Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Sources: Competition committee agrees to changes to strike zone, intentional walks

I am all for speeding up the game. In 1971, 40% of all games (roughly 64 games) were at or under 2 1/2 hours and they rarely went over 3 hours. In 2015, DET played only 4 games that were at or under 2 1/2 hours, while the vast majority were over 3 hours.

I do not believe raising the strike zone will help the Tigers. I also don't believe it will increase the action. Pitchers will continue to throw it low and hitters will continue to swing or not swing. It will only be evident when they don't swing. So how much will there be a difference? 1% of all pitches thrown maybe? 2%?
 
I am all for speeding up the game. In 1971, 40% of all games (roughly 64 games) were at or under 2 1/2 hours and they rarely went over 3 hours. In 2015, DET played only 4 games that were at or under 2 1/2 hours, while the vast majority were over 3 hours.

I do not believe raising the strike zone will help the Tigers. I also don't believe it will increase the action. Pitchers will continue to throw it low and hitters will continue to swing or not swing. It will only be evident when they don't swing. So how much will there be a difference? 1% of all pitches thrown maybe? 2%?

I agree with the IBB. As far as the strike zone, another advantage to the hitters again. Wouldn't be surprised if they lowered the mound again.

Maybe they should call the strikes like it says in the rule book and call the high one's again.
 
I agree with the IBB. As far as the strike zone, another advantage to the hitters again. Wouldn't be surprised if they lowered the mound again.

Maybe they should call the strikes like it says in the rule book and call the high one's again.

Are mounds all a standard height now, or do they still vary from park to park like they did a few years back? I honestly hadn't even thought about this until I just saw your post.
 
Are mounds all a standard height now, or do they still vary from park to park like they did a few years back? I honestly hadn't even thought about this until I just saw your post.

They are supposed to be 10 inches above the playing field. It was 18" in 1968, lowered to 12" in 1969.

GULO: Thing is as you lower the height, you shorten the distance to home plate, right?
 
They are supposed to be 10 inches above the playing field. It was 18" in 1968, lowered to 12" in 1969.

GULO: Thing is as you lower the height, you shorten the distance to home plate, right?

The ball comes at you at a reduced speed or something like that. Every time pitchers are doing well and hitters aren't hitting 50-60 home runs they talk about lowering again.
 
Back
Top