Moving the fences back to 600 feet would all but eliminate the over the fence home run, but would be a boon to perhaps the most exciting play in baseball, the inside the park home run. "Shift" analysts could position an infielder or two in the wide open spaces to curb this eventuality.
Teams, however, would be forced to lower the price of those bleacher seats in the next county.
Lowering the mound is certainly a more doable modification, and could also be repeated as needed until the pitchers were literally standing in a hole to pitch.
The ball itself need not be deadened to prewar specs, but could it not be infected with a virus of some sort that made it a bit more mushy in the core. The diameter and weight could remain the same.
And finally how to handle the epidemic of "Tommy John" surgery. One suggestion would be to require rehabbed Tommy Johners to get 4 outs/half inning rather than three, and begin an early education program in elementary school to teach little leaguers sound pitching mechanics and techniques to avoid the strain on their elbows that would predispose them to become a Tommy Johnner later in life in their early twenties.
Rule or equipment changes always have consequences, both intended and unintended. Baseball has been tweaked many times in the past and will continue to be tweaked going forward. The overall balance of the game between pitching and hitting has remained relatively constant, but seems to be heading away from the balance and equilibrium. Some ideas expressed in this thread are more reasonable than others and I doubt if the powers that be on the rules committee are getting their input from Net54. Let's, at least, hope they are not.
