New Extra Innings Rules are Coming to MLB — And it Won’t Ruin the Game
Despite many baseball fans and media fretting over the extra innings rules for the 2020 MLB season, there’s really no need to worry.
As part of Major League Baseball’s return under anything but normal circumstances in 2020, it was announced extra-inning games this season would adopt a rule that has been in place in Minor League Baseball over the last two seasons: At the start of each inning, there will be a runner placed at second base with no outs.
Predictably, many longtime baseball fans, or “purists,” along with several national baseball and sports writers have panned the new rule.
(Peter Gammons is a great writer, legendary baseball voice and Hall of Famer, but his argument doesn’t make much sense. Who wants to break it to him that the guys he listed are not going to be pitching in the 10th inning and beyond?)
Over two years ago, I was just like them. I thought it was foolish and unnecessary. I informally lobbied for a compromise to play three extra innings under standard rules to ensure each team went through the lineup once before moving to the modified rules. It didn’t help matters on the opening day of the 2018 season when the OKC Dodgers and Iowa Cubs went to extra innings in the second game of a doubleheader, both teams ended up having to use a relief pitcher as the automatic runner to start the inning due to a double switch. It was an unintended consequence that slipped by the rule makers and made people like me do a facepalm. (This rule was rectified in 2019 so teams can now use the player preceding the pitcher’s spot in the batting order to be the automatic runner.)
But since that first time seeing it in person, I’ve seen 21 additional extra-inning games and a funny thing happened: I started to like it and became a convert. I’ve listed my reasons below why I’ve come around.
Games do end quicker
The following stats were provided by Minor League Baseball:
For the OKC Dodgers, there have been 22 extra-inning games between 2018–19. Sixteen ended after one extra inning (73%), matching up with the MiLB-wide numbers. Four ended after two extra innings (18%) and only two have lasted as long as three extra innings (9%).
Keep in mind the main reason MLB is instituting this rule is for the sake of health and safety in order to shorten the time teams are gathered together.
There are people who have opined this will get rid of memorable extra-inning marathons. But how many of those games are truly memorable and significant? Very few. Yes, my favorite game over my years in Oklahoma City lasted 19 innings, but a thrilling win can come in many ways, even in the 11th inning.
In 2009, I called a 21-inning game that had to be split up over two days. Is it fun story? Yes. Would I be less of a baseball fan or be missing out on a huge part of my career if it never happened? No.
And don’t worry, the rule will not be in place during the playoffs — which I agree with — so similar outcomes to Game 3 of the 2018 World Series are still possible.
Even under normal regular season circumstances, I’d advocate for this rule to be put in place by MLB. When a team goes several extra innings and burns up all its pitching, the roster consequences aren’t just felt at Triple-A. It’s a domino effect throughout the entire organization and can take all teams — Majors and Minors — several days or even weeks to stabilize. Add in that pro baseball organizations are going to be dealing with severe economic impacts as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and it can also be a significant money saver not having to shuttle players around all over the place.
They’re exciting!
In a standard extra-inning game, if a team leads off with a double, you’d probably think, “Hey, they’ve got a good chance to score here!” and perk up. That’s already built in under this new rule and forces everyone to be a bit more locked in, from hitters to pitchers to coaches to broadcasters to fans. Under traditional rules, teams can go long stretches without sniffing a scoring chance.
I’m not a huge football fan, but like most people, I prefer college football’s overtime rules over those of the NFL. Why? Because each team starts with an instant scoring opportunity. (And because both teams actually get to touch the ball on offense, but that’s for another time.)
Same goes for the NHL. It seems most hockey die-hards don’t like the current overtime and shootout rules, but as an average fan, I think they’re wildly entertaining. (As hard as it may be to believe, hockey purists are probably more stubborn than baseball purists.)
Baseball is currently in a position where it needs to add fans and generate more excitement in many facets across the game. While it’s not the biggest mean to that end, I think this rule certainly helps more than it could hurt.
Teams don’t play it safe
Yahoo! Sports MLB columnist Tim Brown recently wrote that extra innings will turn into “pretty much a bunting and fly ball-hitting contest.” I’ve heard this echoed by several others, who mind you have never actually seen one of these games.
This was one of my biggest fears when the rule was first established, but it turns out it’s simply not true. Get ready for a bit of a deep dive into some numbers…
My focus on this exercise lies mostly within the visiting team, since they are the ones who bat first and dictate the tempo in a sense. I don’t ding a home team for “playing for one” if the game is tied since it’s assured you just need one run to win. (In a similar vein, football teams don’t get chided for playing for a field goal after holding their opponent scoreless earlier in the overtime period.)
As I pointed out earlier, the OKC Dodgers have played 22 games under these rules across the last two seasons and there have been a total of 30 innings that started with a runner at second base. There were 14 instances the visiting team scored only one run. Only six of the 14 times did that team win in that inning. The visiting team lost in the bottom of the inning five times and the home team tied the game three times. That’s well under a 50% win percentage when only scoring one run in the top of an inning.
On the other hand, when the visiting team scored at least two runs in the top of an inning, they never lost. Of the eight instances, the team won seven times in that inning alone and the home team tied the game just once, and even in that game the visiting team eventually won after putting together another multi-run inning.
I found five instances when a visiting team began an inning with a sacrifice bunt to move the runner to third base with one out. They scored one run — and never more than that — three times. Within that subset, they won twice and the home team tied the game once. When including the two times the visiting team did not score, the bunting strategy led to a win in that inning only two out of five times.
I should also note all five instances happened in 2018. After teams had a year to learn and adjust, there wasn’t a single time during an OKC Dodgers’ extra-inning game in 2019 where a team deliberately started an inning with a sacrifice bunt.
From a macro level, laying down a sac bunt and hitting a sac fly isn’t that simple. The game isn’t played like that anymore, and there are several players who can’t be relied on to execute a sac bunt because they don’t need to focus on it to begin with. And with the spiking rate of strikeouts over the last few years, getting the runner home from third base with less than two outs is far from a sure thing.
You have to be aggressive if you want to win under these rules. Teams don’t play for one run because it’s become apparent they can’t afford to.
It’s not perfect
Like anything in baseball or life, it’s not a perfect a rule and I’m not going to pretend it is.
At first, I was afraid it could lead to a decline in the most exciting play in baseball — the walk-off home run. In theory, I still believe this might be the case, but maybe not with the emphasis across the game to hit the ball in air. Of those 22 extra-inning games the OKC Dodgers played in with the new rule in place, four games ended in a walk-off homer (18%). Over the two seasons prior to that (2016–17), the team played in 25 games in extra innings under standard rules and only two ended with a walk-off homer (8%).
There’s also the issue of relief pitchers’ numbers taking an unfair hit. If the automatic runner scores, it is considered an unearned run, but still reflected as a run allowed by that pitcher. Any subsequent runs allowed follow standard scoring procedures.
Below is an excerpt of an article by the great JJ Cooper of Baseball America that shows there was a significant difference in runs allowed by relief pitchers once the rule went into place. As JJ notes, he decided to focus on Double-A pitchers due to the overall increase in offense in Triple-A during the 2019 season. (You can access the full article here, but you must be a Baseball America subscriber.)
For guys playing for their careers or entering arbitration/free agency, this could have a significant impact. Say what you want about basic versus advanced stats, but the old standbys on the back of the baseball card still hold weight. This is from current Philadelphia Phillies relief pitcher Robert Stock:
Player agent Rafa Nieves also outlines an extreme example below, but it is possible. (Technically it would only result in three earned runs.) He does make a valid point about relievers getting a limited amount of games this season, thus making it harder to improve overall numbers.
I’d like to think with all the stats and technology at the disposal of agencies and teams, they will be able to extrapolate the numbers to differentiate between these situations. But when economics come into play, I can certainly see how this would be used against a pitcher to unfairly characterize his performance.
Either way, from a competitive standpoint it shows in a 60-game season where the stakes are even higher each night, you can’t take much risk with who you place on the mound in extra innings. It must be someone you trust to execute in high leverage situations, because all situations are high leverage under this rule.
Don’t just take it from me. During my conversations with coaches and players, most have expressed they are in favor of it. Los Angeles Dodgers manager Dave Roberts echoed that to the media recently:
Former OKC manager Bill Haselman also agrees it makes sense to implement in MLB for the 2020 season, even if he isn’t a full convert quite yet. (If the video doesn’t automatically play at the selected time, scroll to 5:50.)
I don’t expect the naysayers to cozy up to it after reading this, but just give it a chance. Baseball will not be ruined because of this rule. Trust me.
