Mixed Reviews After Opening Weekend

The first weekend of Spring Training games is complete, which means the first games under MLB's new "speed-up" rules are complete.  And, not surprisingly, most of the talk surrounding those games is about the pitch clock.  Manny Machado started his first at-bat of the Spring with an 0-1 count, and a Braves-Red Sox game ended on a walk-off automatic strike, but overall, there were fewer violations than I expected.  Only a little more than two per game.

Violations early in Spring Training were inevitable as pitchers and hitters alike get used to the new rule.  Especially since veterans have their routines that they'll have to break.  But, as much as Spring Training is for getting ready for the season physically, it's also time for players to get experience playing under the new rules before we get to the games that matter.  It's an adjustment for sure.  And this is the time to make that adjustment.

That's why I'm actually impressed by how low the number of violations was.  The Red Sox-Braves thing got most of the attention (and justifiably so), but would you rather that happen now or in the regular season?  And, other than the Machado one, did we even hear about any of the others?  That alone is an indication that pitch clock violations won't really be as prevalent as some feared.  There'll still be some, to be sure, but I have a feeling they'll be few and far between.

Machado had a funny take after his violation.  After the game, he said, "I guess I'll start with an 0-1 count a lot."  But, in all seriousness, he admitted that he'll have to cut out some of the stuff he usually does when he steps up to the plate in order to be ready with eight seconds left on the clock.  For example, he used to greet the home plate umpire, which is something he probably won't do anymore, simply because of the extra few seconds it takes.  He also lamented that he may as well not even bother with a walk-up song, since he may not get to hear much of it anyway.

Meanwhile, Max Scherzer's view from a pitcher's perspective was very interesting.  He loves the new rules.  Not because he works quickly (if he was still pitching, Mark Buehrle would love them for that reason alone), but because he believes it gives the pitcher the advantage.  The batter gets his timeout, which is fine with Scherzer.  Because he only gets one per at-bat, and if he burns it, he burns it.  Scherzer also said he clarified with umpires between innings what's legal and what's not, and it was confirmed that he can stand there ready waiting for the batter if he wants.

There have also been some comments about the size and location of the pitch clocks behind home plate.  It was one of the first games on Friday, A's-Rangers I think, where the pitch clock was very close and in the shot from the center field camera.  However, that'll likely just be an issue in Spring Training, with smaller ballparks and not really a lot of places to put them.  MLB has reassured fans that you won't be able to see the pitch clock on the center field camera during the regular season.

TV networks have been experimenting with where and how to put in the pitch clock on their graphics, too.  I'd imagine we'll see several different variations throughout the Spring as the networks try to hammer out what's best.  What YES did for the Yankees-Tigers game was simply replace the number of pitches with the pitch clock, which I liked.  I'd imagine we'll see a lot of that.  Pitch count/pitch speed is already built into most graphic templates, so adding the pitch clock to that rotation of "pitcher stuff" sure seems like the easiest, least obtrusive option.  (I've heard ESPN might want to try putting it on the back of the pitcher's mound like TNT does with the shot clock at the free throw line in NBA games, which I think would look terrible.)

Some fans don't like the pitch clock and are never going to based simply on principle.  Their biggest issue is less the attempt to speed up the game than it is the making decisions like this based on the opinions of non-baseball people.  The big criticism (which is somewhat of a joke, but also somewhat true) is that they asked people who don't watch baseball, made changes based on what they said, then those people will go back to not watching baseball.  So why are they the ones you're listening to?

You know what, though?  The pitch clock is having the desired effect.  It's a very small sample size.  I get that.  And Spring Training games are usually quicker anyway, so they're not necessarily a reliable indicator.  But the biggest reason for the pitch clock was to have faster games, and so far, that's exactly what we've gotten.  Last year, the average Major League game lasted 3:06.  Most games in the first weekend of Spring Training were around two-and-a-half.  So, yeah, the pitch clock has seemingly made that much of a difference!

My biggest concern with it was that it would make players rush.  That doesn't seem to be the case at all, though.  I'll compare it to the serve clock in tennis.  You're so preoccupied with it at first, then, once everybody gets used to it, you don't even notice it anymore.  I have a feeling something very similar will happen here.

As for the players, they aren't as worried about the pitch clock itself as they are about the enforcement.  The violation triggers seem pretty straightforward.  The batter has to be facing the pitcher ready to hit with eight seconds left, and the pitcher has to start his delivery before the clock's at zero.  But there's still some interpretation.  What one home plate umpire views as "engaging" the pitcher or a pitcher starting his motion might not be the same as another home plate ump.  As a result, what's a violation to one may not be to the other.  All the players are asking for in that area is consistency.

While the pitch clock has drawn the most attention, and will likely continue to as Spring Training progresses, last weekend also marked the debut of the shift ban and larger bases.  As I expected, you hardly even realize the bases are larger while watching.  Sure, you notice it when they're held up next to the 15-inch bases side-by-side, but when they're on the ground while a game's being played?  No.  And the shift ban probably won't be as noticeable until later in the Spring when lefty power hitters who were most affected by it begin getting their at-bats.

Faster games weren't the only reason for the offseason rule changes, though.  They also wanted more exciting games with more action.  And, I must say, it's so far, so good on that front.  Again, it's a small sample size and the beginning of Spring Training features very few (if any) veterans who we'll be seeing throughout the season.  But there were more runs being scored and the games were finishing quicker, so it sounds like both of those objectives have been achieved.  At least so far.

It's obviously way too early to form an opinion one way or the other about the pitch clock and MLB's other pace-of-play initiatives.  The early returns are certainly promising, though.  Whether it'll continue as Spring Training progresses and into the regular season is anybody's guess.  But, after an encouraging first weekend of Spring Training, I've got faith it will.