Analytics, universal DH are dragging down baseball

Yappi

Yappi

Go Buckeyes
What Baseball Has Done to Baseball, in 25 words or fewer:

The winner is reader John Fleming, who submitted, “It is really sad seeing one entire side of the infield open while a .188 hitter tries to hit a home run.”

Sad, pathetic, self-destructive, mindless, idiotic, senseless, ludicrous. Take your pick, collect them all, trade ’em with your friends.
Click to expand...
nypost.com

Analytics, universal DH are dragging down baseball

The great pity of it all is that this never had to be.
nypost.com nypost.com

I don't necessarily agree with everything in the article but the bolded is spot on.
 
 
This can be remedied so easily. Stop giving big contracts to guys who hit .220 but hit 35+ home runs. Much like the NBA's over stressing the triple double, baseball's home runs are not a good indicator of success.
Baseball needs to overhaul their salary structure. Start paying big money for guys who hit .300, who get on base and don't make outs.
 
It’s no secret: Ball go far, team go far. It’s not pretty to watch, but it’s just the reality of what wins games. Just look at the team home run totals and team batting average totals, and tell me which is a bigger indicator of team success.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
 

Attachments

  • 831C45E5-B74C-4C40-A5D5-E119D7075D8D.png
    831C45E5-B74C-4C40-A5D5-E119D7075D8D.png
    402.4 KB · Views: 133
  • ABCDEAC8-518E-4C6F-8BFA-E0C2E7A6091D.png
    ABCDEAC8-518E-4C6F-8BFA-E0C2E7A6091D.png
    393 KB · Views: 129
  • A69F1BA5-B214-45E5-B6DD-C9940C3E01C4.png
    A69F1BA5-B214-45E5-B6DD-C9940C3E01C4.png
    404.1 KB · Views: 128
As you can see from the attachments on my prior post, the first 8 teams on the home run leaderboard are all playoff teams or just a game or two out (Milwaukee). And you’ve got 3 other playoff teams in the top half or midpoint of the home run field.

The only playoff teams in the bottom third of the home run list are Tampa Bay and San Diego. And that’s no surprise since both teams are carried by pitching and both have missed a batting star for extended time (Franco and Tatis). It’s no surprise the Padres totally overhauled their offense at the deadline to try to fix the problem.

As shown in the attachment, there are several teams in the top half of the batting average list who have been massive disappointments or aren’t even close to being a playoff team.

The White Sox (my team) are the perfect case study. They allegedly have all these power hitters — Abreu, Jimenez, Robert, Vaughn, Sheets, Grandal, even Anderson and Moncada. But the sweetie hitting coach who infamously said “F the home run” has turned them mostly into singles hitters. As a result, they have the fifth best batting average but fifth fewest home runs. The result? They are the most disappointing team in baseball, scuffling around .500 all year with a moribund offense and struggling to make the playoffs in a terrible division.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
 
I was coming out of college when Bill James’ original Baseball Abstract was published. He‘s mentioned in the Moneyball scene near the end when Billy Beane meets with the Red Sox GM at Fenway. Fascinatingly different look at baseball…that began the demise base stealing and bunting. The stats didn’t back them up.

While in college, I had a friend who was regularly writing to the Pirates with analytic material…they used it and encouraged him to keep writing them…and he did.

Analytics are merely pieces of information. The author of this article criticizes analytics because the game isn’t as enjoyable to watch. I think he’s right. He is wrong if he‘s asserting that analytics lead to less W’s. Analytics gives us less bat on ball, more K’s, less action in the field.

The game needs to overcome the Mike Hargrove influence…you get in the batter’s box, you stay there. Make a rule…one step out per at bat (unless there’s a valid reason); OR 2-3 step outs per inning per team. Games under 2 hours were not uncommon during the 60’s/70’s.
 
Last edited:
Move the mound back, lower it, or both.

Not long ago a 95 mph fastball put a guy in the top percentile of the league and they were more or less always dominant. Now 95 is practically expected and 97-98 gets you into the conversation for an elite fastball. Pitchers simply have too much of an advantage with velocity over hitters. 30-35 years ago the average starting pitcher was around 91-92 and there were a lot more control guys around that maxed out in the upper 80s. (Not surprisingly, it was also the era of the juiced batter cranking homers at unprecedented rates, which undoubtedly has played a role in where we are today). In the golden age of baseball, high 80s would've been a big deal; mythical Walter Johnson, who wowed everyone at the time, is estimated to have only thrown around 88 mph - puts that era into a different perspective, IMO. Bob Feller threw in the upper 90s in an era where 90 would've spun a batter around like a Looney Tunes character. Unsurprisingly he was nearly unhittable, and is so considered one of the greatest of all time. Would he be if he played today? Maybe, maybe not. Certainly a big part of his advantage was how unusually hard he threw.

It's a lot easier to sit on a pitch or pick your spot on the field when you have the time to do so. Without a change to the diamond, we're going to be left with hitters swinging for the fences because it's all most of the them can do to be significantly productive.

On the flip side, the emphasis on throwing so hard is wreaking havoc on arms. Tommy John is more or less becoming expected, and guys are now being pulled after 80 pitches. Making it through 6 seems like a big deal for a starter these days.

None of this seems sustainable, and it's honestly making baseball suck.
 
Last edited:
What does getting rid of the shift help? Would it help? Are you for it?

How do the .300 hitters do it with the shift. Are they just great athletes?
 
MitSulHer said:
What does getting rid of the shift help? Would it help? Are you for it?

How do the .300 hitters do it with the shift. Are they just great athletes?
Click to expand...
I’m against getting rid of the shift. What I am for is reducing major league pitching staffs to 11 or 12 maximum so it returns the emphasis to starting pitchers who need to go deeper into games instead of giving max torque every pitch and being done after 5 innings.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
 
AEW Champion said:
I’m against getting rid of the shift. What I am for is reducing major league pitching staffs to 11 or 12 maximum so it returns the emphasis to starting pitchers who need to go deeper into games instead of giving max torque every pitch and being done after 5 innings.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
Click to expand...

I think we are way more likely to see the shift banned than we are to seeing smaller pitching staffs, less jobs for major leaguers, and more work for starting pitchers.

Not that i dont agree w you.
 
.300 hitters? I'd be surprised if there were more than a dozen in all of MLB, and that's now with the DH in the NL.
 
AEW Champion said:
It’s no secret: Ball go far, team go far. It’s not pretty to watch, but it’s just the reality of what wins games. Just look at the team home run totals and team batting average totals, and tell me which is a bigger indicator of team success.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
Click to expand...
If each team is trying to produce HR hitters, it should be no surprise the least successful would be the worst teams.

What I would like to see is a good 70s-90s team with great all-around hitters play a game against the HR hitting clubs of today. Maybe the HR hitting clubs are better but just maybe the all-around teams would be better. MLB is too afraid to find out right now because the system is totally geared towards producing HR hitters and not promoting great contact hitters.
 
Crusaders said:
.300 hitters? I'd be surprised if there were more than a dozen in all of MLB, and that's now with the DH in the NL.
Click to expand...
It’s like the ‘60’s before they lowered the mound.

.250 meant you were a pretty good hitter, .275 or better you were one of the best.
 
Changes for next year:

I read through the article quickly, so from memory..........2 Pitch clocks (one with runners on, one without), shift is banned, no infielders positioned on the outfield grass, Batter must be in the box with at least 8 seconds remaining on the clock. First, Second, and Third bases are being enlarged from 15 inches square to 18 (player safety), Home Plate remains the same.

MLB claims that they've experimented with most of these for the past 3 years in the minors, and the average time of game has dropped by 30 minutes or so. That's good!

The article didn't explain what the penalties are for violating the new rules.........does anybody here know?
 
I’m not sure, but I’d assume the first time-clock violation for a pitcher would be a warning and then they’d probably assess a ball to the count for any subsequent violation by that pitcher. I’d assume the same for a hitter except it would be a strike assessed to the count.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
 
Impalaman said:
Not having a DH would be like if the NFL said that every offensive lineman must carry the ball .
Click to expand...
Since baseball is going "radical" how about this for an idea. Like football, have an offensive and defensive unit. Guys that only bat, and guys that only field. Imagine the athletes you'd be able to put on the field defensively, and the offense would look like a beer league softball lineup, all #4 hitters.
 
CatAlum said:
I was coming out of college when Bill James’ original Baseball Abstract was published. He‘s mentioned in the Moneyball scene near the end when Billy Beane meets with the Red Sox GM at Fenway. Fascinatingly different look at baseball…that began the demise base stealing and bunting. The stats didn’t back them up.

While in college, I had a friend who was regularly writing to the Pirates with analytic material…they used it and encouraged him to keep writing them…and he did.

Analytics are merely pieces of information. The author of this article criticizes analytics because the game isn’t as enjoyable to watch. I think he’s right. He is wrong if he‘s asserting that analytics lead to less W’s. Analytics gives us less bat on ball, more K’s, less action in the field.

The game needs to overcome the Mike Hargrove influence…you get in the batter’s box, you stay there. Make a rule…one step out per at bat (unless there’s a valid reason); OR 2-3 step outs per inning per team. Games under 2 hours were not uncommon during the 60’s/70’s.
Click to expand...
There is currently rules in place to keep the pace of play moving. Umpires simply do not enforce them.
 
Gardens35 said:
Changes for next year:

I read through the article quickly, so from memory..........2 Pitch clocks (one with runners on, one without), shift is banned, no infielders positioned on the outfield grass, Batter must be in the box with at least 8 seconds remaining on the clock. First, Second, and Third bases are being enlarged from 15 inches square to 18 (player safety), Home Plate remains the same.

MLB claims that they've experimented with most of these for the past 3 years in the minors, and the average time of game has dropped by 30 minutes or so. That's good!

The article didn't explain what the penalties are for violating the new rules.........does anybody here know?
Click to expand...
Imagine this, late game, bases loaded 3-2 count. batter has been warned for excessive time, pitcher has been warned for excessive time. Do you honestly think baseball is going to allow an umpire to call a clock violation and award a team with a run or a team with an out? It's my whole claim on these shenanigans. Nothing is going to happen. In the minors they can make it happen because those games are not as critical, the players don't make the money to force any rules. It's complete nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top