Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TonySoprano

Are Baseballs "Juiced" This Season?

Recommended Posts

It's not just the stats that are the issue. The game is just boring to watch now. Homeruns were special things, but now you see 3 or 4 just about every game. If I remember right the Phillies/Mets had something crazy like 13 in a game earlier this year.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Punchandjudy said:

Guess Verlander answered my question above and then some! 

Next question, will MLB change the balls back? Or will they basically do the same thing they did by turning a blind eye to dopers and completely invalidate all the stats that came before.

They have a big dilemma because of the ever-increasing velocity at which pitchers are throwing.   With strikeouts way up, if they don’t juice the ball, runs are going to go down drastically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Home runs are so plentiful (too plentiful?) that teams have stopped running (the stolen base rate is the lowest in 48 years) and pitchers are more willing to walk a batter rather than throw a challenge pitch and risk a home run (walks are the highest in a decade).

 

https://www.si.com/mlb/2019/07/08/cody-bellinger-christian-yelich-mike-trout-home-runs-juiced-ball-mlb-2019-baseball-trends

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I don't get about the whole situation.

I read the article and the quotes from Verlander.  He isn't saying the game is being made a joke.  It's the secrecy by MLB that's the joke.

Rob Manfred or whoever MLB executive says, "we want more offense.  we're making changes to the baseball and here they are".   We have no issue!  I'm not aware of anything illegal about making changes to equipment unless they violate safety laws.  Does it violate something in the collective bargaining agreement?  Why in the world is there a want to make changes to the baseball covert???  It happens over and over again - we had this discussion before!  It makes absolutely no sense.

Stop getting in your own way MLB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, 25 Nuggets said:

This is what I don't get about the whole situation.

I read the article and the quotes from Verlander.  He isn't saying the game is being made a joke.  It's the secrecy by MLB that's the joke.

Rob Manfred or whoever MLB executive says, "we want more offense.  we're making changes to the baseball and here they are".   We have no issue!  I'm not aware of anything illegal about making changes to equipment unless they violate safety laws.  Does it violate something in the collective bargaining agreement?  Why in the world is there a want to make changes to the baseball covert???  It happens over and over again - we had this discussion before!  It makes absolutely no sense.

Stop getting in your own way MLB.

Admitting a deliberate change to the ball would give a lot of ammo to argue that the record books are tainted, something that would be a huge turnoff to traditional fans. Mlb wants to eat cake and have it too, attract casual fans/the youths without alienating core fan base. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the late 1990's and early 2000's when the HR totals shot up, people naively speculated about the baseballs being juiced.  Of course,  it turned out that the players were on steroids and HGH, and that is what caused the HR totals to go up.

In my opinion, the exact same thing is happening now. The HR totals are going up,, and people are naively speculating about the baseballs being juiced.   History is quite simply repeating itself. The players have found ways to get around the testing and  as Segui said in today's USA article, the great majority of MLB players are taking something to improve their performance. (Segui says at least 60% of current MLB players are on PED). 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/verlaju01.shtml

To be talking  about the balls being juiced and Verlander's speculations, I think you are wasting your time on a red herring.  The PED use in MLB is getting out of control, and the results of the games are being distorted by such stats as the HR totals (and strikeouts). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The balls were altered in the late 90s and aughts, in addition to the PEDs.  And the smaller ballparks, and all the other stuff.

This is not a one-or-the-other situation.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Maverick Hiker said:

In the late 1990's and early 2000's when the HR totals shot up, people naively speculated about the baseballs being juiced.  Of course,  it turned out that the players were on steroids and HGH, and that is what caused the HR totals to go up.

In my opinion, the exact same thing is happening now. The HR totals are going up,, and people are naively speculating about the baseballs being juiced.   History is quite simply repeating itself. The players have found ways to get around the testing and  as Segui said in today's USA article, the great majority of MLB players are taking something to improve their performance. (Segui says at least 60% of current MLB players are on PED). 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/verlaju01.shtml

To be talking  about the balls being juiced and Verlander's speculations, I think you are wasting your time on a red herring.  The PED use in MLB is getting out of control, and the results of the games are being distorted by such stats as the HR totals (and strikeouts). 

Players were using PEDs well before the late 90's. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

Admitting a deliberate change to the ball would give a lot of ammo to argue that the record books are tainted, something that would be a huge turnoff to traditional fans. Mlb wants to eat cake and have it too, attract casual fans/the youths without alienating core fan base. 

MLB's got a stick up their ass is what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strikeouts are up and pitchers are getting bigger. I think both batters (more HR) and pitchers (strikeouts going up)  are on PED.

If the baseball being juiced is causing more HR, then how do you explain the larger sized pitchers and the increased strikeout totals? If the ball is juiced then batters would presumably not have to swing as hard,  just make contact, and there would be fewer strikeouts not more.

Also if the ball is juiced and flying off the bat faster, I would expect there would be more incidents of pitchers getting hurt by line drives hit  back up the middle and hitting the pitcher before he could react.  I have not heard of any such increase.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Maverick Hiker said:

In the late 1990's and early 2000's when the HR totals shot up, people naively speculated about the baseballs being juiced.  Of course,  it turned out that the players were on steroids and HGH, and that is what caused the HR totals to go up.

In my opinion, the exact same thing is happening now. The HR totals are going up,, and people are naively speculating about the baseballs being juiced.   History is quite simply repeating itself. The players have found ways to get around the testing and  as Segui said in today's USA article, the great majority of MLB players are taking something to improve their performance. (Segui says at least 60% of current MLB players are on PED). 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/verlaju01.shtml

To be talking  about the balls being juiced and Verlander's speculations, I think you are wasting your time on a red herring.  The PED use in MLB is getting out of control, and the results of the games are being distorted by such stats as the HR totals (and strikeouts). 

Getting out of hand? You do realize that just about everyone was on amphetamines in the 60's and 70's, right? Guys were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses as well as growth hormones. Amphetamines have been around since the mid 1800's and steroids since the mid 1930's. Cocaine was legal in the early 1900's as well. This delusion that PED's just came out of nowhere in the 90's has to go. The drugs just got better in the 90's, that's it. The record books have been tainted for a very long time. I would say it's likely that over 75% of guys in there used PEDs. Aaron did. Mays did. Mantle did. Pretty much everybody did back then.

Heck, Pud Galvin showed in 1889 that even back then, guys were willing to inject dubious substances into their body to try to extend their careers. Guys will do anything to get to MLB and stay there as long as they can. It's not going to change. Professional sports without PEDs would likely be extremely boring. Such a product has never, ever existed and likely never will and I don't know how anyone can assume that it would be a good product much less a better one.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Players were using PEDs well before the late 90's. 

I know, you love to beat the amphetamine drum, and of course you are factually correct.

But the specific mode of PED usage that blew up in the 90s was the use of PEDs that allowed people to recover more quickly from weight training so they could do more extreme weight training and build up previously unheard of strength.

And the fact is, until the 80s, there were very few guys in MLB who actually did any serious weightlifting.   It was considered something that guys in other sports did, but baseball players didn't.   It was feared, it turned out incorrectly, that muscle bulk would decrease bat speed.   That stigma didn't start disappearing until the 80s.   There were very few players who lifted seriously before that time.

You can argue moral equivalency all you want, but I think most fans see a difference between something that allows you to bulk up until your veins are popping out and your head is swollen, and something that is basically just super-coffee that helps you be more alert during a game after you were out partying until 4am the night before.

And the steroid explosion of the 90s was basically a new phenomenon because significant weightlifting/bodybuilding was for the most part considered (mistakenly) something ballplayers shouldn't do, until there was a significant attitude change beginning in the 80s.   

  • Upvote 2
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steroids were being used before the 90's.

I find it hilarious that some folks only have an issue with PEDs when they reached a certain level of efficiency.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sessh said:

Getting out of hand? You do realize that just about everyone was on amphetamines in the 60's and 70's, right? Guys were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses as well as growth hormones. Amphetamines have been around since the mid 1800's and steroids since the mid 1930's. Cocaine was legal in the early 1900's as well. This delusion that PED's just came out of nowhere in the 90's has to go. The drugs just got better in the 90's, that's it. The record books have been tainted for a very long time. I would say it's likely that over 75% of guys in there used PEDs. Aaron did. Mays did. Mantle did. Pretty much everybody did back then.

Heck, Pud Galvin showed in 1889 that even back then, guys were willing to inject dubious substances into their body to try to extend their careers. Guys will do anything to get to MLB and stay there as long as they can. It's not going to change. Professional sports without PEDs would likely be extremely boring. Such a product has never, ever existed and likely never will and I don't know how anyone can assume that it would be a good product much less a better one.

Mantle, Mays, and Aaron did not use PEDs.]

 I do not consider amphetamines PED, they did not drastically improve a players abilities, the way that HGH and steroids can. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Maverick Hiker said:

Mantle, Mays, and Aaron did not use PEDs.]

 I do not consider amphetamines PED, they did not drastically improve a players abilities, the way that HGH and steroids can. 

What proof  do you offer that the effects of amphetamines are of a smaller impact?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






×
×
  • Create New...