Jump to content

Are Baseballs "Juiced" This Season?


TonySoprano

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Maverick Hiker said:

I suspect the players are juiced, rather than the baseballs.  

Remember the last time there was an unexplained surge in HR  like this in MLB.  McGwire, Canseco,, Bonds, Sosa, all of them turned out to be on the juice. As I get older, I see that history often repeats itself.

Here is what I suspect is  happening. The majority of MLB hitters and pitchers are now on PED.  Only it's different  from the old McGwire days,  today's PED don't bulk the players up to look like the Incredible Hulk.  Also the drug makers are so far ahead of the weak testing program in MLB that players will very rarely get caught.   '

The pitchers are throwing faster fastballs, because they are on PED,.  Because the batters are also on PED,  when they do connect ,the ball leaves the bat with greater velocity and often leaves  the park. Hence strikeouts are up due increased velocity of pitchers on PED,  and the HR are up due to batters on PED. 

No, the balls are 100% juiced. The numbers in A,A+ and AA haven't changed, but the numbers in AAA have gone crazy. The only thing different in AAA this year is they switched to the same ball as MLB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

No, the balls are 100% juiced. The numbers in A,A+ and AA haven't changed, but the numbers in AAA have gone crazy. The only thing different in AAA this year is they switched to the same ball as MLB.

I think that's one of the strongest pieces of evidence for it being the primarily the ball.  We have an absolutely clear case where Ball A was used in AAA last year, and with the same basic level of play we have Ball B this year.  This year homers are up 56% in the IL, and 52% in the PCL!

You're going to have a really hard time convincing me that everyone in AAA suddenly started taking undetectable radioactive industrial steroids just this past offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Maverick Hiker said:

That's fine in laying out a theoretical case where PEDs might have an impact.  But there's no evidence.  No failed tests.  No one admitting taking anything.  Mainly a bunch of guys from the early 2000s talking about how it has to be PEDs just like back in their day.

The AAA homer rate means that perhaps PEDs are part of this, but absolutely, without any doubt the ball is a huge piece of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, SteveA said:

Rosenthal mentions in an article in the Athletic that a lot of GMs are telling MLB they need to know, one way or the other, what the plans are going forward for baseballs next year and beyond.  Will it be status quo or will some attempt be made to de-juice them?  They need to determine the hitting environment so they can determine what types of hitters, and pitchers, to pursue as the trading deadline approaches.

A related thing to think about is if they deaden the ball, who is this era's Larry Sheets?  Players will have different reactions to playing with a juiced or un-juiced ball.  It's not going to be across the board and linear.  If we drop back 30% or 40% to a more historically normal home run rate there will be players whose careers crater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

That's fine in laying out a theoretical case where PEDs might have an impact.  But there's no evidence.  No failed tests.  No one admitting taking anything.  Mainly a bunch of guys from the early 2000s talking about how it has to be PEDs just like back in their day.

The AAA homer rate means that perhaps PEDs are part of this, but absolutely, without any doubt the ball is a huge piece of it.

Segui seemed to indicate he keeps in touch with current players and he said easily 60% of todays players are juiced. He also indicated the ball is "hot", but that the main cause of this is players on PED.

The article also explained that players who were caught are usually not caught by MLB's testing program, but they make other mistakes that lead to them being caught.  There are so many ways to get around the MLB PED testing, it's just not working well.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Maverick Hiker said:

Segui seemed to indicate he keeps in touch with current players and he said easily 60% of todays players are juiced. He also indicated the ball is "hot", but that the main cause of this is players on PED.

The article also explained that players who were caught are usually not caught by MLB's testing program, but they make other mistakes that lead to them being caught.  There are so many ways to get around the MLB PED testing, it's just not working well.

 

I think Segui has it backwards.  Some players are on stuff, but I don't see any reason why that would change year-to-year.  But one change in the ball and immediately 50% more homers in AAA.  PEDs are the background, the ball is the overwhelming factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The parameters for the co efficient of restitution of the MLB ball, allow for a variation in flight of up to 10 feet or more. So they can change the ball to increase or decrease the number of HR and still say the ball is the same. They've been doing this for years. Steroids? We don't need no stinkin' steroids!

Related image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

o

 

The AL starting pitcher for tomorrow's All-Star game is Justin Verlander.

Verlander leads the Major Leagues in Home Runs Ceded (26), but he also leads the Major Leagues in WHIP (0.813) and the American League in Hits-Per-9 Innings (5.400) ......... hence, I would presume that that is part of the reason for his very solid ERA of 2.98 (he gives up round-trippers, but not a lot of base-runners.)

 

In regard to the notion of juiced balls, Verlander's Home Run rate of 1.847 is by far the highest of his Major League career.

 

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

 

o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, OFFNY said:

o

 

The AL starting pitcher for tomorrow's All-Star game is Justin Verlander.

Verlander leads the Major Leagues in Home Runs Ceded (26), but he also leads the Major Leagues in WHIP (0.813) and the American League in Hits-Per-9 Innings (5.400) ......... hence, I would presume that that is part of the reason for his very solid ERA of 2.98 (he gives up round-trippers, but not a lot of base-runners.)

 

In regard to the notion of juiced balls, Verlander's Home Run rate of 1.847 is by far the highest of his Major League career.

 

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

 

o

 

 

14 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

 

Verlander has been ridiculously lucky so far.

A 90.7 LOB% is more than 15% over his career average, and his .181 BABIP isn't even remotely sustainable ........ his career number is .281.

 

o

 

Thanks for the additional info.

 

o

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 "It's a f---ing joke," said Verlander, an eight-time All-Star who is starting his second All-Star Game on Tuesday. "Major League Baseball's turning this game into a joke. They own Rawlings, and you've got Manfred up here saying it might be the way they center the pill. They own the f---ing company. If any other $40 billion company bought out a $400 million company and the product changed dramatically, it's not a guess as to what happened. We all know what happened. Manfred the first time he came in, what'd he say? He said we want more offense. All of a sudden he comes in, the balls are juiced? It's not coincidence. We're not idiots."

Asked if he believed the balls were intentionally juiced by the league, Verlander said: "Yes. 100 percent. They've been using juiced balls in the Home Run Derby forever. They know how to do it. It's not coincidence. I find it really hard to believe that Major League Baseball owns Rawlings and just coincidentally the balls become juiced."

Quote

"I hate the way I feel out there," Verlander told ESPN. "No matter who's the batter, I feel like I'm constantly walking a tightrope, because any batter can go opposite field. Any batter can leave with any pitch that's anywhere in the zone. You can't miss barrels anymore. You have to miss bats. There's been multiple times this year where five years ago I'd probably just throw a fastball away. I can't do that. Because you're the 8-, 9-hole hitter and you still can hit an opposite-field homer."

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/27149029/verlander-mlb-juicing-balls-more-offense

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Punchandjudy said:

Are the baseballs juiced? I don’t think that’s the real question.  Rather, I want to know: was juicing the balls intentional? 

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.

Link to comment
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.




  • Posts

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...