sean Murphy proceeded to hit a two-run homer on the first pitch. Barring such a walk-off home run however, I don’t believe the placed runner does much to shorten games if both teams execute, which I realize doesn’t always happen. Pace of play aside, if the pitcher on the mound didn’t put him there, there shouldn’t be a runner on second base. Period.

One of the newest rules introduced this year limits the number of times a pitcher can attempt to pick off a runner at a base. The rule states, paraphrased of course, that if a pitcher throws to a base three times and cannot pick off the runner, they rule it a balk and the runner gets the next base. They put the rule in place in order to limit the number of times a pitcher throws to a base, thus increasing the chance of action on the play. This rule, along with the bigger bases, has encouraged more stolen base attempts. I feel this is good for fan engagement, but I offer one small caveat. The three-pickoff rule is fine, but instead of charging the pitcher a balk, let the runner use his discretion. Most baserunners–I’m looking at you, Ronald Acuña Jr–will take off, anyway. If he doesn’t, let him stay where he is. He’ll know he’s got free rein for the rest of the at-bat. Charge the pitcher with a ball in the count if he throws over again, like you would a pitch clock violation, if you must. No reason to be handing out free bases. I don’t think anyone who plays the Mets, for example, is going to be throwing over to keep Daniel Vogelbach on first base. You’re only going to see this come into play with prolific base stealers. They certainly don’t need any help.

Another hotly debated topic in baseball over the past few years has been the shift. Some, like me, hated it. Others saw it as an incentive for players to hit the ball to the opposite field. Some fans were indifferent to the shift. As I’ve stated, I fancy myself a baseball purist. I believe players should stay in their positions, with some exceptions of course. If a shortstop or second baseman wants to play up the middle for a certain hitter, sure, let him. But having your shortstop or third baseman in shallow right field every time you see a left-handed hitter is not baseball. I grew up–and I think a lot of us did–in an era where if you hit a ball in the hole between first and second or third and short, you got a base hit. The shift took that away, making anything, whether in the air or on the ground in those areas, an almost automatic out. Doesn’t do much for action and engagement from a fan's perspective, does it? Simply put, analytics aside, the shift has no place in baseball. But with every rule there are loopholes. As much as I hate it, there will always be shifts in some form. My only hope is it’s a long time before they become as exaggerated as the ones that have theoretically been banned.

Intentional walks have been a part of baseball for decades. Got a base open? Feared hitter coming up? “Put him on,” as they say. When I began my journey to becoming the baseball enthusiast that I am, they conducted an intentional walk by a pitcher throwing four pitches to his catcher that were far outside the hitter’s reach, often in the opposite batter’s box. As ritualistic and boring as it may seem now, such a practice allowed for interesting situations such as Miguel Cabrera getting a base hit on an intentional walk pitch that wasn’t far enough outside, or a wild intentional walk pitch that results in a runner dashing home from third. Exciting stuff, right? Nope, now they just point to first base and the next hitter steps in. Excuse me while I take a nap.

Baseball is changing. The fan watching the game is changing. No matter how you feel about intentional walks with no pitches, pitch clocks, or the universal DH, they are all evidence that the game we love is growing. All we can do as fans is embrace the changes and relive the fond memories of years gone by in our hearts and minds.