|
|
Post by unionstation82 on Feb 16, 2021 8:38:16 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by olpapa on Feb 16, 2021 9:00:49 GMT -6
I absolutely agree with Big Papi. With the introduction of the DH and now the “home run or strikeout” approach to hitting, there is very little strategy involved in the game anymore. For the fans it’s just sitting, watching and waiting for the next goon to club one over the fence. May as well go to a beer league softball game. It’s just as exciting and a lot cheaper.
|
|
|
|
Post by blcoach8 on Feb 16, 2021 12:13:46 GMT -6
I agree with him 100%. I blame a lot of it on too much reliance on analytics......angle of elevation, exit velocity, WAR, and the rest. No emphasis on hitting the line drive, hitting behind the runner, advancing runners, scoring the runner from third with one out, bunting, base stealing, etc. It's all about the home run. It is too much home run or strikeout trying for the home run. We have a few Astros who have fallen into this trap and I blame a lot of it on Hinch and the stat freaks who rely solely on analytics and forget the human aspect of the game. Managers are scared to go by a "gut feeling" because it goes against what the "stats" say to do. In other words, the game is being ruined by rule changes and relying too much on home runs and use of analytics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hunter McCormick on Feb 16, 2021 13:59:08 GMT -6
"We used to want to develop great hitters. Now it's all strikeouts with some home runs and it's straight-up (f------) boring. If you could bet in Vegas that the next hitter was going to strike out, you'd take it every time." Make an out of any kind? Sure. I'd bet that would be the outcome. But baseball has been that way since it started! Strike out? I'd bet he won't! Only a fool would bet he would. Put your money where your mouth is, Mr Ortiz, and I'll own your riches.
Of all qualifying batters, the most likely strikeout candidate in 2019 was Domingo Santana of the Mariners. Just under one third of his plate appearances resulted in a strikeout. Over two thirds of the time the result was NOT a strikeout. www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=y&type=c,16,6,35&season=2019&month=0&season1=2019&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=2019-01-01&enddate=2019-12-31&sort=5,d Other batters in MLB were less likely to strikeout. The league average in 2019 was 23%. www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,16,6,35&season=2019&month=0&season1=2019&ind=0&team=0,ss&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0 For even money, over the long term, betting against a strikeout is money in the bank.
Yeah, I get the sentiment. We don't like strikeouts and they're more prevalent now, than ever in history. But the Vegas statement is a bridge too far. |
|
|
|
Post by olpapa on Feb 16, 2021 16:46:24 GMT -6
I think Papi was referring to betting on a strikeout vs a home run.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hunter McCormick on Feb 18, 2021 11:13:44 GMT -6
I think Papi was referring to betting on a strikeout vs a home run. That's not what he said, although that might have been what he was thinking. And that's a bizarre thought. It's more likely a Plate Appearance would result in something other than a strikeout or home run. So there would be more cases where there was no winner when betting on 'a strikeout vs a home run'. While we're on the subject of weird thoughts ... What if there were only two possible outcomes of a plate appearance: A strikeout or a home run? A strikeout is more likely than home run. And that's pretty much been the case, on-average, throughout baseball history. Lately, strikeouts are significantly more common than home runs. Does that really matter?Let's imagine a lineup that can only strikeout or homer. How often can they strikeout without it being more of a negative than the home runs are a positive? If the team has THREE times as many strikeouts as home runs, they'll average 9 runs for 27 outs. Each plate appearance will be boring AF. Either a solo homer or a strikeout. But even with a mediocre pitching staff and defense, they'd win a amazing number of games. Since building a team that can win games should be a high priority for any baseball organization, it's little wonder we have a focus on home runs. Creating 'excitement' is nice. Winning games is nicer, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by olpapa on Feb 18, 2021 13:48:15 GMT -6
When I was a young man a friend of mine played on one of the better slow pitch softball teams in the state of Texas. Every guy on that team was pumped up on steroids. They won most of their games by one guy after the other stepping in and jacking the ball out of the park. They hosted a tournament locally and like teams from all over the state came to play in our city. My friend invited me to come to the tournament. I did. My friend’s team won the tournament. I’ve never been more bored in my life than I was at that tournament. That is where MLB is headed.
|
|
|
|
Post by ɮօʀȶǟʐ on Feb 18, 2021 13:59:51 GMT -6
The real question is, why does Ortiz get a pass for using steroids during his playing career when better players than he are sitting outside the HOF unable to get in without a ticket?
|
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Feb 19, 2021 8:32:43 GMT -6
The real question is, why does Ortiz get a pass for using steroids during his playing career when better players than he are sitting outside the HOF unable to get in without a ticket? Was he actually proven with a failed test and/or the Mitchell Investigation though? I think it was just rumors. |
|
|
|
Post by ɮօʀȶǟʐ on Feb 20, 2021 0:11:59 GMT -6
The real question is, why does Ortiz get a pass for using steroids during his playing career when better players than he are sitting outside the HOF unable to get in without a ticket? Was he actually proven with a failed test and/or the Mitchell Investigation though? I think it was just rumors. I don't remember, but it was probably covered up by the league because of who he played for and who he is. |
|
|
|
Post by olpapa on Feb 20, 2021 7:34:31 GMT -6
|
|
