New Strike Zone Coming

[A.E]

A new strike zone could be on baseball's horizon and the old-fashioned intentional walk could be a thing of the past after both were agreed to by the competition committee at Major League Baseball's owners meetings this week, sources said.
 
The potentially dramatic changes could be in effect by next season.
 
The committee agreed on a motion to effectively raise the lower part of the strike zone to the top of the hitter's knees, sources said. The current rules stipulate that the zone begins at "the hollow beneath the kneecap," but the change is a reaction to a trend by umpires to call strikes on an increasing number of pitches below the knees.
 
The change in the intentional-walk rule would end the traditional practice of requiring the pitcher to lob four balls outside the strike zone. Instead, a team could signify it wants to issue an intentional walk, and the hitter would be immediately sent to first base, sources said.
 
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/15633876/mlb-competition-committee-agrees-changes-strike-zone-intentional-walks

 
Both changes are long overdue. Umpires have slowly dragged the zone lower and wider over the years. The Intentional Walk also makes too much sense. Just wastes time. I don't see why MLB's playing rule committee wouldn't agree to make the changes.

 

[catman]

As long as strike zones are consistent, pitchers and hitters can adjust to it regardless of where it really is.
As to the intentional walks being automatic, I am torn. Occasional wild pitches make the game interesting. I agree that they slow the game down so I would be OK with the automatic walk, I suppose.

 

[Bengals1Fan]

Not too much of a Baseball fan. Actually not at all. Reading the title made me dislike this... reading the details made me agree. Get this done. 

 

[cavsfan817]

Am I mis-reading this? How is making the zone smaller going to speed up the game? 

 

[A.E]

Am I mis-reading this? How is making the zone smaller going to speed up the game? 

 
Speeding up the game piece comes with change to Intentional Walks. I do think raising the zone will make the game more entertaining over time. Raising the zone obviously forces pitchers to put more balls up. We'll see more hitters rake.

 

[cavsfan817]

 
Speeding up the game piece comes with change to Intentional Walks. I do think raising the zone will make the game more entertaining over time. Raising the zone obviously forces pitchers to put more balls up. We'll see more hitters rake.

 
Yes, it definitely benefits the offensive aspect of the game. However, it will do the opposite of what they have been trying to do (speeding the game up) because there will be more offense. I guess the argument can be made that the ball will likely be in play more, but I see this as a drawback. If anything, I think they should be expanding the zone.

 

[Phil The Thrill]

Umps already expand the zone as they please anyways

 

[cavsfan817]

Umps already expand the zone as they please anyways

 
It's been pointed out (accurately) that they have expanded it lower because they get judged even harder if they call a high strike, as opposed to a low strike. Less heat if they make a mistake lower than higher.

 

[A.E]

More balls in play speeds up the game. I've seen a lot of analysis to show faster games with PO's via BIP versus POs by way of K's

 

[cavsfan817]

More balls in play speeds up the game. I've seen a lot of analysis to show faster games with PO's via BIP versus POs by way of K's

 
By common thought too, if you have a larger zone, players will be more likely to swing at pitches because they know that they will be called strikes. Despite pitchers having to put the ball in a zone that the hitter can hit it "better" with an smaller zone, it also promotes walks and taking pitches because the hitter has a greater advantage with the smaller area that they know the pitcher has to come into.

 

[A.E]

Someday baseball will maximize technological advances to phase out subjective calls. I'm all about controversy being good for the sport but it seems umpires' interpretations of the strike zone is getting more and more skewed over the years. I coached a 16U game last night and three times I had to question the plate umpire's zone. When the catcher is falling off-balance to snag the ball....no f'ing way is it a strike.