Left field at OPACY going through a big change

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Move the mound back 6 inches?  12 inches.   Sounds small but it probably wouldn't take much.    Athletes get bigger faster, more powerful, each generation.   Now, I'm pretty sure that's a fact!

Someone mentioned raising the basketball rim.  It sounds sacreligeous (sp?) but it makes all the sense in the world.  

Careful you might say something complimentary toward me by mistake. 

[RZNJ]

9 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Careful you might say something complimentary toward me by mistake. 

I'm only human.  I'm entitled to a mistake now and then.

[Can_of_corn]

11 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I'm only human.  I'm entitled to a mistake now and then.

 

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, RZNJ said:

Move the mound back 6 inches?  12 inches.   Sounds small but it probably wouldn't take much.    Athletes get bigger faster, more powerful, each generation.   Now, I'm pretty sure that's a fact!

Someone mentioned raising the basketball rim.  It sounds sacreligeous (sp?) but it makes all the sense in the world.  

I am not a purist, but at the same time I hate messing with sacred dimensions.  It does make sense though.  

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

I am not a purist, but at the same time I hate messing with sacred dimensions.  It does make sense though.  

As I said earlier, they've been moving the pins further back in golf this whole time. 

I'm not sure that moving the mound is the best way, I'd start with something more reversible, deadening the ball.  

[Moose Milligan]

17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

As I said earlier, they've been moving the pins further back in golf this whole time. 

I'm not sure that moving the mound is the best way, I'd start with something more reversible, deadening the ball.  

Pins in golf, when every hole is a different shape and length, is a bit of false equivalency.  Every baseball field has different dimensions at the walls but the dimensions inside the diamond are the same.  

I'd agree with deadening the ball, but I don't think that would ever happen.  I mean, for diehards like us, we're showing up no matter what.  But MLB, I think, feels that it needs to have high scoring games in order to keep the casual fan interested. 

I've said it before, but I'll say it again here...MLB wants its cake but wants to eat it, too.  They want high scoring games which inherently take longer to play but they want to shorten the time of the game so they're going to do things like limit mound visits, pitching change rules, etc.  

 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

Pins in golf, when every hole is a different shape and length, is a bit of false equivalency.  Every baseball field has different dimensions at the walls but the dimensions inside the diamond are the same.  

I'd agree with deadening the ball, but I don't think that would ever happen.  I mean, for diehards like us, we're showing up no matter what.  But MLB, I think, feels that it needs to have high scoring games in order to keep the casual fan interested. 

I've said it before, but I'll say it again here...MLB wants its cake but wants to eat it, too.  They want high scoring games which inherently take longer to play but they want to shorten the time of the game so they're going to do things like limit mound visits, pitching change rules, etc.  

 

It's more than just moving pins, they've been altering the total yardage of the courses.

"Tiger proofing" is what they used to call it.

From 2011 talking about Augusta. 

Quote

More yardage was added before the 2006 tournament, and today the course measures 7,435 yards -- or some 500 yards longer than 10 years ago.

 

[ExileAngelos]

2 hours ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

The game is a lot more boring now and despite what Manfred might think more home run does not equal more excitement. Strikeout, walk or home run has gotten real old for me. 

Would love to see a team like the 80's Cardinals make a comeback, but I also understand at the same time it's not going to happen. Analytics won't allow it and the astroturf fields that rewarded speed are gone now. Maybe expanding the dimensions of ballparks would eventually encourage teams to value hitters who put the ball in play. 

That Delmon Young hit is not nearly as exciting if it were hit out of the park.  Ball was IN PLAY and we all watched with exhilaration as JJ Hardy rounded third and slid into home plate just ahead of the throw.  

[RZNJ]

57 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I am not a purist, but at the same time I hate messing with sacred dimensions.  It does make sense though.  

60 feet 6 inches.  I realize it's sacred to an extent but how random is 60 feet 6 inches?

[RZNJ]

3 minutes ago, ExileAngelos said:

That Delmon Young hit is not nearly as exciting if it were hit out of the park.  Ball was IN PLAY and we all watched with exhilaration as JJ Hardy rounded third and slid into home plate just ahead of the throw.  

I agree to some extent.  A triple or inside the park homer is more exciting than an over the fence homer probably but I bet the crowd wouldn't have been any less loud if it had been an actual homer.   The suspense lasts a lot longer on the triple.

[Moose Milligan]

2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

60 feet 6 inches.  I realize it's sacred to an extent but how random is 60 feet 6 inches?

This is some @DrungoHazewood type **** but IIRC, they really wanted it to be 66 feet and there was an error somewhere along the way.  Someone, in a Spinal Tap moment, got the dimensions wrong.  

This article says that's not true, https://www.mlb.com/news/why-is-the-mound-60-ft-6-inches-away

It's a really long read, though.  Not gonna lie, I lost interest.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, RZNJ said:

I agree to some extent.  A triple or inside the park homer is more exciting than an over the fence homer probably but I bet the crowd wouldn't have been any less loud if it had been an actual homer.   The suspense lasts a lot longer on the triple.

 

6 minutes ago, ExileAngelos said:

That Delmon Young hit is not nearly as exciting if it were hit out of the park.  Ball was IN PLAY and we all watched with exhilaration as JJ Hardy rounded third and slid into home plate just ahead of the throw.  

I don't think that anyone has ever seen a game winning home run and said, man that was cool and all but what if it had been a double instead?  Wouldn't that have been even better?

 

I'm not arguing that the double was the more exciting play, but I will argue that the fact that it was a double and not a HR doesn't help the game.  No one is going to buy a ticket or tune into a broadcast because that ball didn't go over the wall.

I just checked, you can't even by a Delmon Young Double hat.

Or a wife beater...which would be a lot more fitting for Delmon....

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

This is some @DrungoHazewood type **** but IIRC, they really wanted it to be 66 feet and there was an error somewhere along the way.  Someone, in a Spinal Tap moment, got the dimensions wrong.  

This article says that's not true, https://www.mlb.com/news/why-is-the-mound-60-ft-6-inches-away

It's a really long read, though.  Not gonna lie, I lost interest.

Sweet graphics tho.

[Frobby]

4 hours ago, jabba72 said:

OOTPB 19, which has park ratings for every stadium list HR's for Camden Yards to be 1.060 for RHB and 1.150 for LHB. Which means the Orioles right field is still extreme to use Elias words. 1.000 in the game is average. 

My source is Statcast.  https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/leaderboard/statcast-park-factors?type=year&year=2021&batSide=L&stat=index_wOBA&condition=All&rolling=

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, RZNJ said:

Move the mound back 6 inches?  12 inches.   Sounds small but it probably wouldn't take much.  

The Atlantic League did it for half of last season and the feedback from the players was that it didn’t make much difference.   They’re dropping the experiment.   Dropping robo-umps too.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/33059011/atlantic-league-ends-trials-61-foot-mounds-robo-umps-balls-strikes