HR's.. enough is enough

[DreamTeams]

I'd love to take my kid to a vintage baseball game and would visit them regularly myself. Unfortunately there are no vintage teams playing in California. But, I know it's coming. People are fed up with the pro game and are starting to get pro-active about it. Vintage baseball is starting to take hold, again. It won't replace the pro game, but it'll be a very nice alternative.

Interested in vintage baseball? These teams play for the love of the game. I put a link to their site in my post on the first page of this thread. But here it is again... www.vbba.org

[Rasmuth]

I remember when 40 homers was a big deal!!! 35 usually was where the league leaders were. When George Foster hit 52 in the mid 70's it seemed so out of place...

Once upon a time 500 homers was a real plateau and 600 was hallowed ground. I'll tell you right now...Willie Mays 660 homers is much more of an accomplishment than when Barry Bonds passes him. To me 500 homers now is like 350 or 400 in the past.

oh well...I'd much rather see a well pitched 1 to nothing game

[Jason Moyer]

YankeesPride,

I feel bad for arguing park effects with you constantly but I did want to note that the ones I was using earlier were for long-term averages.

Places like STATS use a weighted system based over a 5 year period, where the current year is weighted twice as much as the other 4 years. This provides a much more reliable park factor that doesn't change much over time.

A single season is way too small of a sample size to ascertain anything. This is part of the reason the pitching dominance occurred from 1962-1968. MLB assumed that hitting was going to explode based on 1 season, 1961, and made rule changed to balance things. Unfortunately, they actually ended up creating a ridiculous amount of pitching dominance because they based their decision on 1 season of hitting dominance (and really, 1961 wasn't a hitting dominant year, expansion just lowered the competitive balance ever so slightly, as it always does, creating slightly more extreme peaks - expansion affects hitting/pitching equally).

Same thing could be said of park factors. Personally, I think single-season factors are interesting, but not really that valuable when analyzing a park's effects on the games played there. The more data you have, the more accurately you can gauge the effect a park is having on a player's stats.

Finally, I think I mentioned this before, but they aren't meant for statistical prediction (at least in the "so and so would hit this many homeruns in this park during this year" sense - they're useful if you want to analyze trades and such or try and predict how someone will hit for a new team, if used in conjunction with Bill James aging algorithms). My predictions made before were mere pondering, and there was a huge flaw in my logic that surprisingly no one pointed out (hint: what % of a player's games are played at home?).

Jason

[Jason Moyer]

Originally posted by Rasmuth
oh well...I'd much rather see a well pitched 1 to nothing game

Y'know, the arguments that homeruns draw fans are so ridiculous.

How many people watch football because they want to see a touchdown or field goal?

How many people watch hockey because they want to see a ton of goals scored?

There's a lot more to any sport than scoring. A 6-3 football game is an incredibly exciting thing. The most exciting hockey game I've personally seen was the marathon 1-0 game the Flyers/Penguins played here a few years ago in the playoffs (believe it went to 4 overtimes?).

The thing that the commissioner, owners, and players need to realize is that a 3-2 baseball game has more of the tension that makes baseball exciting than a 12-6 snoozer.

They also need to fix the game lengths caused by constant starting/stopping. Stop letting batters step out of the box after every pitch. 20 years ago, if someone had tried to step out of the box more than once in an at bat, the umpire would have eventually said "enough is enough". Mike Hargrove, actually, is famous largely because he called time after each and every pitch. Nowadays, everyone does that. I'll stop now before I start ranting about multiple pitching changes in an inning, and infinte pickoff attempts.

Could you imagine how exciting basketball or football would be if the players could just stand around for as long as they want inbetween plays?

Jason

[The Professor]

Home Runs don't make the game...amen to that!!

...I, too, prefer a white-knuckle pitchers duel anyday to a slugfest.

Whitey Herzog said as much in his book...of course, Whitey being Whitey was plugging himself (gotta love it)...but he all but said that anyone who thinks that HR's are what draws a crowd ought to look only as far back as his Cardinals teams of the 80s. His teams broke St.Louis (and Kansas City before that) attendence records 10 times in 15 years and turned St.Louis into "a sea of red on gamedays" ...this a team of guys who lived on rug-burners and punch shots into the outfield, and a ferocious assault on the pitchers psyce -- steal, steal, steal some more, steal down 10-0, steal up by 10. Great defense and a team game...still the best ball I've seen. The Cards were an exciting team, and it was even more exciting to anticipate what would happen when the teams big gun came up - in my memory, that was Jack Clark. Clark was a slugger among sluggers (when healthy, that being VERY rare), he could flat kill fastballs...yet his 35 HR plateau would look wimpy today...but when he came up, it was exciting....more for me than Mark McGwire.

...I'm by no means debating managerial style. I know some say that Whiteyball is a dead style, won't succeed in this day and age...perhaps. All I know is that I like to see good pitching, close ball games and guys who seem to have a true skill...not every player trying to define himself by how many HRs he had last season...

[Smaegol]

Well.. Guys back in the 1930's didnt use Steroids, and could never hang over the plate like they do nowadays. What would happen if he tried standing in like that against Gibson or Koufax??? Now sammy Sosa declines a steroid test. The league favors hitters so much now too. Why does no one else in the league get to wear that huge elbow shield except Bonds?! (Unless they have a legit injury). Didnt they say they were stressing that rule extra hard this year? Barry has no injuries im aware of to his elbow. Bravo to Clemens for drilling him. I would love to see Bob Gibson pitch against Bonds and put one right in the ribs and see how he stands in next time.
Rules need to start going back to helping out pitchers.. Baseball is turning into softball real quick

-Smaegol

[CMH]

Jason...i understand wat you mean about ballpark factors. and its ok that you argue against me on it. i like baseball arguments. everyone has their opinions and its fun to see what other people feel against what i feel.

i understand that atlanta's ballpark factor says its tough to hit homeruns. i agree with that. i just choose to ignore it b/c personally i feel that some players can overcome any ballpark factor. thats it. nothing more.

the example on PacBell was just to point out that we cant "predict" how a player will do in bark X b/c year by year the factors change. maybe you can say something like, "oh Player A could have hit 10 more homeruns if he played in Coors in 1995" that would be a more reasonable argument, in my opinion.

but anywayz, back to the new topic at hand. i love pitching duels. i know how it feels to hit a homerun whne you play baseball and its great. but i also know how it feels as a player and a fan to be part of a tight close game. most games over 4 or 5 runs arent that close compared to games under 4 runs. which ofcourse makes sense since a 3-1, 3-0, 3-2, etc. game is always close. well i love those scores heading into the 6th or 7th inning.

i think thats what makes playoff baseball so good. a lot of those games are usually close. look at game 7 of the World Series. what made that game a classic? it wasnt just that the Dbacks came back against Rivera and the Yanks, it was mainly due to the fact that the teams couldnt score a dayam run. and every time a run was scored, fans from the opposing side would start to get nervous and tense, b/c we knew that day that runs were hard to come by.

thats a great baseball game.

[BaseballMan]

Originally posted by Jason Moyer


Yes. Of course, baseball officials actually did something about the offensive surge then.

If Bart Giamatti were still alive the homerun surge would have ended 5 years ago. For that matter it would have likely never started. MLB has tested the tenacity of baseballs for years, and has allowed the balls to become livelier without creating new regulations. A strong commissioner would have put a regulation in place before it became a serious problem. Body armor would have been regulated the moment it appeared.

Honestly, I'm not sure why I care anymore. I hope there is a strike this year because maybe the MLB will finally die completely (the sport won't die, and professional leagues won't die, but I wouldn't be surprised if the MLB itself did). At least we wouldn't have to read any more of Joe Morgan's articles on espn.com.

Jason

Well i dont think the players who are not on steroids should be punish for hitting home runs.
So if players are honestly hitting more home runs we are suppose to stop it. Why? If they do it honestly why not give them credit.
So what if they played in hitters parks of today. Theres been pitcher parks too.
You still have to hit the ball before it can go anywhere.
When Gibson has an era of 1.12 they change the game for hitters,
now its suppose to be changed for pitchers.
I say just let them play.

[jblaze03fuel]

actually, the runs are down....homeruns are too.....from i think 1998, when mac daddy hit his record setting hrs. so i think its fine how it is.....i think u just get confused cuz there are a good core at the top, but after that there is a decent drop off.

[SSG Troyer]

Originally posted by Smaegol
...Now sammy Sosa declines a steroid test. The league favors hitters so much now too...
-Smaegol

Oh, come on. That's just unfair. The SI guy goes into the locker room after the game, and asks Sosa if he's doing steroids (a question he's been asked, oh, maybe 50 times lately). Sammy says no, but if the league eventually reqiures it, he'll be the first in line to be tested. The guy then hands him a card and suggests he go to a clinic 45 minutes away from the park to be tested right then. And Sammy Strikeout, quite rightly (IMHO) tells him to shove it. Props to The Whiffer for standing up to an a**hole.

Baseball needs a commissioner who has no financial ties to the owners or the players. It's called conflict of interest. If the judge in the upcoming WoldCom trials has a relative who lost money on their stock, he'll disqualify himself. Selig should do the same.

[Carplos]

Originally posted by Jason Moyer



Honestly, I'm not sure why I care anymore. I hope there is a strike this year because maybe the MLB will finally die completely (the sport won't die, and professional leagues won't die, but I wouldn't be surprised if the MLB itself did). At least we wouldn't have to read any more of Joe Morgan's articles on espn.com.

Jason

Would Baseball survive? I mean, it would never just dissapear, but leagues might become scarce. Kids might play it when they're little still, but once they get into high school and things, how many athletes would really choose baseball over football or basketball? There's still a profession to be made in those, where as in baseball, even there is Indy leagues, it's tough to live on Indy league salaries.

[Jason Moyer]

Originally posted by BaseballMan
If they do it honestly why not give them credit.

The reasons why there are so many homeruns:

1. Body armor. Nearly 50% of homeruns are to the opposite field now, because players can literally hang over the plate and go after outside pitches. 20 years ago less than 15% of homeruns were hit to the opposite field.

2. Steroids. I don't think this has the huge effect most people say it does, and I really doubt that more than 5-10% of players at the major league level use them.

Steroids increase strength. Hitting a homerun isn't about strength it's about bat speed. Look at Ted Williams - tall, scrawny guy but he had incredible bat speed.

Speaking of bat speed:

3. Thin handled bats. Bats have gradually gotten thinner since 1950. Ever wonder why it seems bats break so easily now? The more the mass of the bat is concentrated on the fat end, the easier it is to generate the bat speed that is required to hit a ball 400-500 feet. This is why I feel very strongly that the MLB should regulate the width of bat handles.

If players had to use the same equipment (bats, no armor) that Ted Williams and Willie Mays did, homeruns would be back down to normal levels very very quickly.

My other part of this response is directed towards whomever said that homeruns were declining. I have no idea where you're getting this information. Here are AB/HR for every 10th year in the NL, starting with 1950, and including 1998 and 2001:

1950's - 37
1960's - 44
1970's - 47
1980's - 48
1990's - 36

1998 - 35
2001 - 30

Don't see any increase in the AB/HR there.

Just to be on the safe side, let's check the AL:

1998 - 31
1999 - 30
2000 - 29
2001 - 31

Same story.

To put this in the context of a typical 600 AB player, an average player in the 1970's would have hit 13 homeruns, while an average player in 2001 hit 20. 20 HR's is pretty ridiculous for an average player, especially when you consider that pitchers are bogging that number down.

Jason

[KC]

Originally posted by Arbiter


You do realize that these would have been *above-average* dimensions throughout a good portion of history? Heck, Yankee Stadium's what, 20 feet deeper down the lines today than pre-remodeling?

Yankee Stadium's dimensions down the line may be deeper today than before renovation. But, in Babe Ruth's time, centerfield was 480 feet away from the plate. In Mickey Mantle's day, monument park was still in play. If you were going to hit a homerun in Yankee Stadium back in the day, it was going to centerfield.

[KC]

Originally posted by Chief Wahoo
Just a thought. Do you think people in the 1930's were having this same conversation?

Not on the Internet

[KC]

Originally posted by Smaegol
Well.. Guys back in the 1930's didnt use Steroids, and could never hang over the plate like they do nowadays. What would happen if he tried standing in like that against Gibson or Koufax??? Now sammy Sosa declines a steroid test. The league favors hitters so much now too. Why does no one else in the league get to wear that huge elbow shield except Bonds?! (Unless they have a legit injury). Didnt they say they were stressing that rule extra hard this year? Barry has no injuries im aware of to his elbow. Bravo to Clemens for drilling him. I would love to see Bob Gibson pitch against Bonds and put one right in the ribs and see how he stands in next time.
Rules need to start going back to helping out pitchers.. Baseball is turning into softball real quick

-Smaegol

You're damn right!

[jblaze03fuel]

Originally posted by SSG Troyer


Oh, come on. That's just unfair. The SI guy goes into the locker room after the game, and asks Sosa if he's doing steroids (a question he's been asked, oh, maybe 50 times lately). Sammy says no, but if the league eventually reqiures it, he'll be the first in line to be tested. The guy then hands him a card and suggests he go to a clinic 45 minutes away from the park to be tested right then. And Sammy Strikeout, quite rightly (IMHO) tells him to shove it. Props to The Whiffer for standing up to an a**hole.

Baseball needs a commissioner who has no financial ties to the owners or the players. It's called conflict of interest. If the judge in the upcoming WoldCom trials has a relative who lost money on their stock, he'll disqualify himself. Selig should do the same.

why was sosa so pissed? Well maybe it is because he is saddened that for what he has done for the cubs, the Dominican republic, etc.....and after all of that, ppl think he is on steroids, and don't believe him. That hurts a man's pride and thats just not right. He shoulda slapped the **** out of that man. Yes the man is trying to make a name for himself, yes he's already a good journalist, but hell......tell me all the journalist names that you know of right off the top of your head? hell i cant name anyone.....all the ppl argue the reporter dont need to make a name for himself, maybe not, maybe so, but when alot more money that he is making is in front of him.....or you......would u think twice?

[jblaze03fuel]

Bonds will be next......it will happen every year until baseball is no more, a player will do very well, and they will be asked if they are taking anything....IMO- i could care less, its all about honestly and well-being, if you cheat your way there, then the lord will get you when he has you.

[LAH]

Originally posted by Smaegol
Yeah, there will always be the Lance Berkmans put there. But for every one of those there are 50 Barry Bonds. And it pisses me off. Who was that guy the other night who hit a popup to the pitcher, jogged to first, and got thrown out when the pitcher dropped the ball!! With 2 outs and runners on!!!!! There are just too many players who have no respect for the game or its history. Baseball helps this along by knowingly allowing players to use steroids and heat temper thier bats and the stadiums.... Look at stadiums now days. half the parks out there have little league dimensions in the alleys. Look at Pac Belle Park, 307 to right field?? Are you kidding me?? Yankee stadium, 314 down the lines?!?!?

Does anyone else agree that A-B-C Baseball (bunting,stealing,manufacturing runs) is so much more exciting and takes so much more talent? Im so sick of this Homer Derby that they call MLB. Watch Sportscenter every night to see the Homers - er, highlights from each game..

sigh,
Smaegol

Like you could hit a ball 314...

The hardest thing to do in sports is hit a home run, especially off of a guy like Randy Johnson.

There is only 1 Barry Bonds, and he hit a home run off of Johnson the other night.

Point is, don't hate the player, hate the game. MLB needs to raise the mound and continue to work on the elbow pad rule.

But Barry Bonds is a special player and one of the best to ever play the game.

Home runs are part of the game, just like stealing bases is.

Home Runs do not win world championships, and Barry Bonds does not win world championships.

Pitching and defense win titles.

Look at the Yankees, D-Backs and Marlins, the last 3 teams to wint he world series. They all had great pitching and great defense, and they all played great team baseball.

-V

[LAH]

Originally posted by jblaze03fuel
Bonds will be next......it will happen every year until baseball is no more, a player will do very well, and they will be asked if they are taking anything....IMO- i could care less, its all about honestly and well-being, if you cheat your way there, then the lord will get you when he has you.

I read a report today which said that most MLB players are for testing for steroids.

I think that most players don't do it, and that they feel they get a bad image off of this.

I think the expansions over the past decade have more to do with the home run boom than steroids do...

-V

[Jason Moyer]

Originally posted by LAH Point is, don't hate the player, hate the game. MLB needs to raise the mound and continue to work on the elbow pad rule. [/B]

Man, 2 things I hope they don't do to combat homeruns is raise the mound or increase the strikezone.

One thing that gets overlooked when people are discussing the historical rate of HR's is the historical rate of K's. Body armor, moving the batter's box, regulating bat handle width, etc I'm fine with because you'd see people slapping outside pitches to the opposite field for cheap singles again. If baseball raises the mound/increases the strikezone, we should just give Randy Johnson 400 K's before the season starts.

Jason