Does the ADA open the door for teams full of walking midgets?

[Ruzious]

Maybe the Orioles could have signed Owen Meany

He wouldn't have had a prayer.

[DrungoHazewood]

I think that the counter would be to have the pitcher groove the pitches, move the infielders in to bunt distance, and move the outfielders into just behind the bases. I doubt if a midget could hit the ball out of the infield or run fast enough to make it safely to first if he did manage to hit the ball. Most major league pitchers ought to be able to place their pitches within a midget's minuscule strike zone if they only concerned themselves with location and not with velocity or movement.

Here's the official definition of the strike zone:

The STRIKE ZONE is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the knee cap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.

The last sentence is key, especially the "from the batter's stance" part. A person who has no intent of ever swinging the bat could contort himself such that he has almost no strike zone without regard to actually being able to swing well. You could argue that he's prepared to swing, even if he doesn't actually ever do so.

A person who's 3' 7" could probably get into a crouch that leaves a strike zone only a few inches high. No pitcher could hit that consistently, no matter how much speed or movement he sacrifices for accuracy. As long as the umps called things by the book, I'd guess that a modern Eddie Gaedel would walk at least 75% of the time, and maybe more like 90%. I'd bet many pitchers would melt down and be completely unable to throw a strike when faced with a crouching midget (I can hardly type just imagining it). When you're used to throwing every pitch at near maximum effort it's very difficult to flip a switch and suddenly throw much more slowly and accurately to one spot barely a foot off the ground.

[Migrant Redbird]

When you're used to throwing every pitch at near maximum effort it's very difficult to flip a switch and suddenly throw much more slowly and accurately to one spot barely a foot off the ground.

I disagree. It's little different than throwing at the bullseye target in a carnival dunking tank, except that the pitching mound is a little further away. I grew up on a farm and we used to throw rocks at squirrels, rabbits, and frogs, except that I was throwing with all the velocity I could muster (which wasn't much). Some kids were pretty accurate and generally hit what they were throwing at most of the time -- I suspect that most baseball pitchers were in the latter group.

The STRIKE ZONE is that area over home plate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the knee cap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball.

The last sentence is key, especially the "from the batter's stance" part. A person who has no intent of ever swinging the bat could contort himself such that he has almost no strike zone without regard to actually being able to swing well. You could argue that he's prepared to swing, even if he doesn't actually ever do so.

If the zone is too condensed, the umpire should be allowed to require the batter to demonstrate that he can actually swing the bat from that position.

A person who's 3' 7" could probably get into a crouch that leaves a strike zone only a few inches high. No pitcher could hit that consistently, no matter how much speed or movement he sacrifices for accuracy.

I disagree again. We frequently refer to pitchers who "paint the corner" and I don't think that it's unusual for good pitchers to have pinpoint control. It is when they are throwing at the limit of their envelope -- trying to generate maximum velocity or movement -- that their control tends to get pretty loose.

Even Rick Ankiel at his wildest could probably have struck out Eddie Gaedel if he didn't have to worry about getting enough action on the ball to fool the hitter. With the infield drawn in, the pitcher would be begging the diminutive batter to put the ball into play.

We should also keep in mind that the ball doesn't have to be entirely within the strike zone. The diameter of the ball is a little over 2-1/2 inches, so the strike zone is effectively expanded by another 5 inches. If a modern Eddie Gaedel manages to shrink his strike zone down to 5 inches, the pitcher actually has a box about 10 inches high that he needs to keep the ball within.

[DrungoHazewood]

I disagree. It's little different than throwing at the bullseye target in a carnival dunking tank, except that the pitching mound is a little further away. I grew up on a farm and we used to throw rocks at squirrels, rabbits, and frogs, except that I was throwing with all the velocity I could muster (which wasn't much). Some kids were pretty accurate and generally hit what they were throwing at most of the time -- I suspect that most baseball pitchers were in the latter group.

If the zone is too condensed, the umpire should be allowed to require the batter to demonstrate that he can actually swing the bat from that position.

I disagree again. We frequently refer to pitchers who "paint the corner" and I don't think that it's unusual for good pitchers to have pinpoint control. It is when they are throwing at the limit of their envelope -- trying to generate maximum velocity or movement -- that their control tends to get pretty loose.

Even Rick Ankiel at his wildest could probably have struck out Eddie Gaedel if he didn't have to worry about getting enough action on the ball to fool the hitter. With the infield drawn in, the pitcher would be begging the diminutive batter to put the ball into play.

We should also keep in mind that the ball doesn't have to be entirely within the strike zone. The diameter of the ball is a little over 2-1/2 inches, so the strike zone is effectively expanded by another 5 inches. If a modern Eddie Gaedel manages to shrink his strike zone down to 5 inches, the pitcher actually has a box about 10 inches high that he needs to keep the ball within.

I'm not going to argue too much with you, but there are pitchers in the majors who can't hit Frank Thomas' strike zone with much regularity. I don't believe they can simply flip a switch and throw 60 mph with pinpoint control.

[RShack]

Maybe the Orioles could have signed Owen Meany

One of the best books of all-time...

[RShack]

The last sentence is key, especially the "from the batter's stance" part. A person who has no intent of ever swinging the bat could contort himself such that he has almost no strike zone without regard to actually being able to swing well. You could argue that he's prepared to swing, even if he doesn't actually ever do so.

Could this be exploited without requiring the O's to sign a bunch of midgets?

[RShack]

More to the point, would a team of midgets give a competitive advantage? Couldn't pitchers throw into the small strike zone at 40 miles per hour?

Well, see, this means it's not as easy as it sounds. To combat this, you'd need a team of softball-slugging midgets. And where do you find those?

[Migrant Redbird]

Could this be exploited without requiring the O's to sign a bunch of midgets?

Sure. All you need to do is to lower the height of your belt and your chest. Theoretically, if you squatted down with your fanny lower than your knees and your chest pressed down on your knees, you could potentially shrink the strike zone down to a line with zero height. Of course, you'd never be able to generate any power in your swing from that position and, if you straightened up as you initiated your swing, the umpire would be required to use your actual strike zone at the time you swung at the pitch.

Another thing -- a hitter who's in such an exaggerated crouch of a swing is not going to be very agile when it comes to getting out of the way of an errant pitch. I suspect that any hitter who tried to do that would end up needing to get out of the way of a lot of pitches aimed at his ribs -- or higher.

[DrungoHazewood]

Could this be exploited without requiring the O's to sign a bunch of midgets?

Possibly. I think this was covered in a children's book called "The Boy Who Hit 1.000." The protagonist never swung the bat, and ended up with only walks up until the last day of the season. Of course something happened where he had to swing the bat, and in his only official at bat he singles home the winning run.

[DrungoHazewood]

What this thread needs is a simulation where one or more batters in a real lineup are replaced with players who walk 75%-90% of the time, and strike out in their other plate appearances. Run a few hundred or a few thousand seasons with and without the non-swingers, and see how that impacts runs scored.

[RShack]

a hitter who's in such an exaggerated crouch of a swing is not going to be very agile when it comes to getting out of the way of an errant pitch. I suspect that any hitter who tried to do that would end up needing to get out of the way of a lot of pitches aimed at his ribs -- or higher.

That just requires the next evolution of body armor

[twoBshorty]

I don't think this would work. Little people have a lot of health issues in addition to just being really short. Lots of bone and joint deformities,poor muscle tone, motor delays, respiratory issues, and spinal/skull problems, just to name a few that would affect how they play sports. Many of them have shunts in their heads because of hydrocephalus, so contact sports can be really dangerous. Getting beaned would be a disaster, and since their heads would be a lot lower than what pitchers are used to, that's a big risk. They'd be really slow between the bases because of the short legs and muscle development problems and any kind of collision with an average-height player would probably result in severe injury. Most of these people top out at the average height for a 7-year-old boy. Would you stick a 7-year-old out there with a bunch of grown men, even just to stand at the plate? No way, right? The mental image of them getting hit by a 93 MPH fastball gives me the willies. Too many safety problems here.

[RShack]

I don't think this would work. Little people have a lot of health issues in addition to just being really short. Lots of bone and joint deformities,poor muscle tone, motor delays, respiratory issues, and spinal/skull problems, just to name a few that would affect how they play sports. Many of them have shunts in their heads because of hydrocephalus, so contact sports can be really dangerous. Getting beaned would be a disaster, and since their heads would be a lot lower than what pitchers are used to, that's a big risk. They'd be really slow between the bases because of the short legs and muscle development problems and any kind of collision with an average-height player would probably result in severe injury. Most of these people top out at the average height for a 7-year-old boy. Would you stick a 7-year-old out there with a bunch of grown men, even just to stand at the plate? No way, right? The mental image of them getting hit by a 93 MPH fastball gives me the willies. Too many safety problems here.

Well darn!

[BaltimoreTerp]

Possibly. I think this was covered in a children's book called "The Boy Who Hit 1.000." The protagonist never swung the bat, and ended up with only walks up until the last day of the season. Of course something happened where he had to swing the bat, and in his only official at bat he singles home the winning run.

That HAS to be a Matt Christopher book

[BaltimoreTerp]

I'm not going to argue too much with you, but there are pitchers in the majors who can't hit Frank Thomas' strike zone with much regularity. I don't believe they can simply flip a switch and throw 60 mph with pinpoint control.

MR is right in one aspect, because many pitchers aren't TRYING to hit Frank Thomas' strike zone, because that ball would soon be hitting the ballpark's upper-deck zone.

You are also right, though, just based on the number of pitchers who have problems throwing intentional walks, to first on grounders, etc.