Last Thursday Major League Baseball announced major rules changes at all four levels of the minor leagues for the 2021 season. They were met to mixed reactions, though many fans came down on the side of being against some of these drastic changes.

In case you missed it, the changes are as follows:

Triple-A: The size of the bases will increase from 15-by-15 inches to 18-by-18.

Double-A: All teams must have at least four players stationed on the infield dirt during all pitches. This is defined as both feet completely on the dirt. The purpose of this is to prevent second basemen from going onto the outfield grass in overshifts, and also eliminates the use of the four-man outfield against extreme fly ball hitters.

High-A: Pitchers must completely disengage from the pitching rubber before a pick off. This was scheduled to be implemented in the minors for 2020 before the coronavirus pandemic wiped out the season. The Atlantic League used this rule in 2019 and saw a significant uptick in stolen bases.

Low-A: Pitchers are limited to two step-offs or pickoff attempts per plate appearance. If a pitcher tries a third pickoff, the move is considered a balk unless the runner is successfully picked off.

Low-A Southeast only (ex-Florida State League): Automatic ball-strike system, with balls and strikes called by a radar system.

Low-A West only (ex-California League): Implementation of a pitch clock, but in a way that goes “beyond the system currently used in Triple-A and Double-A.”

“These experimental rules are designed to put more balls in play, create more excitement on the basepaths and increase the impact of speed and athleticism on the field,” MLB senior vice president of on-field operations Raul Ibanez said a press release. “As another important goal of the rules approved by the Competition Committee and the Playing Rules Committee, we expect the new larger bases to increase player safety. We look forward to testing these rules in the Minor Leagues.”

Many baseball fans have reacted negatively to the new rules and dread the day that they would see these put in place in the big league game, but frankly major changes to the game are long overdue. Stolen bases and bunts for hits are exciting plays that have been eradicated from the game in recent years as the sport has become a stagnant, plodding exhibition of waiting for the next home run.

MLB has seen offensive periods like this before, such as the 1940s and 50s, but change is needed to make the game more exciting and action-packed. The buzz-phrase in recent years has been “pace-of-play”, but really we’re talking about “pace-of-action”.

If you feel skittish about possible rules changes to baseball, you’re in good company. But realize that of the four major sports in the US, baseball is the only one that hasn’t changed its rules in the past 25 years to create more offense. The NFL has made it easier to pass the ball effectively. The NBA has eliminated much physicality and hand-checking. The NHL eliminated the cumbersome two-line pass rule and is constantly changing equipment regulations and making other minor rules tweaks. The only one that stays the same is baseball, and the sport is suffering for it.

While the rules changes are a good thing to try, especially if it is successful in increasing the number of infield hits, bunt hits and stolen bases, the execution of how the changes will be tried seem really weird. Batters in High-A and Triple-A can face defenses that are overshifted, but Double-A batters cannot. You have one size base at every level, then it is bigger in Triple-A, but then back to the regular size in MLB.

If MLB wanted to test the rules out in this manner, they have four MLB Partner Leagues (the formerly independent Atlantic League, American Association and Frontier League as well as the formerly affiliated Pioneer League) to test out these rules. Then when they judge if they work or not, it makes more sense to unilaterally bring them in at all levels of the minor leagues so that players have a consistent set of rules all the way up the chain. At minimum let the rules be phased in across multiple levels, like the pitch clock.

While the gut reaction from many purists to the rules changes has been bad, if they work as hoped they could all be good for the game. It also means that when it comes to judging minor leaguers, it is even more important than ever to not judge them based on their statistics. Regardless of whether they work or not, it’s nice to know that the sport is actually trying to adapt for the modern age.

Joe Vasile is a play-by-play broadcaster for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders (AAA, NYY) and Bucknell University. He hosts the baseball history podcast Secondary Lead.

10 comments on “MiLB rule changes for 2021 could be good thing

  • SiteAdmin

    Increased-size bases – I’m neutral but I think this will have unintended consequences
    Four players on dirt – Hate it
    Pro SB rules – Don’t like it but get that I’m probably in the minority here
    Automated strike zone – Love it
    Pitch clock – Need more information but think this could be ok

    I do like how they’re trying different things in different leagues. Throwing all of these changes in all of the leagues would have been too much.

  • Wobbit

    Bigger base: a huge jump in size… increases base size 44%!!! Maybe just add an inch each way (16″) and increase 14% and note the subtle changes. I’m afraid the huge increase will bring drastic effects, not nearly all positive. Will shorten the base paths by about 4-6 inches. The longer term effects will be to bring the stolen base back into play, put more emphasis on speed, will test catchers’ arms and pitchers’ ability to hold runners, which could be good for the game. I believe they will opt for a slight increase in base size if at all at the ML level, not the 18 inch base.

    Infielders on dirt: will put more emphasis on the better infielders with more range. Hitters will prosper, more runs scored.

    Pickoff limitations: Again, stolen bases galore and many more runs scored. I love small ball and emphasis on speed. A lot more pressure on pitchers and defenses. The casual “throw over” will be gone… can’t afford the “calling card” reminder… most fans won’t miss that.

    Automated strike zone: Wow. A whole new ballgame. Will be fascinating to watch the game adjust. How will catchers fool the machine?

  • Bob P

    I’m OK trying out the automated strike zone but don’t like any of the others. I agree with Brian and Wobbit that the base sizes will have an impact. To Wobbit’s point about shortening the base paths by 6 inches, it seems to me that there are an awful lot of plays that are closer than that. The issue with the shift is something hitters can eliminate from the game if they looked to hit the other way.

    The rule change that I have the biggest issue with though is one in MLB already – man on second in extra innings. Hate that more than anything.

  • Metsense

    The game is too long (3.5 hours) and too slow between pitches with too little action between the lines. A pitch clock of 20 seconds would be good , no stepping out of the batters box, no batters timeouts, restrictions on stepping off and pick off attempts would step up the pace of the game. The increase of the size of the bases and the disengaging of the rubber should increase stolen bases resulting in more action. The automatic strike zone is good and the game should have totally automatic calls with cameras and umpires in the booth will make the calls. Shifting should allowed provided that the shift completed in the 20 seconds on the pitch clock. Heck, maybe 15 seconds for the pitch clock. The game pace needs to be addressed.

  • Wobbit

    20 seconds may prove too short. I routinely use the “advance 10 seconds” feature on my MLB.TV site, and it takes sometime three clicks to get to the next pitch. 20 seconds is lightning speed for getting ready, getting the sign, and throwing. Even 30 seconds is a stretch, but certainly worth trying.

    It just could be that baseball is a 19th century game… does not translate to the short-attention-span society.

  • Nym6986

    Sorry-as a long time baseball fan I fail to see how any of this will enhance the game except for automatic balls and strikes. There needs to be a set strike zone based on the size of the batter and different umpires having different strike zones is absurd.
    I’m also not a proponent of shortening the game. When was the last time anyone said football games at three plus hours are too long? They don’t. For the most part we watch games on television and if you are like anyone else you are probably doing some thing else at the same time simply to relieve the boredom. When you attend a game it stands to reason you’d like to see as much baseball as possible. So if the game lasts two hours or 3 1/2 hours who cares?
    The shift is annoying but let’s face it, it a smart defensive move. Batters need to learn to beat the shift by hitting to the opposite field. Once they are not so predictable as pull hitters the defense will have no choice but to adjust back from the infielders playing way out in the outfield and almost all on the same side of the diamond. Starting a runner on second base in extra innings is ridiculous. If the the runner scores and is credited with a run, what is he credited with getting on base? And making a relief pitcher throw to a specified number of batters is also ridiculous and just an attempt to shorten the game. It seems there would be so much more strategy in a manager potentially using up his pitchers trying to get an advantage over the batter. Next thing you know they’ll create a mercy rule so if you were down by more than seven runs they’ll automatically call the game.

    • BobP

      Well said.

  • Hobie

    I don’t get the bigger bases scheme. Is it really to shorten the base paths a few inches? I could see extending 1B into foul territory (a different color on the foul side). Maybe it’s a safety issue at 2B too.

  • Paulc

    I admire good pitching, but the game has become dominated by the Three True Outcomes. Strikeouts, walks, and home runs are not as exciting as a double or triple in the alley. The lack of action is failing to attract new fans to grow the game. These changes will increase action and that’s a positive development.

    I grew up loving Ricky Henderson and Tim Raines steal 80+ bases. They could turn a single or a walk into a triple. The game needs more baserunners, more contact, more extra base hits, and more stolen bases (remember Billy Ball?). In addition, make pitchers throw from flat ground like Japan to decrease the pitching advantage and regulate bat weight/composition to ensure those extra hits are not home runs.

    Traditionalists won’t like changes, but the game’s athletes have changed a lot since they lowered the mound and implemented the DH 50 years ago and the game has to change, too.

  • Wobbit

    Just to weigh in:
    1. I find the game too long. Not enough contact… too many long counts. NFL disastrous in this regard.
    2. I like the three batter minimum… see #1.
    3. Bigger base stoo pid. I see no reason.
    4. Shorten commercial breaks by one minute between innings… times 18… there’s 18 minutes saved.
    5. Reduce pitching changes to 3 minutes max… major league athletes can run in from the pen… takes about 1 minute to throw 7 pitches.
    6. Reduce video review to one minute. Don’t wait for plodding umpires to put on headsets. NFL disastrous again on this.
    7. I actually like the extra-innings base runner. Makes the game slightly more interesting… increases strategy.
    These changes won’t change the game much… just make it more appealing to new fans (and to some of the old fans). Can’t wait to hear from the rest of you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 100 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here