Rob Manfred Floats Lead Trial Balloon with ‘Golden At-Bat’ Farce

Long envious of the headline-grabbing nature of other major sports’ accelerated free agency periods, MLB commissioner Rob Manfred recently sought to generate some of his own hype. But just like so many other times he’s been the center of attention, this latest attempt at finding ways to broaden baseball’s appeal to non-baseball fans went over like a lead balloon. Though this baffling idea was first mentioned in late October, it gained a good bit of online notoriety thanks to a Jayson Stark column in The Athletic.

“There are a variety of (rule change ideas) that are being talked about out there,” Manfred told John Ourand on The Varsity podcast. “One of them — there was a little buzz around it at an owners’ meeting — was the idea of a Golden At-Bat.”

For those of you who are still blissfully unaware of this batshit insane concept, it would give the opportunity for teams to choose one at-bat in every game to put their best hitter at the plate even if it wasn’t his turn in the lineup. Let’s say the Cubs are in a tie game with the Manfred Man on second and one out in the bottom of the 10th. They could call on Juan Soto to bat for Isaac Paredes, thus improving their chances for a game-winning hit.

Wait, what’s that? Sorry folks, I’m being informed that the player has to be someone who’s actually on the roster and that the Cubs can’t afford Soto. Or any other superstar, for that matter. Alright, enough about that.

Baseball officials have remained mum on the exact details of how this whole thing would work and whether there are plans to test it with anyone other than the Savannah Bananas, but Stark laid out some possibilities. The only possible wrinkle to this I find even the least bit intriguing is the idea that a guy could bat twice in a row between his regular and Golden ABs, which is fun even though it’s still dumb as hell.

Wait, here’s a little twist on that concept. Say Matt Shaw — who will be the Cubs’ best hitter by the time this rule is implemented — is due up second but is selected for a Golden At-Bat to lead off an inning. He hits a single, but the Cubs can use a pinch runner because Shaw is otherwise still in the lineup. Now Shaw hits a two-run homer to drive himself in twice (sort of).

Okay, seriously, this is such a dumb idea that the only way I could even provide it with moderate support is to see foolproof automated ball-strike and check-swing systems implemented as well. Even that wouldn’t be enough for me to get behind an idea that would have the exact opposite effect as what MLB is trying to achieve.

As cool as it is to see Soto or Shohei Ohtani hit a game-altering homer in a big situation, it’s even cooler when an unexpected author puts his signature in the history books. Maybe it means the same if Gary Sheffield or Moises Alou is at the plate in the 1997 World Series, but Edgar Renteria got the job done. If Graig Nettles or Reggie Jackson got a Golden AB, the people of Boston wouldn’t be cursing the existence of Bucky F—in’ Dent to this day.

This kind of novelty schtick is what happens when a league that has done a terrible job of marketing its star players suddenly overcorrects and turns into MTV Rock ‘n Jock. Why not give added runs to homers hit by players making $30 million AAV or higher? Or maybe a pitcher has to stop throwing a certain pitch type once he reaches a specified number of strikeouts.

Rather than looking at what it means to put the bat in a superstar’s hands more frequently, I’m focused on what it means to take the bat out of a role-player’s hands. Not only does it blunt the game’s human element, but it alters strategy in a wholly inorganic way. While I know this might sound disingenuous coming from someone who just advocated for lessening umpires’ influence — and who is fine with the universal DH — I hate this idea so much.

Now, ask me about the idea of a penalty kick/shot-style homer-off once the game goes past the 13th inning and you might get my approval.