Jon Heyman whiffed on the “baseball is back” report last week, but he’s usually right more than he’s wrong, and this tidbit seems worthy of sharing:

Baseball purists seem to hate this rule, which is certainly not traditionalist. That’s the main “con” here; the idea that it’s a totally foreign concept and seems kind of gimmicky, for lack of a better word.

Proponents say it puts the kibosh on these lengthy 14-inning games and saves bullpen arms at the same time, which prevents us from having to go to Wilson Valdez in the 19th. That made for a cool story back then, but the Phils had to burn through seven relievers before they got to that point, and that was on top of Roy Halladay (RIP) going seven innings prior to Michael Stutes’ introduction.

The sticking point perhaps is the the tight schedule that Heyman mentions. If we’re going to be playing every day and condensing the calendar, then we’re gonna run these guys ragged if we have games going 13, 14, or 15 innings and lasting five or six hours. The rule seems weird on the surface, but let’s see it in action and decide if we truly hate it or actually don’t mind it.