Do you like Expanded Rosters

Do you like Expanded Rosters

  • Yes, keep it.

  • No, needs to be scratched or changed.


Results are only viewable after voting.

Filthy Dangles

Registered User*
Oct 23, 2014
28,356
39,703
i.e the 25 man roster becoming the 40 man roster. This starts at midnight tonight, the same deadline for non-waiver players being eligible for postseason.

There are arguments for and against it. Some against it are that it leads to excessive bullpenning and slowing the games down with so many pitching changes now that you can carry 40 guys on the roster. And that games can be managed like this for the most meaningful ones down the stretch.

An argument for it is prospects can get some playing time and players can accrue service time.
 

bleedblue1223

Registered User
Jan 21, 2011
51,762
14,675
Yes, provides time to players that otherwise wouldn't get any. Maybe they could put some restrictions to make the added relievers not as bad, but in general, I like expanding the rosters.
 

tony d

Registered User
Jun 23, 2007
76,590
4,550
Behind A Tree
I like it. Allows players to rest up for the playoffs. Also gives some players some late season action in preparation for the next season.
 

SJSharksfan39

Registered User
Oct 11, 2008
27,290
5,376
San Jose, CA
I like the expanded rosters, but I think it should be the teams job to set rosters for each series in September. So basically it's a combination of both. You can have the expanded roster, but they still need to be the same as any other month in the season so we don't lengthen games unnecessarily.
 

AtlantaWhaler

Thrash/Preds/Sabres
Jul 3, 2009
19,583
2,755
I like it, but the jump from 25 to 40 is a bit much. Maybe 32? Let’s you add some pen and a couple bats.
 

Filthy Dangles

Registered User*
Oct 23, 2014
28,356
39,703
Matty V had a pretty good solution on MLBN, imo. Keep it so you can carry 40 on the active roster (with all of those 40 accruing big league time) but only say 28-29 can be active on any given night which should reduce bullpenning and pace of play issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Winger98

Cheese Wagstaff

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
1,418
976
I hate how many teams are going with twelve position players and thirteen pitchers nowadays. A three man bench (or four in the NL) doesn’t leave room for any interesting late game moves. I prefer 40 man rosters since it’s at least some tactical options back in the game even if it’s kind of silly to change the rules one month a year.

It seems like baseball teams are committed to carrying more and more pitchers and I really feel like we’re at the point where MLB needs to do seomthing. 25 man roster for a three game series (26 for a four game series) is my vote. Let teams not roster a couple starters and hope they use at least one of the spots on an extra bench player. Do that then maybe do like 30 man active rosters for September series and I think it’s better both ways than what we currently have.
 

Quid Pro Clowe

Registered User
Dec 28, 2008
52,293
9,161
530
Not a fan because it is too much of a significant jump in roster spots. It's like a completely different set of rules for the last month of the season compared to the first 5.

If the owners really want to evaluate talent, let them increase the roster by 5. Odds are neither good teams or bad teams have 15 major-league ready prospects waiting in the wings for their chance. Most teams only expand their roster by a handful, anyway.
 

Big Poppa Puck

HF's Villain
Dec 8, 2009
20,530
932
D-Boss' Dungeon
Matty V had a pretty good solution on MLBN, imo. Keep it so you can carry 40 on the active roster (with all of those 40 accruing big league time) but only say 28-29 can be active on any given night which should reduce bullpenning and pace of play issues.

This is a decent solution. Or at least set a maximum for amount of Pitchers you can have active.
 

Vamos Rafa

Registered User
Jan 11, 2010
18,342
1,526
Armenia, California
It gives playoff teams additional options for their playoff roster instead of sticking with struggling players they couldn't get rid of during the regular season especially if a September call-up does well in that one month.
 

NJDevs26

Once upon a time...
Mar 21, 2007
67,117
31,153
The short answer is no, I agree with those who've said if you want to expand the rosters that's fine but you can't have everyone active for each game.

And also in this day and age it doesn't really give top prospects many more at bats and the pitchers that get called up usually are just coming out of the pen. There's no incentive for noncontenders to bring up their prospects now that it's become such a sum zero financial equation to keeping them down (Eloy, Vlad) or 40-man roster considerations get taken into account (Peter Alonso), and contenders usually have more proven options with a few exceptions. All the expanded rosters do is increase the managers' tit for tat bullpenning versus matchup AB's moves.
 

JWK

Report Spam @JWK on Twitter Plz
Mar 27, 2010
21,084
7,366
303
Matty V had a pretty good solution on MLBN, imo. Keep it so you can carry 40 on the active roster (with all of those 40 accruing big league time) but only say 28-29 can be active on any given night which should reduce bullpenning and pace of play issues.
Would be better if rosters are set before each series, instead of each game. That way, you get at least 3~4 SPs locked instead of 1 which gives you less flexibility each game.
 

MurrayBannerman

I post about baseball on a hockey forum
Feb 18, 2012
34,493
659
CHI
Matty V had a pretty good solution on MLBN, imo. Keep it so you can carry 40 on the active roster (with all of those 40 accruing big league time) but only say 28-29 can be active on any given night which should reduce bullpenning and pace of play issues.
I like this. This is very much fine.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,367
83,458
Vancouver, BC
I love extra position players and resulting pinch hitters, pinch runners, and extra strategy.

I hate seeing the game slowed down by each team using 6 relief pitchers every night.

Would like a rule that limited teams to a maximum of 1 pitcher change per inning.
 

Fish on The Sand

Untouchable
Feb 28, 2002
60,203
1,904
Canada
I love extra position players and resulting pinch hitters, pinch runners, and extra strategy.

I hate seeing the game slowed down by each team using 6 relief pitchers every night.

Would like a rule that limited teams to a maximum of 1 pitcher change per inning.
A rule change that requires pitchers to face a minimum of 2-3 batters before being replaced would probably speed games up by at least 15 minutes and its such a simple change.

It would be the death of the LOOGY but the LOOGY has been bad for baseball imo. Otherwise bad pitcher who can only face hitters from one side of the plate would be used very sparingly, especially since they can't be removed from the game when a pinch hitter comes in. Would a manager throw out some mediocre lefty knowing he may have to face 2 or 3 right handed hitters?
 

AdmiralsFan24

Registered User
Mar 22, 2011
14,979
3,896
Wisconsin
I don't even mind expanding the roster by a few players per game. It's a long season and you can give regulars a break every now and then but having 10 pitching changes a game because you called up 8 pitchers is over the top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Machinehead

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,276
109,803
NYC
I like the idea of it, but there needs to be some restrictions.

Managers start making pitching changes every other batter and the commercial breaks kill me.
 

KevFu

Registered User
May 22, 2009
9,007
3,239
Phoenix from Rochester via New Orleans
Len Kasper pretty much said the same thing... 40 man roster is fine, but keep the game day roster at 25

Yeah, I'd say 40-man up, 25- active 15 scratches every game.... 4 of your starting pitchers are going to be scratched each day, so that gives everyone four extra roster spots for the month. Teams out of the race can rotate different September Call-Ups into those spots and evaluate some players.

It doesn't reduce playing time for the SCUs, because the playing time is always doled out by INNINGS and AT-BATS. The only difference between giving six SCU pitchers one out each over three games (1.0 IP each) or giving two guys an inning each day (1.0 IP each) is whether or not the fans have to sit through four mid-inning commercial breaks or not.

And it's important to consider what this does to pennant races. Guys who didn't play from April through August, and won't play in October are playing a role in who makes the playoffs.

They created this rule a LONG TIME AGO. There was no wild card and with huge divisions, very few teams were still playing for something. Before the wild card, only four teams had ever entered September down 6.0 games and rallied to make the playoffs. Even with the Wild Card, only two more teams have. So if that's the line...

An average of 78% of the league was out of it in September in the One League Era.
An average of 70% was out of it in the Divisional Era
Now only 44% enter September not within 6.5 of the division or wild card.

On Sept. 1, 1993, only SF/ATL were in the NL pennant race, (86% toast). On Sept. 15, 2018, only five teams weren't within 6.5 games (33% toast).

This rule needs a tweak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Otto

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->