There's been a lot of talk going around about ways to speed up the game in order to cut down on the average time of games. One idea that would save some time while also impacting strategy would be a rule forcing relievers to face at least two or three batters.
Cubs president Theo Epstein floated such a possibility at the general managers' meetings in November during a gathering of GMs and Major League Baseball officials, according to major-league sources. No formal proposal was made, but the concept generated a mostly positive reaction, sources said.
Think how the game would change if such a rule was in effect:
An opposing manager would need to think twice about bringing in a left-handed specialist to face, say, the Red Sox's premier left-handed hitter, David Ortiz, with less than two outs.
From Tom Verducci of Sports Illustrated:
Perhaps an even better idea ... is the three-batter minimum, which would slow the parade of relievers. Maybe the least aesthetic baseball game ever played was a 4-3 win by the Houston Astros over the New York Mets on April 30, 2012. More aptly, it was a game between Brad Mills and Terry Collins, the two managers. They used 11 pitchers to get the last 16 outs. It is the only game in history in which seven pitchers faced only one batter. Nobody bought a ticket so they could watch Mills and Collins, but that's what they got. What fun.
As Verducci writes, there are more power arms than ever before, many of whom end up in the bullpen, throwing smoke for a limited number of pitches: "General managers and managers have figured out how to leverage this steady flow of arms: use more and more pitchers who throw harder and harder in increasingly shorter bursts. The formula has been wildly successful -- even despite the increase in Tommy John surgeries, which tells you how abundant is the supply."
Indeed, 30 years ago, the average team used 15 pitchers for the entire season; in 2014, it was 23. The final two or three innings of close games have become a turnstile of dominant relievers -- there were 29 relievers last year who pitched at least 30 innings with an ERA under 2.00, and 98 with an ERA under 3.00, and 101 who allowed a batting average under .230 -- who only rarely give up runs and rarely blow leads.
Those around the office here have heard me arguing for this rule for years. The incessant pitching changes slow the game down and have helped cause the decrease in scoring. Teams carry 12 or even 13 pitchers, so stocked bullpens mean fewer players available on the bench, which helps managers get even more matchup advantages out of the bullpen. People complain about designated hitters who don't have to play the field; isn't a pitcher who has to face only one or two batters even more one-dimensional?
So let's add a rule that a reliever has to face at least two batters (I'd even be in favor of three), unless the inning ends. For those worried about a pitcher faking an injury: Fine, if a pitcher leaves with an injury, he's ineligible for the next three games and you can't replace him on the roster.
What do you think?