2015 Baseball Offense

To blacklisted bully. The bats aren't changing. Therefore line drives through the infield and ground balls will not be affected. Obviously your deeper line drives and deep fly balls will be te only ones we see less resistance coming into play.

To Engie. Again.. Just because we are getting 60% of the deep fly ball distance back DOES NOT MEAN we will be getting 60% of the offensive production back. It goes back to my first point. Most balls in play will not be affected by the new ball. If we went to Pre BBCOR then yes grounders and line drive singles WOULD be affected. BUT, since the bats remain the same that is not the case.

Offense will be slight improved because of the deeper balls going over the wall and farther in the gap, BUT THAT'S IT.

Which is why I say home runs, average, and slugging will maybe be 10-20% back to 2010 levels than we've seen in the BBCOR era... Not 60%. This is very easy to understand.

We don't really need offensive production to improve that much, outside of TD Ameritrade. I just want it to fairly closely approximate MLB offensive numbers, and this should help.

Why would I want to see ground balls become hits? I don't want the bats juiced so that most ground balls are killed so hard it's difficult to defend. If you're hitting the ball on the ground in the direction of an infielder, you don't usually deserve a hit, so I'm fine with those not being affected.

I just want the pitcher rewarded for forcing someone into weak contact, and I want the hitter rewarded if the pitcher makes a mistake and the hitter makes good contact. That's it. Honestly, no decisions should be made simply to increase numbers. If you're not a good hitter, you shouldn't have good numbers.

How does a ball purportedly travel further without travelling faster? That's the root of your disconnect. Yes, it's going to leave the bat at the same speed -- but it's rate of deceleration is MUCH slower -- making even infield line drives/hard ground balls "seem" to accelerate compared to what players are used to -- gap shots carry alot further, etc. This isn't going to show a singular effect on the homerun like you are projecting, but an effect on every single ball hit period -- and every pitch thrown -- that is just about linear. Less drag = more horizontal acceleration -- and faster vertical acceleration. Balls will travel further and get to the ground faster -- and that's not exclusive to balls on a homerun trajectory.

Your HIGH END of your projected increase still has homerun totals at less than 2011 levels, AKA year 1 of BBCOR. Sorry -- that's asinine.

Just admit that you made a bad initial projection the first time without really thinking it through and we can let it go and move on to something else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

How does a ball purportedly travel further without travelling faster? That's the root of your disconnect. Yes, it's going to leave the bat at the same speed -- but it's rate of deceleration is MUCH slower -- making even infield line drives/hard ground balls "seem" to accelerate compared to what players are used to -- gap shots carry alot further, etc. This isn't going to show a singular effect on the homerun like you are projecting, but an effect on every single ball hit period -- and every pitch thrown -- that is just about linear. Less drag = more horizontal acceleration -- and faster vertical acceleration. Balls will travel further and get to the ground faster -- and that's not exclusive to balls on a homerun trajectory.

Your HIGH END of your projected increase still has homerun totals at less than 2011 levels, AKA year 1 of BBCOR. Sorry -- that's asinine.

Just admit that you made a bad initial projection the first time without really thinking it through and we can let it go and move on to something else.

---

Well I'm going to disagree about the rate of deceleration of a line drive by the time it travels 80-120 feet on a rope will affect all that much. Obviously ground balls won't change a damn bit. When I have the time I'm going to avg together the BBCOR numbers, as well as the 2008-2010 numbers... Find what 20% increase and 60% increase back to the norm would be.. And give everyone our "predictions"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

We don't really need offensive production to improve that much, outside of TD Ameritrade. I just want it to fairly closely approximate MLB offensive numbers, and this should help.

Why would I want to see ground balls become hits? I don't want the bats juiced so that most ground balls are killed so hard it's difficult to defend. If you're hitting the ball on the ground in the direction of an infielder, you don't usually deserve a hit, so I'm fine with those not being affected.

I just want the pitcher rewarded for forcing someone into weak contact, and I want the hitter rewarded if the pitcher makes a mistake and the hitter makes good contact. That's it. Honestly, no decisions should be made simply to increase numbers. If you're not a good hitter, you shouldn't have good numbers.

---

I agree. Home runs need to be home runs. Shots in the gap need to be shots in the gap. This will be a good change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pioneer Dawg

Well I'm going to disagree about the rate of deceleration of a line drive by the time it travels 80-120 feet on a rope will affect all that much. Obviously ground balls won't change a damn bit. When I have the time I'm going to avg together the BBCOR numbers, as well as the 2008-2010 numbers... Find what 20% increase and 60% increase back to the norm would be.. And give everyone our "predictions"

---

I can't wait. Why don't we just wait and see what happens? I don't really see the purpose in going on and on and on back and forth talking about what will probably happen. We can just wait until next year and see.

The one thing not mentioned is the negative impact on the pitcher and his ability to spin the baseball. That will aid offenses as well. I'm not sure of the impact overall, only time will tell. 60% sounds a high, however, all balls in play will be aided by lower seams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pioneer Dawg

To blacklisted bully. The bats aren't changing. Therefore line drives through the infield and ground balls will not be affected. Obviously your deeper line drives and deep fly balls will be te only ones we see less resistance coming into play.

To Engie. Again.. Just because we are getting 60% of the deep fly ball distance back DOES NOT MEAN we will be getting 60% of the offensive production back. It goes back to my first point. Most balls in play will not be affected by the new ball. If we went to Pre BBCOR then yes grounders and line drive singles WOULD be affected. BUT, since the bats remain the same that is not the case.

Offense will be slight improved because of the deeper balls going over the wall and farther in the gap, BUT THAT'S IT.

Which is why I say home runs, average, and slugging will maybe be 10-20% back to 2010 levels than we've seen in the BBCOR era... Not 60%. This is very easy to understand.

---

You're forgetting another factor. The minor league ball with lower seams is woven tighter. A tighter ball is a harder ball. A harder ball produces more "bounce" or "pop". Thereby increasing the likelihood of line drives and deep fly balls as well as increasing speed of ground balls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homedawg

60% sounds a high, however, all balls in play will be aided by lower seams.

---

If its coming off the bat the same, how in the hell are ground balls affected in any discernible way?

And yes 60% is crazy high.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smootness

I can't wait. Why don't we just wait and see what happens? I don't really see the purpose in going on and on and on back and forth talking about what will probably happen. We can just wait until next year and see.

---

Yep around 330 days from now we shall know.

Homerun numbers per game(BBCOR):
2011 - .52
2012 - .48
2013 - .42
2014(current) - .39
= .4525 avg

Pre-BBCOR:
2010 - .94
2009 - .96
2008 - .84
2007 - .68
= .855 avg

Will's "projection" doesn't even get homerun totals back to 2011 levels -- the first year of BBCOR. Scoring and other power metrics are almost directly proportional to homerun output over the years. As the homerun dips, so goes average, and runs per game, which are the only metrics easily available that are relevant to this argument.

Basically, Will thinks that next year will see a homerun average of between .493 and .513 per game next year, or less than actually was hit in year 1 of BBCOR. I think homerun output will be in the 0.69 range -- about what it was from 77-95 and 03-07...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

Homerun numbers per game(BBCOR):
2011 - .52
2012 - .48
2013 - .42
2014(current) - .39
= .4525 avg

Pre-BBCOR:
2010 - .94
2009 - .96
2008 - .84
2007 - .68
= .855 avg

Will's "projection" doesn't even get homerun totals back to 2011 levels -- the first year of BBCOR. Scoring and other power metrics are almost directly proportional to homerun output over the years. As the homerun dips, so goes average, and runs per game, which are the only metrics easily available that are relevant to this argument.

Basically, Will thinks that next year will see a homerun average of between .493 and .513 per game next year, or less than actually was hit in year 1 of BBCOR. I think homerun output will be in the 0.69 range -- about what it was from 77-95 and 03-07...

---

Yep. That is SEC only correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pioneer Dawg

Yep. That is SEC only correct?

---

No -- that is NCAA-wide lifted directly off their website -- with a little excel work to get us to-date numbers for 2014...

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/baseba.../TrendsYBY.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

No -- that is NCAA-wide lifted directly off their website -- with a little excel work to get us to-date numbers for 2014...

http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/baseba.../TrendsYBY.pdf

---

Ill stick by mine either way. NCAA, SEC overall, SEC only.

Can you get slugging too during those years

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pioneer Dawg

Ill stick by mine either way. NCAA, SEC overall, SEC only.

Can you get slugging too during those years

---

I think I can -- but it will require more excel work than I'm prepared to do at the moment... It's not in a convenient chart...

Am I the only one that is not excited about the change? Our team is built on pitching, defense and getting on base any way possible.

We are not a power team and I know everyone is expecting Garner and Humphries to start mashing - but Im worried that like this year, they won't really get reps.

Looking at our roster right now, I don't want teams with big hitters to start having the chance to hit more home runs. I think that goes against who we are as a team. Am I overthinking this?

I would also think the new balls will hurt soft tossing pitchers like Ross Mitchell and Laster. I would think power arms wouldn't be as affected as much, but maybe Im wrong.

I just think Cohen has done such a good job of figuring out how to score runs and more importantly win with these dead bats, Im not eager to change the bats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog

Am I the only one that is not excited about the change? Our team is built on pitching, defense and getting on base any way possible.

We are not a power team and I know everyone is expecting Garner and Humphries to start mashing - but Im worried that like this year, they won't really get reps.

Looking at our roster right now, I don't want teams with big hitters to start having the chance to hit more home runs. I think that goes against who we are as a team. Am I overthinking this?

I would also think the new balls will hurt soft tossing pitchers like Ross Mitchell and Laster. I would think power arms wouldn't be as affected as much, but maybe Im wrong.

I just think Cohen has done such a good job of figuring out how to score runs and more importantly win with these dead bats, Im not eager to change the bats.

---

I think you are overthinking it. Cohen can build the team to do anything at this point. He built it the way he did before because of the situation -- and has been molding and rebuilding it accordingly. We grabbed a few players in the 2012 class in preparation of a change -- and loaded up in the 2013 class for it. Our second year guys in our national #2 recruiting class are as fitted for the new ball as any class recruited in the country that year...

To me, it just comes back to the fact that homeruns should be homeruns. That's baseball purity. Won't help nor hurt us in the long run -- just bring more overall fan interest back into the game. Omaha is an abomination to the game right now -- and it was last year when we went deep. Do I think we go deep either way? Sure, because we hit a ton of balls that would have gone out as well. UCLA on the other hand probably doesn't. The big stage should be a spotlight for great hitters and great teams -- and it really is just defined by mistakes and fundamentals at this point...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

I think you are overthinking it. Cohen can build the team to do anything at this point. He built it the way he did before because of the situation -- and has been molding and rebuilding it accordingly. We grabbed a few players in the 2012 class in preparation of a change -- and loaded up in the 2013 class for it. Our second year guys in our national #2 recruiting class are as fitted for the new ball as any class recruited in the country that year...

To me, it just comes back to the fact that homeruns should be homeruns. That's baseball purity. Won't help nor hurt us in the long run -- just bring more overall fan interest back into the game. Omaha is an abomination to the game right now -- and it was last year when we went deep. Do I think we go deep either way? Sure, because we hit a ton of balls that would have gone out as well. UCLA on the other hand probably doesn't. The big stage should be a spotlight for great hitters and great teams -- and it really is just defined by mistakes and fundamentals at this point...

---

That is great to hear. The only two newcomers that showed any real offensive promise to me was Collins and Heck, but neither one of them seemed like power hitter to me.

Who are you projecting to be the power bats next year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

I think you are overthinking it. Cohen can build the team to do anything at this point. He built it the way he did before because of the situation -- and has been molding and rebuilding it accordingly. We grabbed a few players in the 2012 class in preparation of a change -- and loaded up in the 2013 class for it. Our second year guys in our national #2 recruiting class are as fitted for the new ball as any class recruited in the country that year...

To me, it just comes back to the fact that homeruns should be homeruns. That's baseball purity. Won't help nor hurt us in the long run -- just bring more overall fan interest back into the game. Omaha is an abomination to the game right now -- and it was last year when we went deep. Do I think we go deep either way? Sure, because we hit a ton of balls that would have gone out as well. UCLA on the other hand probably doesn't. The big stage should be a spotlight for great hitters and great teams -- and it really is just defined by mistakes and fundamentals at this point...

---

How many truly great power hitters have been in Omaha over the past two years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog

That is great to hear. The only two newcomers that showed any real offensive promise to me was Collins and Heck, but neither one of them seemed like power hitter to me. tet

Who are you projecting to be the power bats next year?

---

Collins hit a bunch of balls last year that have a good chance of getting out with the new balls. He seems like a traditional power hitter -- just without quite the power to get them out of the yard as a true freshman with the BBCOR setup...

Collins, Hump, Garner, Rooker, Swinarski, Ingram all have homerun potential. Cody Brown will probably hit a couple as well, and a couple of the incoming guys should be pretty decent power guys...

As of now, it's all just potential. People have to step up into the roles. In 2013, they did. This year, they didn't. That's the difference in the 2 teams...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KB21

How many truly great power hitters have been in Omaha over the past two years?

---

A bunch...

Schwarber
Conforto
Turner
Renfroe
Moran

All were first round position players in the past 2 drafts -- and I feel certain I'm missing a few -- and there are several more future first rounders playing this year...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

Collins hit a bunch of balls last year that have a good chance of getting out with the new balls. He seems like a traditional power hitter -- just without quite the power to get them out of the yard as a true freshman with the BBCOR setup...

Collins, Hump, Garner, Rooker, Swinarski, Ingram all have homerun potential. Cody Brown will probably hit a couple as well, and a couple of the incoming guys should be pretty decent power guys...

As of now, it's all just potential. People have to step up into the roles. In 2013, they did. This year, they didn't. That's the difference in the 2 teams...

---

Ok - That is my thinking as well - I didn't think we had an established power hitter in the lineup as of yet, but that doesn't mean one couldn't pop up.

Also, if Rea comes back with his head screwed on straight - he could easily put up 15-20 Hr's if he goes back to 2012 form.