Can anyone hit the #$%&! dang ball.....?

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I don't know how you cut down on strikeouts without moving the mound back. 

Well, I guess there are less direct ways like limiting teams to seven or eight pitchers on the roster and strictly limiting callups and demotions to the minors.  But I'm not sure there's any appetite for that, since limiting to 13 pitchers was not wildly popular.

Or (and you knew this was coming) you could just revert to 1860s rules, which banned overhand and most sidearm pitching and forced pitchers to keep a stiff arm and both feet on the ground while delivering the ball.  In the early 1870s there were about 0.75 strikeouts per game.

It seems a lot more straightforward and less controversial to just set the pitcher's plate at 63' 6".  When they moved the pitching distance back in 1893 strikeouts fell by about 30%.

You have to limit the advantage of power in some way if you are going to curb strikeouts.

If you take the strikeout away from the pitcher you will see an increase in walks and homeruns.

Is that a better game?

If you deaden the ball it might encourage hitters to switch to an approach that is more about putting the ball in play and less about putting the ball into the stands.

[DrungoHazewood]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You have to limit the advantage of power in some way if you are going to curb strikeouts.

If you take the strikeout away from the pitcher you will see an increase in walks and homeruns.

Is that a better game?

If you deaden the ball it might encourage hitters to switch to an approach that is more about putting the ball in play and less about putting the ball into the stands.

Maybe, and even if that happens it'll take a long time.  You saw Chris Davis and all the other sluggers who won't bunt against a wide open left side of the infield.  You think large numbers of players who've been successful and gotten rich pulling the ball 425' will switch to a different approach?  They won't.  They'll just eventually be replaced by others with different abilities. 

And don't underestimate baseball's will to hit homers.  They might just start recruiting more Walter Youngs and Calvin Pickerings who can hit a dead ball 425'.

Just move the mound back.  It'll take the grounds crew two hours.  And the Orioles have proven it's not impossible to move the fences back, too.

[Can_of_corn]

8 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Maybe, and even if that happens it'll take a long time.  You saw Chris Davis and all the other sluggers who won't bunt against a wide open left side of the infield.  You think large numbers of players who've been successful and gotten rich pulling the ball 425' will switch to a different approach?  They won't.  They'll just eventually be replaced by others with different abilities. 

And don't underestimate baseball's will to hit homers.  They might just start recruiting more Walter Youngs and Calvin Pickerings who can hit a dead ball 425'.

Just move the mound back.  It'll take the grounds crew two hours.  And the Orioles have proven it's not impossible to move the fences back, too.

Walks are even less interesting than strikeouts.

Watching an overmatched pitcher nibbling is even less enjoyable than watching an overmatched hitter flailing at pitches.

Just moving the mound back and calling it a day is lazy.

[oldfan]

Neuse, for the A's today got three hits by taking pitches on the outer half to right field, pretty simple approach. Of course the O's helped out by pitching him away and playing Odor over by second base.

[DrungoHazewood]

14 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Walks are even less interesting than strikeouts.

Watching an overmatched pitcher nibbling is even less enjoyable than watching an overmatched hitter flailing at pitches.

Just moving the mound back and calling it a day is lazy.

I don't think we can expect a lot more nibbling and walks.  For most of baseball history strikeouts were far lower than today but the range of walks per game has been constrained to 2.24-4.04 for 130 years.  Eyeballing the list, it looks like about 90% of seasons have been between 2.8 and 3.8. 

When the current distance was established in 1893 strikeouts fell by a third but walks only went from 3.4 to 3.9, and within five years were back under 3.0.  And they stayed in that neighborhood for half a century.

For almost all of history pitchers struck out 3, 4, 5 men per nine and baseball was the most popular sport in the country. Are today's fans so in love with wall-to-wall strikeouts that they're going to tune out if we return to something like historically normal baseball?  I doubt moving the mound back 3' would return to historical norms; the historical median is probably 4 or 4.5.  My guess is moving it back 3' drops it to 6.5 or seven.  Which is 2005 or 2010 rates. When the Atlantic League moved the mound back 1' there was no discernible impact on anything.  Ks actually went slightly up.

[interloper]

16 hours ago, oldfan said:

Neuse, for the A's today got three hits by taking pitches on the outer half to right field, pretty simple approach. Of course the O's helped out by pitching him away and playing Odor over by second base.

I thought Bemboom's game-calling was pretty awful. Lot of doubled-up pitches in the same spots, lot of wearing out the outer half of the plate so it was super predictable. I am eager to see him go. 

[NCRaven]

21 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Just moving the mound back and calling it a day is lazy.

Alright Sports Guy. 

 

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

Alright Sports Guy. 

 

Hey now, watch it with the cheap shots.

[OriolesMagic83]

How about a slightly heavier baseball?  I think it would result in less home runs and less velocity.  No doubt would be blamed for more pitcher injuries.

[SteveA]

The Cubs went 15 for 25 today with runners in scoring position.

Yes, I said "today".

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, SteveA said:

The Cubs went 15 for 25 today with runners in scoring position.

Yes, I said "today".

It’s usually a bad day when you fail 10 times with RISP.  

[OriolesMagic83]

10 runs in 2 games.  O's are an offensive juggernaut. 

I still don't understand the inability to hit HR.  O's have a lot of guys w/ marginal HR power, so maybe the humidor is having a huge effect.  I had Mullins, Hays and Mancini w/ good shots at 20 HR and Mountcastle w/ a good shot at 30. 

[Moose Milligan]

8 minutes ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

10 runs in 2 games.  O's are an offensive juggernaut. 

I still don't understand the inability to hit HR.  O's have a lot of guys w/ marginal HR power, so maybe the humidor is having a huge effect.  I had Mullins, Hays and Mancini w/ good shots at 20 HR and Mountcastle w/ a good shot at 30. 

I think the humidor's gotta do something with it, absolutely.

I'm wondering what these humidors are set to.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

I think the humidor's gotta do something with it, absolutely.

I'm wondering what these humidors are set to.

Looking at baseball reference last season one home run was hit every 27 at bats. This season it’s closer to a home run every 36 at bats. 

I think the humidor is making an impact. Perhaps early season chilly weather is also dragging down home runs. 

[Moose Milligan]

10 minutes ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

Looking at baseball reference last season one home run was hit every 27 at bats. This season it’s closer to a home run every 36 at bats. 

I think the humidor is making an impact. Perhaps early season chilly weather is also dragging down home runs. 

The Orioles are doing their part in dragging that average down, that's for sure.