Another No Hitter

[BrunswickDawg]

No hitters on back to back days for the first time since 1969.

6th no no of the season. Kluber does it for the Yanks against the Rangers.
2 against the Mariners.
2 against the Indians.
2 against the Rangers.

Single season record is 8 in 1884.

First Yankees no hitter since 1999 and their first in the road since 1951.

What a crazy season so far.

Oh, and Kershaw has another one goin thru 3 against the D-Backs

[MetEdDawg]

I keep thinking at some point hitters will adjust and change their approach. Getting no hit used to be an embarrassment. Now it's become more commonplace and it doesn't seem like it bothers folks as much as it used to.

I remember as a Braves fan when Randy Johnson no hit us. I was embarrassed for a long time after that even with it being against one of the best pitchers to ever to play the game.

[Really Clark?]

No hitters on back to back days for the first time since 1969.

6th no no of the season. Kluber does it for the Yanks against the Rangers.
2 against the Mariners.
2 against the Indians.
2 against the Rangers.

Single season record is 8 in 1884.

First Yankees no hitter since 1999 and their first in the road since 1951.

What a crazy season so far.

Oh, and Kershaw has another one goin thru 3 against the D-Backs

Peacock has a no hitter (maybe perfect) through 3 for the Diamondbacks as well in the same game.

Kershaw just gave up a 2 run shot

[Schultzy]

through three is not a thing...through six, maybe

[BrunswickDawg]

through three is not a thing...through six, maybe

On a day when one has already been thrown, it’s worth noting that there could be another in the works. 2 on the same days has only happened twice in MLB history.

[Schultzy]

It ain’t in the works after 3

[Rex54]

Move the mound to 61' 6"
Ban the infield shift
Severely punish foreign substances that increase spin rate.

[Homedawg]

Move the mound to 61' 6"
Ban the infield shift
Severely punish foreign substances that increase spin rate.

No too much hitter advantage
No learn to go the other way
I can go with this but they are trying to catch them I guess. It's just hard to prove

Hitters have become hr or bust. That's the problem. Not the mound and not the shift. The reason the shift is in is Bc everyone is up there pull happy trying to hit jacks. That's why we are at a modern day low of league Ba at 232. That's a joke. Crying shame really. But as long as hr hitters get paid a premium and people don't get paid for being tiny Gwynn at an equal rate that's what's going to happen. No different than hoops being a 3 point contest. Makes for a crappy level of basketball but that's what it is and ii isn't changing.

[Todd4State]

No too much hitter advantage
No learn to go the other way
I can go with this but they are trying to catch them I guess. It's just hard to prove

Hitters have become hr or bust. That's the problem. Not the mound and not the shift. The reason the shift is in is Bc everyone is up there pull happy trying to hit jacks. That's why we are at a modern day low of league Ba at 232. That's a joke. Crying shame really. But as long as hr hitters get paid a premium and people don't get paid for being tiny Gwynn at an equal rate that's what's going to happen. No different than hoops being a 3 point contest. Makes for a crappy level of basketball but that's what it is and ii isn't changing.

Yep. All of this.

[Rex54]

Yep. All of this.

Nope. Bad diagnosis. You two can play the old man "get off my lawn" all you want but if you want actual change to occur you'll implement what I said.

[MetEdDawg]

Nope. Bad diagnosis. You two can play the old man "get off my lawn" all you want but if you want actual change to occur you'll implement what I said.

Can you explain what was factual incorrect about Homedawg's statement?

Because every bit of it is true.

[Really Clark?]

Nope. Bad diagnosis. You two can play the old man "get off my lawn" all you want but if you want actual change to occur you'll implement what I said.

Awful cocksure of yourself considering how off the mark you are in many ways on the game. Was that Hatcher crow any good? Because we both know who had that situation nailed, from the eye test and from the analytics standpoint. It wasn’t you.

I actually don’t mind looking at the mound distance experiment, which they are doing in the minor league right now. And of course trying to catch them using foreign substance is already a given...if they can catch them. The shift is beatable so while I don’t like it, we don’t ban defensive schemes in other sports. You want to see it gone, beat it, don’t ban it. The Braves last night and Austin Riley has been for the last several games, actually used an approach at the plate last night and executed it that beat the shift. It can be done. Riley’s average is much higher this year so far using a better approach and tweaking his bat path. While his HR’s are down, everybody would take his approach and execution today over his last 2 years.

But here is the question, what is your end goal for pushing the mound back a foot and banning the shift? Just more offense? In the end I don’t like leagues forcing game shifts by rules instead of allowing the players and coaches to find creative and innovative ways to win. If the game needs to move the mound back, it needs to be for several reasons, safety, game playability, offense, pitcher craft work, etc.

[Rex54]

But here is the question, what is your end goal for pushing the mound back a foot and banning the shift? Just more offense?.

Mound - cut down K's and get more balls in play
Shift- sliding the analytic incentives to balls in play away from selling out for the HR or looking for a walk.


We don't ban defensive schemes in other sports

3 in the key

[Really Clark?]

Mound - cut down K's and get more balls in play
Shift- sliding the analytic incentives to balls in play away from selling out for the HR or looking for a walk.



3 in the key

You can also accomplish both of those without changing the rules or banning a defense. Different approach at the plate would cut down K’s and adding bunting vs the shift with a different approach would do the same thing. That is allowing the coaches and players to adapt and you don’t have regulate the sport.

3 in the key is offensive restriction not defense. The NBA (and NCAA) 3 second violation for defense, the Shaq rule, is probably what you are referring to. It was idiotic to have that rule stay but then lift the ban on zone defenses for the NBA and keep the penalty harsh. Another one of the NBA’s cockups but in the end they actually expanded what type of defenses the could run not decrease it. But the positive of that rule was about the health of the post players...not everyone could take the punishment Shaq did on the inside. That rule in itself didn’t restrict the type of defense just how long you could be in the paint but overall effect caused coaches to make changes.

[Rex54]

You can also accomplish both of those without changing the rules or banning a defense. Different approach at the plate would cut down K’s and adding bunting vs the shift with a different approach would do the same thing. That is allowing the coaches and players to adapt and you don’t have regulate the sport.

No you can't. The reason they have the approaches they do now is because it leads to the most runs scored in this pitcher dominant environment. All of these hitters COULD sacrifice some power and raise their batting averages with more singles, but the value of the HR is such compared to the ball in play it's literally not worth it. Do you think these people are dumb? They're trying to win games and the best way to do that IN THIS PITCHING/DEFENSE ENVIRONMENT is to sell out for power and who cares if I K because a ball in play is likely to be an out anyway with shifts, or if I can even manage to get a ball in play with the velocity and spin rates we see these days.

Also, bunting is really hard. And nobody wants to see that shit. People want to see early 90's version of the game, and that can be manufactured through rule changes.

Look, it takes a certain IQ level to understand the concept of "they do what they do to maximize runs in this environment." You could change approaches to a "try to beat the shift or bunt" but you would get worse actual run results if the ENVIRONMENT doesn't change, the environment being mound distance, spin rates, and shifts. It's a big-brain vs small-brain discussion. Smootness for example is fairly big-brain on the topic. Clark, Commercecomet, and Todd, small brain.

[BrunswickDawg]

No you can't. The reason they have the approaches they do now is because it leads to the most runs scored in this pitcher dominant environment. All of these hitters COULD sacrifice some power and raise their batting averages with more singles, but the value of the HR is such compared to the ball in play it's literally not worth it. Do you think these people are dumb? They're trying to win games and the best way to do that IN THIS PITCHING/DEFENSE ENVIRONMENT is to sell out for power and who cares if I K because a ball in play is likely to be an out anyway with shifts, or if I can even manage to get a ball in play with the velocity and spin rates we see these days.

Also, bunting is really hard. And nobody wants to see that shit. People want to see early 90's version of the game, and that can be manufactured through rule changes.

Look, it takes a certain IQ level to understand the concept of "they do what they do to maximize runs in this environment." You could change approaches to a "try to beat the shift or bunt" but you would get worse actual run results if the ENVIRONMENT doesn't change, the environment being mound distance, spin rates, and shifts. It's a big-brain vs small-brain discussion. Smootness for example is fairly big-brain on the topic. Clark, Commercecomet, and Todd, small brain.

Or, MLB can lower the seams on the ball and juice the core again - like they did in the 90s - and not have to monkey with the rules.

[Really Clark?]

No you can't. The reason they have the approaches they do now is because it leads to the most runs scored in this pitcher dominant environment. All of these hitters COULD sacrifice some power and raise their batting averages with more singles, but the value of the HR is such compared to the ball in play it's literally not worth it. Do you think these people are dumb? They're trying to win games and the best way to do that IN THIS PITCHING/DEFENSE ENVIRONMENT is to sell out for power and who cares if I K because a ball in play is likely to be an out anyway with shifts, or if I can even manage to get a ball in play with the velocity and spin rates we see these days.

Also, bunting is really hard. And nobody wants to see that shit. People want to see early 90's version of the game, and that can be manufactured through rule changes.

Look, it takes a certain IQ level to understand the concept of "they do what they do to maximize runs in this environment." You could change approaches to a "try to beat the shift or bunt" but you would get worse actual run results if the ENVIRONMENT doesn't change, the environment being mound distance, spin rates, and shifts. It's a big-brain vs small-brain discussion. Smootness for example is fairly big-brain on the topic. Clark, Commercecomet, and Todd, small brain.

Well my small brain, has destroyed several of your points throughout the season with actual results. Innovation and creativity wins without major rule changes. Analytics are great and I use them a lot but it has flaws. A part, big part of why bunting is hard but it’s not worked on either. Analytics says it’s almost useless in most situations but that is a two part flaw in regards to this discussion: 1) players are not great at bunting so it is even harder against the pitching of today, worked on harder and it would be better. 2) The analytics can’t factor in bunting against the shift because it’s not implemented for the data. But we know it will work simply by the defensive positioning. We don’t have to have data to know it is an approach that would work, IF they choose to work on it.

Being someone of low IQ with regards to actual technique and approach, as yourself, a change of approach is NOT about hitting only singles and eliminating power. It’s about a better swing path and approach to beat the defenses and pitching of today. And it is being discussed at higher levels to a degree. Hearing it from some high level hitting coaches. Launch angle is being adjusted again to change from just 2 years ago. But there is an organizational and money component that is in play that is outside of all of this.

Riley was just a good immediate example of someone I know many watch and how he is making changes that have increased his average but not at the expense of all of his power potential. Be interesting to see if he can continue and if the changes work under pressure. But you keep on sucking off Hatcher’s piss rods while he is on the bench. Low IQ, you are a joke with that. CC24 would coach circles around you every game. Clueless and calling someone else low IQ when you have proven yourself to be ignorant

[Rex54]

Or, MLB can lower the seams on the ball and juice the core again - like they did in the 90s - and not have to monkey with the rules.

Which would make the HR even more optimal.

The issue with MLB isn't a lack of runs - League ERA is up three quarters of a run in the last decade. To win games you have to play the way we are seeing. The idea of changing approaches would be laughed at, "what do you want us to start losing?"

The issue with baseball is that it's become an incredibly boring product with the BB/K/HR approach. Same as the NBA with the 3. Analytics aren't going away so you need to use the rules to make the most optimal analytical approach ALSO be the most enjoyable form a fan/viewer perspective.

[PMDawg]

Look, it takes a certain IQ level to understand the concept of "they do what they do to maximize runs in this environment." You could change approaches to a "try to beat the shift or bunt" but you would get worse actual run results if the ENVIRONMENT doesn't change, the environment being mound distance, spin rates, and shifts. It's a big-brain vs small-brain discussion. Smootness for example is fairly big-brain on the topic. Clark, Commercecomet, and Todd, small brain.

The difference is that everyone you listed here is actually able to remain civil and have a very good point/counter-point debate with each other. They have all made good points on both sides of the argument, and have managed to do so while being civil to each other.

You, on the other hand, actually add no meaningful content to the discussion and just hurl child-like insults whenever someone disagrees with you. You insinuate that you are the smartest person in the room. You need to humble yourself, and consider that maybe you're not. Most members of this board are college educated people with technical degrees. Everyone on here is likely very smart. Your baseless insults make you come across like a 5 year old brat stomping their foot or laying on the ground crying. It certainly doesn't paint you as the smartest person in the room.

I have no doubt you've studied baseball a lot, and that you have a lot of good knowledge to bring to the table. However, no one is going to listen to you if you can't be civil with it.

I'll take my own advice and stop here.

[Rex54]

The difference is that everyone you listed here is actually able to remain civil and have a very good point/counter-point debate with each other. They have all made good points on both sides of the argument, and have managed to do so while being civil to each other.

You, on the other hand, actually add no meaningful content to the discussion and just hurl child-like insults whenever someone disagrees with you. You insinuate that you are the smartest person in the room. You need to humble yourself, and consider that maybe you're not. Most members of this board are college educated people with technical degrees. Everyone on here is likely very smart. Your baseless insults make you come across like a 5 year old brat stomping their foot or laying on the ground crying. It certainly doesn't paint you as the smartest person in the room.

I have no doubt you've studied baseball a lot, and that you have a lot of good knowledge to bring to the table. However, no one is going to listen to you if you can't be civil with it.

I'll take my own advice and stop here.

I don't really "study the game" that much, mostly been a casual Braves fan over the years. I just loathe what analytics has done to all sports. You can't even watch MLB anymore. I wish we could see the league leaders around 80 stolen bases, 50 HR, .360 averages, and 10 K/9. I miss hit-and-runs, squeeze plays, etc. I miss the mid-range jump shot. I miss the I-formation. I'm not interested in time-wasting discussions on the problems being the hitter's approaches when they have no choice but to take those approaches to win games. That's the message that needs to be hammered home and the prism which this needs to be looked at. Environment necessitates approach. Blindly saying "durrr just change approach" is nonproductive.

[Cooterpoot]

Which would make the HR even more optimal.

The issue with MLB isn't a lack of runs - League ERA is up three quarters of a run in the last decade. To win games you have to play the way we are seeing. The idea of changing approaches would be laughed at, "what do you want us to start losing?"

The issue with baseball is that it's become an incredibly boring product with the BB/K/HR approach. Same as the NBA with the 3. Analytics aren't going away so you need to use the rules to make the most optimal analytical approach ALSO be the most enjoyable form a fan/viewer perspective.

More runs were scored in the late 90s and early 2000s than now. Baseball is a game of constant adjustment. This launch angle stuff will go another direction soon (In reality, it's about the same thing Ted Williams was doing, minus the dead pull hitters). Generally every 5 to 10 years change comes in the form of adjustments to what pitchers are doing and what hitters are doing.

[Todd4State]

No you can't. The reason they have the approaches they do now is because it leads to the most runs scored in this pitcher dominant environment. All of these hitters COULD sacrifice some power and raise their batting averages with more singles, but the value of the HR is such compared to the ball in play it's literally not worth it. Do you think these people are dumb? They're trying to win games and the best way to do that IN THIS PITCHING/DEFENSE ENVIRONMENT is to sell out for power and who cares if I K because a ball in play is likely to be an out anyway with shifts, or if I can even manage to get a ball in play with the velocity and spin rates we see these days.

Also, bunting is really hard. And nobody wants to see that shit. People want to see early 90's version of the game, and that can be manufactured through rule changes.

Look, it takes a certain IQ level to understand the concept of "they do what they do to maximize runs in this environment." You could change approaches to a "try to beat the shift or bunt" but you would get worse actual run results if the ENVIRONMENT doesn't change, the environment being mound distance, spin rates, and shifts. It's a big-brain vs small-brain discussion. Smootness for example is fairly big-brain on the topic. Clark, Commercecomet, and Todd, small brain.

Speaking of IQ you're baseball one is very low.

You want to maximize runs? Look at the best home run hitters of all time. The Aaron's, the Ruth's, the Bond's, Pujols, A-Rod, Trout, Ted Williams etc. The vast majority could hit for power AND average. The people like you who don't know what you're talking about try to make into an either you're a singles hitter or a home run hitter argument. But the reality is the best power hitters of all time were also great hitters as well. They actually ended up hitting more, striking out less, and hit more home runs. Why? Because if you have the skill to hit the ball to all fields it makes it more difficult on the pitcher to pitch you and attack you. What happens then is the pitcher is then more likely to make a mistake. THEN you end up with a bomb. If you don't do that maybe you get a double- and yeah maybe you get a single. But all of that is valuable. Especially when it comes to getting paid in MLB. A guy that hits 25 now using this bullcrap pull only philosophy would be able to hit 40 if they actually tried to use the whole field.

MLB pitchers can get hitters out very easily that swing at everything and don't adjust at all.

[Rex54]

Speaking of IQ you're baseball one is very low.
I wouldn't normally do this, but come on...




You want to maximize runs? Look at the best home run hitters of all time. The Aaron's, the Ruth's, the Bond's, Pujols, A-Rod, Trout, Ted Williams etc. The vast majority could hit for power AND average. The people like you who don't know what you're talking about try to make into an either you're a singles hitter or a home run hitter argument. But the reality is the best power hitters of all time were also great hitters as well. They actually ended up hitting more, striking out less, and hit more home runs. Why? Because if you have the skill to hit the ball to all fields it makes it more difficult on the pitcher to pitch you and attack you. What happens then is the pitcher is then more likely to make a mistake. THEN you end up with a bomb. If you don't do that maybe you get a double- and yeah maybe you get a single. But all of that is valuable. Especially when it comes to getting paid in MLB. A guy that hits 25 now using this bullcrap pull only philosophy would be able to hit 40 if they actually tried to use the whole field.

MLB pitchers can get hitters out very easily that swing at everything and don't adjust at all.

Yeah, let's assume every hitter is going to be able to turn into the best hitters of all-time. That'll fix everything! Just to be clear your argument is that currently the vast majority of the league could increase their power AND average (and net worth by millions of dollars) but aren't because The Voice from Field of Dreams hasn't come along and whispered in their ear "go, the other way"...

https://media.tenor.com/images/3a55cc984de47a943db52bd685a01055/tenor.gif


"Guys, hear me out. If you want to fix offense in baseball.... you all need to become Ted Williams, Babe Ruth, and Barry Bonds"

What utter nonsense. This is why I'm bullying you on this topic. Your arguments are a waste of time and provide no actual solutions to MLB being a completely unwatchable product.

[PMDawg]

Almost all sports are pretty much unwatchable these days. A lot of it has to do with politics. They should really work on fixing that first.

As far as baseball goes, back the mound up as suggested, have a DH in both leagues, and see what happens. Go from there.

[Todd4State]

I wouldn't normally do this, but come on...



Yeah, let's assume every hitter is going to be able to turn into the best hitters of all-time. That'll fix everything! Just to be clear your argument is that currently the vast majority of the league could increase their power AND average (and net worth by millions of dollars) but aren't because The Voice from Field of Dreams hasn't come along and whispered in their ear "go, the other way"...

https://media.tenor.com/images/3a55cc984de47a943db52bd685a01055/tenor.gif


"Guys, hear me out. If you want to fix offense in baseball.... you all need to become Ted Williams, Babe Ruth, and Barry Bonds"

What utter nonsense. This is why I'm bullying you on this topic. Your arguments are a waste of time and provide no actual solutions to MLB being a completely unwatchable product.

The hitting approach that players are using right now is what is making MLB unwatchable. I wonder why it was more watchable doing it my way?

But yeah- keep making strawmen instead of staying on point. The point was obvious to people who aren't stupid. You imitate how the best of the best do things. And then each individual player achieves their personal best. They won't all be Babe Ruth. But they sure as hell won't be hitting .210 with 20 home runs and 200 K's either.

https://twitter.com/Seth_3773/status/1395448218083807238

Another big problem with baseball is stupid people like you telling people that know baseball how it should be played.

[Todd4State]

https://twitter.com/Seth_3773/status/1395448218083807238


Here's a link to a former MLB pitcher explaining his take on things.

[Rex54]

The hitting approach that players are using right now is what is making MLB unwatchable. I wonder why it was more watchable doing it my way?

But yeah- keep making strawmen instead of staying on point. The point was obvious to people who aren't stupid. You imitate how the best of the best do things. And then each individual player achieves their personal best. They won't all be Babe Ruth. But they sure as hell won't be hitting .210 with 20 home runs and 200 K's either.
Another big problem with baseball is stupid people like you telling people that know baseball how it should be played.

It was more watchable back in the day because there weren't shifts, there wasn't the high average velocities, and there wasn't the focus on spin rates. Thank you for making my point!

In order to produce max runs IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT you are forced to sell out for walks and the home run. Again, scoring is UP big since a decade ago. Runs are being scored. The problem is NOT a lack of runs. The problem is how runs are forced to be scored because of the insane pitcher ability and defensive shifts. It's too hard to consistently score runs getting singles because the velocity and spin rates are out of control. You HAVE A BETTER CHANCE of winning saying "**** it" and catching a couple long balls.

Again - your argument is falling back on it being their ego or some nonsensical shit. What I'm doing is explaining the "why" all of the million dollar players and GM's and organizations are doing this approach. Trust me, it's not an ego thing. It's a "here's how we can best score runs against the league pitching" thing. If you fix the incentives towards balls in play being rewarded more and lead to better outcomes, that is the approach that will be taught/executed.

[BrunswickDawg]

I think I'll listen to Donnie Baseball about this topic

https://twitter.com/craigmish/status/1395734169058172929?s=21

[Rex54]

I think I'll listen to Donnie Baseball about this topic

That's fine, stay anti-intellectual. Some guy's get off my lawn opinions vs the standard practice league wide. Do you truly not think that the players and organizations aren't approaching hitting the way that they are because that's what is required to maximize run production? Do you think there is just a league wide "durrr I'm just gunna swing for the fence and pull ball because going oppo is weak"? Do you think teams are actively trying to not win games?

Brunswick firmly in the small brain camp.

[BrunswickDawg]

That's fine, stay anti-intellectual. Some guy's get off my lawn opinions vs the standard practice league wide. Do you truly not think that the players and organizations aren't approaching hitting the way that they are because that's what is required to maximize run production? Do you think there is just a league wide "durrr I'm just gunna swing for the fence and pull ball because going oppo is weak"? Do you think teams are actively trying to not win games?

Brunswick firmly in the small brain camp.

You couldn't be more wrong. It's not about a strategy - it's about lack of skill. Where Mattingly is spot on is that this is an issue that started 15 years ago. What has happened in baseball is the same thing that has happened in basketball - youth leagues became about travel and winning and not learning the game and fundamentals. So, as fundamentals eroded, the only options have become swinging for the fences. Both baseball and basketball are seeing those impacts now. I'm anything but closed minded about new approaches and analytics - there is a lot of good in them. But two sports that used to be about skill are only about flash and it's going to kill both sports.

Question for you - did you actually play baseball beyond little league?

[Rex54]

You couldn't be more wrong. It's not about a strategy - it's about lack of skill. Where Mattingly is spot on is that this is an issue that started 15 years ago. What has happened in baseball is the same thing that has happened in basketball - youth leagues became about travel and winning and not learning the game and fundamentals. So, as fundamentals eroded, the only options have become swinging for the fences. Both baseball and basketball are seeing those impacts now. I'm anything but closed minded about new approaches and analytics - there is a lot of good in them. But two sports that used to be about skill are only about flash and it's going to kill both sports.

Question for you - did you actually play baseball beyond little league?

Yeah, the major leaguers lack skill.... solid argument there, genius. That's why runs have been going UP over the last decade. Again, the issue is not the lack of runs being scored... it's how the game is designed to get those runs. It's the environment in which these hitters operate. There is too much velocity, shift, and spin rate. Because of those factors the ability to get base hits have been lessened. To adjust, natural incentives have shifted to trying for HR and BB. This isn't a hard concept to understand. The same hitter that batted .300 in 2000 who took the same exact approaches would probably hit around .275 today. This means BB and HR are more valuable and must be prioritized to WIN GAMES. If you ban shifts, foreign substances, and move the mound back the INCENTIVES to not K and to get base hits would increase and thus you will get more base hits and less K's! This. Is. Not. Complicated.

[Really Clark?]

Yeah, the major leaguers lack skill.... solid argument there, genius. That's why runs have been going UP over the last decade. Again, the issue is not the lack of runs being scored... it's how the game is designed to get those runs. It's the environment in which these hitters operate. There is too much velocity, shift, and spin rate. Because of those factors the ability to get base hits have been lessened. To adjust, natural incentives have shifted to trying for HR and BB. This isn't a hard concept to understand. The same hitter that batted .300 in 2000 who took the same exact approaches would probably hit around .275 today. This means BB and HR are more valuable and must be prioritized to WIN GAMES. If you ban shifts, foreign substances, and move the mound back the INCENTIVES to not K and to get base hits would increase and thus you will get more base hits and less K's! This. Is. Not. Complicated.

You are stating runs are going up, which is true but there are historic cycles we can point to as well, but leaving that aside, if runs are going up shouldn?t you be looking at doing things to help the pitchers and defense not aid the hitters? Everything you want to do; move mound back, ban the shift, find ways to decrease spin rate are all things that would be advantageous to hitters and the biggest adjust they would have to make is waiting longer to read the pitch and spin. They wouldn?t change their approach.

We will see what happens come summer but so far it looks to be a pitchers year and runs are down on average this year but a lot ball left to be played.

[BrunswickDawg]

You are stating runs are going up, which is true but there are historic cycles we can point to as well, but leaving that aside, if runs are going up shouldn?t you be looking at doing things to help the pitchers and defense not aid the hitters? Everything you want to do; move mound back, ban the shift, find ways to decrease spin rate are all things that would be advantageous to hitters and the biggest adjust they would have to make is waiting longer to read the pitch and spin. They wouldn?t change their approach.

We will see what happens come summer but so far it looks to be a pitchers year and runs are down on average this year but a lot ball left to be played.

Exactly - and the approach has been bred into this generation of players. They can’t successfully hit to the opposite field because they haven’t consistently learned how. Lack of learning fundamentals killed bunting slowly over a generation and, and now it is doing the same to learning how to actually hit well enough to beat a shift - or even learn it well enough to keep defenses honest so they can’t shift because of the threat that you could go oppo.

And yeah Rex - I’m saying that MLB hitters are not as well rounded and fundamentally sound as a whole as they were even 10 years ago. They eat better, they are possibly in better physical condition, and they have more tech and numbers available to learn with, but they are not as skilled fundamentally as their predecessors.

[Rex54]

You are stating runs are going up, which is true but there are historic cycles we can point to as well, but leaving that aside, if runs are going up shouldn?t you be looking at doing things to help the pitchers and defense not aid the hitters? .

I want to aid the quality of the product, have you not been reading my posts? The product is shit, it's unwatchable, it's uninteresting. You have to fix the GAME to incentivize less K's and more balls in play. Unless you touch on the velocity, shifts, and spin rates THAT INCENTIVE CANNOT HAPPEN because a change in approach will lead to less runs.

[Todd4State]

It was more watchable back in the day because there weren't shifts, there wasn't the high average velocities, and there wasn't the focus on spin rates. Thank you for making my point!

In order to produce max runs IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT you are forced to sell out for walks and the home run. Again, scoring is UP big since a decade ago. Runs are being scored. The problem is NOT a lack of runs. The problem is how runs are forced to be scored because of the insane pitcher ability and defensive shifts. It's too hard to consistently score runs getting singles because the velocity and spin rates are out of control. You HAVE A BETTER CHANCE of winning saying "**** it" and catching a couple long balls.

Again - your argument is falling back on it being their ego or some nonsensical shit. What I'm doing is explaining the "why" all of the million dollar players and GM's and organizations are doing this approach. Trust me, it's not an ego thing. It's a "here's how we can best score runs against the league pitching" thing. If you fix the incentives towards balls in play being rewarded more and lead to better outcomes, that is the approach that will be taught/executed.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/bat.shtml

Runs per game are down from the 90's by almost a full run depending on what year you look at.

Shifts have been around since the 1940's. They're not new. They're used more but they're not some new sabermetric thing. A big reason for that is the stubborn approach of players who are OK just lining out to the third baseman in right field. MLB wants to see fewer shifts? Use the whole field.

Pitching has improved. Hitting has not. It has gotten worse. No one is "forced" to sell out for home runs. It's a choice that players were led to believe was "better" and now you have no-hitters every week and an unwatchble product. If it was the pitching you wouldn't have MLB players calling out the hitting approach of today's hitters. And you would have the player's on your side. And you would also have current MLB players saying that it is solely about the pitching. But you don't see that happening. It's the opposite.

If hitters would learn to use the whole field in addition to the technology that they have out there now the game would be so much better. And there are incentives to being rewarded to better outcomes. Look at Mike Trout's salary.

Moving the mound back a foot is not going to make a guy not swing at everything that is thrown up there.

[Todd4State]

https://protips.dickssportinggoods.com/sports-and-activities/baseball/situational-hitting-tips-with-mike-trout


Rex says this approach won't work in today's game.**




"Knowing your game plan before you step into the batter’s box could improve your chances of scoring that runner from second or extending the inning to keep your team in the game. Former MVP Mike Trout has an inside look on his approach to situational hitting and how he’s cashed in when it’s counted most on the diamond.

“When the guy is on second base, when I’m ahead in a count or it’s the first pitch, I’m looking for a pitch to drive gap-to-gap,” Trout says.

You want a pitch that you are certain you can hit well that will get past defenders or advance the runner. “Not just right-center, left-center,” Trout says. “Get a good pitch that you can hit hard.”

[Homedawg]

Yeah, the major leaguers lack skill.... solid argument there, genius. That's why runs have been going UP over the last decade. Again, the issue is not the lack of runs being scored... it's how the game is designed to get those runs. It's the environment in which these hitters operate. There is too much velocity, shift, and spin rate. Because of those factors the ability to get base hits have been lessened. To adjust, natural incentives have shifted to trying for HR and BB. This isn't a hard concept to understand. The same hitter that batted .300 in 2000 who took the same exact approaches would probably hit around .275 today. This means BB and HR are more valuable and must be prioritized to WIN GAMES. If you ban shifts, foreign substances, and move the mound back the INCENTIVES to not K and to get base hits would increase and thus you will get more base hits and less K's! This. Is. Not. Complicated.

Are you will James ? Asking for a friend...

[Todd4State]

Are you will James ? Asking for a friend...

The lame personal insults give it away.

[Cooterpoot]

I want to aid the quality of the product, have you not been reading my posts? The product is shit, it's unwatchable, it's uninteresting. You have to fix the GAME to incentivize less K's and more balls in play. Unless you touch on the velocity, shifts, and spin rates THAT INCENTIVE CANNOT HAPPEN because a change in approach will lead to less runs.

Hell, the best stretch of ball most have seen is the steroid era. Bring back roids!

[Homedawg]

The lame personal insults give it away.

Along w bad not well thought out takes, that does it.

[Homedawg]

If only dawg61 were still here you'd have some comp Rex.....

[Really Clark?]

I want to aid the quality of the product, have you not been reading my posts? The product is shit, it's unwatchable, it's uninteresting. You have to fix the GAME to incentivize less K's and more balls in play. Unless you touch on the velocity, shifts, and spin rates THAT INCENTIVE CANNOT HAPPEN because a change in approach will lead to less runs.

I understand what you want to do but moving the mound back does NOT change the hitters approach. You just give him more time to read the pitch and more time to react or lay off pitches. Walks will go up. But you are addressing the pitching not the problem with hitters flaws. You can accomplish the same thing by limiting the equipment used, I.e the balls. Flatten the seams and making the ball deader also limits both the spin and makes hit harder to hit home runs. There the problem you want to address is solved. But it still is not fixing the hitting flaws.

The shift is a defense that has been around for a long time and as I said before, I’m against banning defenses only because an offense can’t beat it. That’s a lame non competitive approach to solving a problem. Offenses either fix the problem or live with it but the answer is not a ban, it’s innovation, creativity, skill. That is the answer, the only answer.

Ban a substance that’s illegal to use...catch them and enforce the rules. But that takes organizations wanting to control a problem but they want their own pitchers using it, so it’s live with it because everyone is doing it or the league will have to take control of the problem.

[Homedawg]

I understand what you want to do but moving the mound back does NOT change the hitters approach. You just give him more time to read the pitch and more time to react or lay off pitches. Walks will go up. But you are addressing the pitching not the problem with hitters flaws. You can accomplish the same thing by limiting the equipment used, I.e the balls. Flatten the seams and making the ball deader also limits both the spin and makes hit harder to hit home runs. There the problem you want to address is solved. But it still is not fixing the hitting flaws.

The shift is a defense that has been around for a long time and as I said before, I’m against banning defenses only because an offense can’t beat it. That’s a lame non competitive approach to solving a problem. Offenses either fix the problem or live with it but the answer is not a ban, it’s innovation, creativity, skill. That is the answer, the only answer.

Ban a substance that’s illegal to use...catch them and enforce the rules. But that takes organizations wanting to control a problem but they want their own pitchers using it, so it’s live with it because everyone is doing it or the league will have to take control of the problem.

Hard to argue w this.

[Cooterpoot]

I'm gonna go throw my kid on a Hit Trax tomorrow and tell him to smash balls into the top of the cage to see how many HRs he can hit. That should fix his hitting problem. Or at least that's what a lot people getting paid to teaching hitting are doing.

[Todd4State]

I'm gonna go throw my kid on a Hit Trax tomorrow and tell him to smash balls into the top of the cage to see how many HRs he can hit. That should fix his hitting problem. Or at least that's what a lot people getting paid to teaching hitting are doing.

And THIS is the real problem. I have no problem with modern technology at all. But I think it's being misused because the teaching is so off.

[Rex54]

But you are addressing the pitching not the problem with hitters flaws.

Again, here is the disconnect. The hitters today aren't "flawed". Just like the unwatchable NBA shooting all those 3's isn't "flawed". The analytics nerds have recognized that the BB/HR is so much more valuable they are willing to completely sell out for it on a risk/reward scale.

You might normally say "two strike approach, put ball in play" but they say "no, still try for power because why not". And they're right! With the velocity and shifts hitters, GM's and organizations on a league-wide scale have recognized that the value of striking out isn't much lower than a ball in play. The natural K% is higher now than ever because of velocity and spin rate. The natural batting average is lower now because of higher K's and shifts. The UNNATURAL movement even higher on K% and lower on batting average is due to CORRECTLY approaching hitting the way teams are doing, correctly in the sense of "here's what it takes to score the most runs in this environment"

The only way to change this is to make the "correct" aka the most analytical approach be to limit strikeouts and put the balls in play. The analytics nerds will always find out which approach leads to maximum runs. The task is to change the environment to achieve the style of game that is enjoyable for the fans.

[BrunswickDawg]

Again, here is the disconnect. The hitters today aren't "flawed". Just like the unwatchable NBA shooting all those 3's isn't "flawed". The analytics nerds have recognized that the BB/HR is so much more valuable they are willing to completely sell out for it on a risk/reward scale.

You might normally say "two strike approach, put ball in play" but they say "no, still try for power because why not". And they're right! With the velocity and shifts hitters, GM's and organizations on a league-wide scale have recognized that the value of striking out isn't much lower than a ball in play. The natural K% is higher now than ever because of velocity and spin rate. The natural batting average is lower now because of higher K's and shifts. The UNNATURAL movement even higher on K% and lower on batting average is due to CORRECTLY approaching hitting the way teams are doing, correctly in the sense of "here's what it takes to score the most runs in this environment"

The only way to change this is to make the "correct" aka the most analytical approach be to limit strikeouts and put the balls in play. The analytics nerds will always find out which approach leads to maximum runs. The task is to change the environment to achieve the style of game that is enjoyable for the fans.

Man you are dense. Velocity is not up. They changed where they measure speed of pitch in 2017 due to improvements in technology. Statcast picks it up out of the hand - it used to be measured about 10 feet in front of home plate.

And spin rate is just a metric. What spin rate has done has gotten pitchers more comfortable in believing that movement is real, and that they can pitch in other areas besides "down and away" like Maddux did and be successful. They are back to high fastball approaches - or as Skip Carry would say "they climb the ladder" more. And hitters who only know launch angle (called an uppercut in ye olde days) can't adjust and "tomahawk" the pitch for a hit.

Watch a game and when these guys k today - every right hand hitter steps in the bucket, pulls his head out, and is swinging under the pitch trying to yank it - and the dam ball is 3 inches outside. It's wretched to watch. The problem ain't the pitching - it's the hitting approach these guys take.

[Rex54]

Man you are dense. Velocity is not up. They changed where they measure speed of pitch in 2017 due to improvements in technology. Statcast picks it up out of the hand - it used to be measured about 10 feet in front of home plate.

And spin rate is just a metric. What spin rate has done has gotten pitchers more comfortable in believing that movement is real, and that they can pitch in other areas besides "down and away" like Maddux did and be successful. They are back to high fastball approaches - or as Skip Carry would say "they climb the ladder" more. And hitters who only know launch angle (called an uppercut in ye olde days) can't adjust and "tomahawk" the pitch for a hit.

Watch a game and when these guys k today - every right hand hitter steps in the bucket, pulls his head out, and is swinging under the pitch trying to yank it - and the dam ball is 3 inches outside. It's wretched to watch. The problem ain't the pitching - it's the hitting approach these guys take.


And thus ends the debate. The readers can decide for themselves which argument makes the most sense to explain why the state of baseball is where it is regarding the K's, HR's, BB's and approaches. I think my analysis does a much better job at that and my solutions are realistically the only way to get baseball back to a watchable equilibrium.

[BrunswickDawg]

This guy seems to have learned an effective approach, and his team seems to like it

https://twitter.com/pirates/status/1395809115994214405?s=21

[Really Clark?]

Again, here is the disconnect. The hitters today aren't "flawed". Just like the unwatchable NBA shooting all those 3's isn't "flawed". The analytics nerds have recognized that the BB/HR is so much more valuable they are willing to completely sell out for it on a risk/reward scale.

You might normally say "two strike approach, put ball in play" but they say "no, still try for power because why not". And they're right! With the velocity and shifts hitters, GM's and organizations on a league-wide scale have recognized that the value of striking out isn't much lower than a ball in play. The natural K% is higher now than ever because of velocity and spin rate. The natural batting average is lower now because of higher K's and shifts. The UNNATURAL movement even higher on K% and lower on batting average is due to CORRECTLY approaching hitting the way teams are doing, correctly in the sense of "here's what it takes to score the most runs in this environment"

The only way to change this is to make the "correct" aka the most analytical approach be to limit strikeouts and put the balls in play. The analytics nerds will always find out which approach leads to maximum runs. The task is to change the environment to achieve the style of game that is enjoyable for the fans.

When I say hitting flaws, I’m talking about the actual art of hitting (mechanics of the swing, absolutes that must occur in a high level swing, bat path adjustments, reading of the pitcher movement, reading of the spin, pitch to hit knowledge, approach, etc.) not what analytics are telling them to do with their approach. That’s 2 separate things or at most just a small portion of the entire part. The analytics are great in so many ways but it has caused a lot of negative impact with the actual art of hitting, players either on their own or being taught to try to manufacture a result that creates issues in the swing and approach that actually limits their individual potential to succeed. As it continues to be taught to young players the worse the professional hitters will become overall because that is what teams have to work with. There is a self fulling prophecy to the analytics and swing mechanics going that direction. Changing the game like you want, does nothing to fix that. Especially moving the mound back. You are just giving hitters a big reaction advantage and time for a bigger load to jerk through the zone harder. They won’t think about ball in play more, it will just happen because you are giving them more time but will do nothing to change their approach.

BTW, what about the majority of the pitchers in the league who don’t throw 97+? You are taken guys who are very good at 92, that pitchers speed to hitter reaction time now looks closer to 89-90. You also make slower bigger breaking balls hard to control lower that off speed usage. There was a pretty good article discussing this topic from analytics MLB personnel and physicist. There was not a consensus on what would occur and they looked at moving the mound back at 3 different distances. The point that had the biggest consensus is that runs would go up, analysts by teams averaged .25-.3 runs per game per team. The majority believe and the analytics was showing many of them that doing this actually changed absolutely nothing to the approach and 3 outcomes of AB’s we see today, in fact believe it to increase by a factor. The balls in play issue, which is what this was being centered around, would occur but that result was strictly because hitters would have somewhere around 4-8% more actual to precognitive reaction time. The approach of the 3 outcome AB’s would also increase. The were some analysts, a minority, who thought pitchers who had good hard breaking stuff might actually have a bigger advantage than hitters allowing the ball to move more and increase K’a as well.

Also, you have to take the nature of physics as it equates to launch angle approaches. Moving back the mound will give you natural augmenting of the bat path to increase that attack angle upward. It will negate some of the 4 seam fastballs riding up through the zone allowing gravity to put the ball on a bigger dropping plane. That’s why it will be interesting to see if pitching has adjusted throughout this season as it appears to have occurred early on. That attack plan by pitching, if continues, will have to cause teams to adjust bat path if it lowers run production by the offenses. Still too early to tell though.

I’m not against studying the effects and how it may effect the game, in reference to moving back the mound. For me, and others, we think it may have to be considered at some point for safety component for pitchers as well. Exit velocity off the bats may require the league to consider reaction time for pitchers to defend themselves. 116 mph is not defendable by a pitcher back at them. But that is expanding the topic away from just the pure debate about offense and pitching.

[Schultzy]

I think it’s because hitters can keep their job hitting .210 if they’re hitting enough homers.

[Quaoarsking]

I don't really "study the game" that much, mostly been a casual Braves fan over the years. I just loathe what analytics has done to all sports. You can't even watch MLB anymore. I wish we could see the league leaders around 80 stolen bases, 50 HR, .360 averages, and 10 K/9. I miss hit-and-runs, squeeze plays, etc. I miss the mid-range jump shot. I miss the I-formation. I'm not interested in time-wasting discussions on the problems being the hitter's approaches when they have no choice but to take those approaches to win games. That's the message that needs to be hammered home and the prism which this needs to be looked at. Environment necessitates approach. Blindly saying "durrr just change approach" is nonproductive.

Sounds like a personal problem, not a baseball problem, that MLB is not living up to your arbitrary personal preferences.

Analytics have been part of baseball since the 1800s. The only difference now is the computing power.

[Quaoarsking]

Seriously, who doesn't love to watch their team take a hit away from some predictable fool? "Thought you had a hit? Not today loser, thanks to math!"

Shifting is easily one of the top 5 most entertaining parts of baseball. Tactics and strategy are fun.

[Rex54]

Sounds like a personal problem, not a baseball problem, that MLB is not living up to your arbitrary personal preferences.

Analytics have been part of baseball since the 1800s. The only difference now is the computing power.

Well it seems that it's absolutely a baseball problem since the leadership of the game is looking at how to remedy the problem. You may be fine watching 6 hit, 30 strikeout games but that's boring as hell to me and the vast majority.