The new ball, launch angle and pace of play

H

Horsehide Harry

<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
I've been thinking about the new ball and launch angle and the resulting effect on power output by ML players and came up with the question: Why would MLB allow the new ball?

Obviously they are a multi-billion dollar business and could make the balls any way they want. So why the new ball?

I think it is intended to do 2 things: Shorten the game and diminish the earning power of power hitters, at least the middle tier power hitters (which also ties in to veteran hitters who are older and have lost a step but still can hit it a long way) all while keeping scoring and fan interest at high levels.

Think about it: If the ball is harder, goes further and is more prone to the HR then players adjust. They adjust their hitting style/angle and swing harder. The ability of hitting HR transfers further down the food chain meaning that more end up with the ability to hit a HR which changes the meritocracy diminishing the leverage of those who rely on their ability to hit HR and making the ability more commodity like as far as compensation evaluation is concerned. It also diminishes the value of players as they age even if they keep their power.

The K is then more important to pitchers and the hitters are helping with K's to an extent by changes in their approach.

The game moves faster (theoretically) and is less costly (circumstantial at this point).

You could say baseball could take the ball the other way, deaden it, get a lot of easy ground ball outs and finish in a Maddux like 2 hours with a lot of 2-1 games. I think they are afraid of going that way because it was lose interest. Fans like to see HR and like scoring. Not many purists who want to see an old fashioned pitching duel anymore and certainly would not be if it appeared the pitching duels were being manufactured by an intentional dead ball.

I may be wrong. But, again the question. Why does MLB allow the new ball? How do they benefit?
 
I raise the possibility that the new ball is not something that has arisen by design...no grand conspiracy...i realize that this view runs contrary to our zeitgeist...but if ever there was a time to be a contrarian this be it
 
Horsehide Harry said:
I've been thinking about the new ball and launch angle and the resulting effect on power output by ML players and came up with the question: Why would MLB allow the new ball?

Obviously they are a multi-billion dollar business and could make the balls any way they want. So why the new ball?

I think it is intended to do 2 things: Shorten the game and diminish the earning power of power hitters, at least the middle tier power hitters (which also ties in to veteran hitters who are older and have lost a step but still can hit it a long way) all while keeping scoring and fan interest at high levels.

Think about it: If the ball is harder, goes further and is more prone to the HR then players adjust. They adjust their hitting style/angle and swing harder. The ability of hitting HR transfers further down the food chain meaning that more end up with the ability to hit a HR which changes the meritocracy diminishing the leverage of those who rely on their ability to hit HR and making the ability more commodity like as far as compensation evaluation is concerned. It also diminishes the value of players as they age even if they keep their power.

The K is then more important to pitchers and the hitters are helping with K's to an extent by changes in their approach.

The game moves faster (theoretically) and is less costly (circumstantial at this point).

You could say baseball could take the ball the other way, deaden it, get a lot of easy ground ball outs and finish in a Maddux like 2 hours with a lot of 2-1 games. I think they are afraid of going that way because it was lose interest. Fans like to see HR and like scoring. Not many purists who want to see an old fashioned pitching duel anymore and certainly would not be if it appeared the pitching duels were being manufactured by an intentional dead ball.

I may be wrong. But, again the question. Why does MLB allow the new ball? How do they benefit?
Click to expand...

I think you're over analyzing. It's quite simple. Baseball is losing popularity, especially with young people, and home runs tend to be the most exciting moment in baseball to a casual fan. So the more home runs, the more people can get excited. I believe it's an attempt by them to generate more excitement to the game.
 
nsacpi said:
I raise the possibility that the new ball is not something that has arisen by design...no grand conspiracy...i realize that this view runs contrary to our zeitgeist...but if ever there was a time to be a contrarian this be it
Click to expand...

I might agree if MLB had not had an opportunity to address it, but didn't.
 
thewupk said:
strikeouts do lead to more pitches and longer abs
Click to expand...

But longer AB's combined with the pace of play stuff might not equal the delay associated with "smaller ball" type of play.

Maddux pitched to be hit much of the time because he could uncannily dictate where the ball would be hit leading to a quick ground out.

The quickest game is a 2-1 (or 2-0) pitching duel where you have 2 Maddux type pitchers on the mound. But Maddux was one of a kind so you don't have that and even if you did, the vast majority of the audience isn't interested in that type of baseball on a routine basis.

However, as Matt said, guys getting on and pitchers struggling throughout the game will lead to an overall longer game than a guy throwing 12 pitches and getting 3 strikeouts while giving up a solo shot.

I admit that I haven't done nor seen a study on it.

But my intuition (which I amit may be wrong) is that a higher scoring game with HR's and strikeouts is a faster game than the same higher scoring game with equal scoring (ie no HR but hits and walks) and K game. It's training the players. If Albies suddenly becomes a HR threat, then he is being trained by results to seek more HR, bunt less, hit less on the ground and probably K more because of an adjusted swing.
 
Lol this was not the reason they changed the ball if they did it intentionally. If it was intentional it was to boost offense. Period.

You’re just looking for things to write 1000 words about now.
 
Enscheff said:
Lol this was not the reason they changed the ball if they did it intentionally. If it was intentional it was to boost offense. Period.

You’re just looking for things to write 1000 words about now.
Click to expand...

I would like to make this short and sweet, well short of 1,000 words.

**** OFF

There, can we be friends again?
 
Horsehide Harry said:
But longer AB's combined with the pace of play stuff might not equal the delay associated with "smaller ball" type of play.

Maddux pitched to be hit much of the time because he could uncannily dictate where the ball would be hit leading to a quick ground out.

The quickest game is a 2-1 (or 2-0) pitching duel where you have 2 Maddux type pitchers on the mound. But Maddux was one of a kind so you don't have that and even if you did, the vast majority of the audience isn't interested in that type of baseball on a routine basis.

However, as Matt said, guys getting on and pitchers struggling throughout the game will lead to an overall longer game than a guy throwing 12 pitches and getting 3 strikeouts while giving up a solo shot.

I admit that I haven't done nor seen a study on it.

But my intuition (which I amit may be wrong) is that a higher scoring game with HR's and strikeouts is a faster game than the same higher scoring game with equal scoring (ie no HR but hits and walks) and K game. It's training the players. If Albies suddenly becomes a HR threat, then he is being trained by results to seek more HR, bunt less, hit less on the ground and probably K more because of an adjusted swing.
Click to expand...

Your intuition is likely wrong. Homers and K's are longer at bats, more pitches, and likely more walks and pitching changes. It likely isn't going to affect the game at all, imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top