K's will likely outnumber hits in 2018

[USAFChief]

https://www.apnews.com/4b92bebe074f4990893685165108be7d/Whiff-of-offense:-Ks-top-hits,-lowest-average-since-'72

 

It looks like 2018 will indeed be the first season in which K's outnumber hits.

 

I think MLB needs to take some action. Three true outcomes is ******* boring baseball. 

 

I just don't know what needs to be done. 

[gunnarthor]

Agreed, I find it boring too but not sure how to fix it. Make the OF walls higher? Get rid of bandbox parks that make offensive/defensive extremes possible (Fenway/A's Colosseum)?

 

Hopefully, this is just a cycle that the game is going through.

[jimmer]

I think if some fans are finding baseball boring on how it's evolved, they can always stop watching. I don't think baseball needs to devolve to a less smart way of playing to appease some fans.

[biggentleben]

I always love reading two articles from someone back-to-back (or two consecutive arguments on a message board) where they in one breath advocate for the DH strongly, using arguments about more offense and how fans love the added offense. Then the next argument or article is how horrible it is that strikeouts are at such a high rate.

 

Yeah...

[Vanimal46]

I've taken jimmer's advice and rolled with it. Efficient and smart baseball doesn't mean it's a good product.

 

With the Twins playing mostly bad this year I've had a lot of time to think about why I still care about the Twins and baseball. There's a lot of things that bother me about this era. One of my biggest gripes is analytics telling everyone regardless of size that it's better to upper cut swing for the fences.

 

As we stand today, 76 qualified hitters have 20+ HRs. 98 qualified hitters have 16+ HRs. 20 HRs used to be a notable achievement.... Now it's a baseline for most players.

 

Analytics also tells us to work a count and draw walks instead of being aggressive and making contact. It seems like teams always had an Astudillo type on roster that consistently put the ball in play. Astudillo is now a unicorn in this era of baseball.

[jkcarew]

 

I think if some fans are finding baseball boring on how it's evolved, they can always stop watching. I don't think baseball needs to devolve to a less smart way of playing to appease some fans.

When 'smart' is the opposite of entertaining, it will be a problem.  Accepting that the sport becomes less popular with the general public is not a good strategy, IMO.

[jimmer]

 

When 'smart' is the opposite of entertaining, it will be a problem.  Accepting that the sport becomes less popular with the general public is not a good strategy, IMO.

except when one figures it's the opposite of entertaining.  I find the game as fun as ever. I doubt I'm alone.  

 

I like that teams are looking into the weeds of the game and playing smarter.  

 

No one is making fans who find the game boring now to keep watching.

[jkcarew]

I do think the relative reward for attempting to 'launch' needs to be somehow decreased (which is not the same as saying it should be eliminated).  Bigger parks (in the long-term) is the best way to solve this IMO...as it also creates more area to defend in the field of play, which should elevate BABiP and creating more incentive for 'contact' swinging.  In the meantime, not sure what can be done with the ball in a viable manner, but it should at least be looked at.

 

I've said it before, I love the power guys and the power displays.  But I miss the diversity.  When the number 1 and 2 and 7 and 8 guys in the order all have basically the same offensive game/approach as the number 4 guy.  That's boring.

[old nurse]

If you do not like strikeouts then go watch cricket.

[ashbury]

I always love reading two articles from someone back-to-back ..

Moderator's note: Just a reminder, try to not make it personal or get overly sarcastic when making an observation like that to anyone. The comparison can be made just as well, by asking straightforwardly.

[ashbury]

One of my biggest gripes is analytics telling everyone regardless of size that it's better to upper cut swing for the fences.

Is that what analytics says? Studies have shown that launch-angle tradeoffs can be to the hitter's advantage, but I doubt any studies have glorified warning track power.

[jkcarew]

 

except when one figures it's the opposite of entertaining.  I find the game as fun as ever. I doubt I'm alone.  

 

I like that teams are looking into the weeds of the game and playing smarter.  

 

No one is making fans who find the game boring now to keep watching.

Maybe I'm just interpreting this topic differently.  I don't see the topic and think "what's compelling for my tastes, or any current hard-core fan's taste, when we watch games in 2019".  I interpret the topic as a longer-term challenge/question.  And in that regard, I view it the responsibility of the game's stewards to see that, as things evolve, baseball adapts in a way that maximizes appeal not to just for the hard-core guys like us, but to the general public as well...the parents of the next and the next and the next generations of future players and fans.

 

Also, I find the concept that somehow the current game has arrived or achieved some significant/lasting/final level of 'smartness' not only misleading...but wrong.  The game isn't played any 'smarter' today than it ever has been.  Unless one believes that humans inherently lacked cognitive abilities in 1970 (for instance) that they possess today...and unless one doubts that 80 years from now most hard-core fans will be thinking how unsophisticated baseball was back in 'the teens'.  Today's game has simply adapted to the facilities, equipment, rules, and information technology that's available.  Just like it always has, and always will.  The fact that changes in technologies that affect how the game is played are accelerating, IMO only warrants further that MLB should be a bit more aggressive in considering  how it should adapt.

 

 

[Vanimal46]

Is that what analytics says? Studies have shown that launch-angle tradeoffs can be to the hitter's advantage, but I doubt any studies have glorified warning track power.

Coaching, video analysis, some higher power is telling players to change their launch angle and swing for a HR...

 

Someone told 5'11 210 lb. Eugenio Suarez he was better off swinging for the fences... He has as many HRs this season than his 5 year minor league seasons combined.

 

Did anyone anticipate Eduardo Escobar being a 20+ HR hitter at any point in his career? I certainly didn't from 2013-2016.

[USAFChief]

 

I always love reading two articles from someone back-to-back (or two consecutive arguments on a message board) where they in one breath advocate for the DH strongly, using arguments about more offense and how fans love the added offense. Then the next argument or article is how horrible it is that strikeouts are at such a high rate.

 

Yeah...

I'm not sure if this is directed at me, but if so:

 

I prefer the DH over having the pitcher hit, but I don't feel all that strongly about it, and I don't recall posting anything about the DH recently. Not sure what you're referring to. I do think for the good of baseball, they need to make the AL and NL play by the same rules, and I can't see the DH going away, so get on with it already.

 

In any case, I don't see why one couldn't both be an advocate of the DH, and not like the rise in three-true-outcome baseball. Watching pitchers hit is as anti-action as it gets.

 

And just for the record, I LOVE power hitting in a player. Just not at the expense of everything else. I want to watch baseball in which there are HRs, but also base hits, stolen bases, hit and runs. I want to see shortstops make great plays in the hole and throw out a runner at first, rather than watch a full count turn into a walk or a K, hitter after hitter.

[ashbury]

Coaching, video analysis, some higher power is telling players to change their launch angle and swing for a HR...

 

Someone told 5'11 210 lb. Eugenio Suarez he was better off swinging for the fences... He has as many HRs this season than his 5 year minor league seasons combined.

 

Did anyone anticipate Eduardo Escobar being a 20+ HR hitter at any point in his career? I certainly didn't from 2013-2016.

Both of these guys have become more potent offensive pieces than they were. I wouldn't use them as examples of analytics gone wrong.

 

Analytics tries to guide teams how to do better. Making the game more fun for fans is the area for the rules-makers.

 

I'd go with a less-tightly wound baseball to address the main problem, and then later adjust other things like mound height to compensate, if batters don't adjust with two-strike counts and keep swinging for the fences futilely.

[biggentleben]

 

I'm not sure if this is directed at me, but if so:

 

I prefer the DH over having the pitcher hit, but I don't feel all that strongly about it, and I don't recall posting anything about the DH recently. Not sure what you're referring to. I do think for the good of baseball, they need to make the AL and NL play by the same rules, and I can't see the DH going away, so get on with it already.

 

In any case, I don't see why one couldn't both be an advocate of the DH, and not like the rise in three-true-outcome baseball. Watching pitchers hit is as anti-action as it gets.

 

And just for the record, I LOVE power hitting in a player. Just not at the expense of everything else. I want to watch baseball in which there are HRs, but also base hits, stolen bases, hit and runs. I want to see shortstops make great plays in the hole and throw out a runner at first, rather than watch a full count turn into a walk or a K, hitter after hitter.

 

Not at all pointed at you. It's a common refrain I've noted in baseball discussion around the internet.

 

One thing I do note is a great discourse that you (as the noted one of the board who remembers the formation of the dirt around MLB fields!) may appreciate...I recently had a good discussion with a friend and a scout, and the friend related that he had been to a field and seen where Frank Howard hit a home run in the minor leagues, and he absolutely could not believe that a player could hit a ball that far.

 

The scout and I piggybacked on one another with a similar refrain, but he had the experience in the game to hammer it home. With bigger ballparks, to be a three true outcome hitter required an incredible amount of strength. Guys could pound out a few home runs that threatened 500 feet each summer, and many were well past 425 feet in distance. One of the big things rarely discussed is that with all of our knowledge of launch angles and exit velocities and such, we know enough to get the ball just over the fence. More home runs has not been at greater distance, in spite of all of the knowledge - it's been the opposite.

 

If baseball really was concerned with the strikeout issue, they could bring back fences, meaning only the guys with "true" power would clear them, and seeking out more consistent contact would be the goal of those guys who are not the truly elite giants of the game in power.

[dgwills]

I read an article linked here recently and the players said they are going for home runs more because it's too hard to get multiple hits in and inning and score runs. Mainly because the pitchers are too good now. Defensive shifts were part of the issue as well. If you're trying to hit doubles and home runs, obviously you're going to strike out more.

I can't see how you can stop teams from shifting. Perhaps lowering the mound to ground level and using an automatic strike zone would help?

[TheLeviathan]

Baseball has an entertainment problem in general and the rise of the "outcomes" model is not to blame IMO.  It is, however, making the issue more alarming like gas on a fire.

 

Baseball is going to have to make some radical changes in the next decade.  For the health of the sport, I hope they choose to act much faster than that or it may be too late.  

 

Starting with the ball and the mandating the DH in both leagues.

[notoriousgod71]

More nauseating to me is the bullpen usage. There are going to be eight or nine guys with 200 innings pitched this year. That is absurd.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I have zero problems with two of the three outcomes, as they add to the action of the game. A homer is always exciting and a walk puts a runner on the bases, which adds to the tension.

 

Strikeouts, on the other hand, are extremely boring in high numbers. It's becoming a problem across baseball.

 

But, like chief, I have no idea what to do about it.

 

I'm all in favor of playing "smart baseball" but this is a spectator sport; watching three guys come to the plate and miss the ball a bunch of times before sitting back down is not a good spectating experience.

[The Wise One]

BB% over the last dozen years have fluctuated, and is lower than the bygone times. I do not know why people would complain about walks. 

Statcast has been around since 2015. Pitchf/x since 2006.  As people use the data it allows them to play the game smarter.  Are players playing better or worse? Total errors are trending down.  Bonehead plays, taking the extra base are not counted anywhere. Peoples recollection is not reliable as one would think. For every Rosario there is also a Norwood (ran like a deer, played like a deer in headlight)  Every team had one, some are more forgettable. 

[Dozier's Glorious Hair]

Astudillo will save baseball. 

[IndianaTwin]

 

...a Norwood (ran like a deer, played like a deer in headlight)  ... 

 

As always, there have been some really great posts and descriptions this season. 

 

This one, however, has to be in the running for "Post of the Year." 

[South Dakota Tom]

 

   Because it would be hard to retrofit every ballpark, the only other way to reduce the current incentive-driven homer-happy game would be by transforming the ball itself.  I think putting such a governor on the sport would be bad for its appeal (dead ball era 2 doesn't have a great ring to it). 

   Is there a solution?  How long would it take to implement a minimum - or at least say any new park built hereafter must be at least x-ft at the corners, alleys and straight-away center, while still allowing for variety in design?  While the sport transitioned to the bigger parks, it would create an interesting dichotomy of styles.

[twinssporto]

I'm not worried about this situation at all.  The game of baseball has continually evolved for over 100 years just like everything else in the world such as business, politics, science, economics, warfare, etc. 

 

Analytics are playing a part of this story along with defensive shifts, pitching mechanics, approaches to hitting and game managing tactics.  At the moment the pitchers have the upper hand.  Eventually hitting will take over and you will have people asking to raise the mound, shorten the distance to home plate, etc.  

 

We now have analytics that teach us launch angle, HR's vs. doubles, hits vs. walks, blah, blah, blah....Now we got the "opener" role too.  Here's a novel approach I'm waiting for the next baseball genius to figure out. Why not get better hitting coaches and choke teams to death that play the shift on you?  If you're playing a team that has 7 guys standing in right field hit the damn ball to left field.  I'd say bunt it that way but nobody knows how to do that anymore.  When you have two guys standing on base now that single or double really means something. Once that happens contact hitters will be all the rage.

 

To me its fascinating to watch the evolution of this game and the new ways teams are trying to gain an advantage. These new issues may have a short term, negative impact on the fan base and turn away some potential new fans but I doubt it will be that impactful in the long run.

 

Long live the shift! Long live the HR! Long live the team that can bat against the shift!  I never thought bell bottom jeans would become the rage after the 70's but I guessed wrong...Someday the high batting average/contact hitters will be in vogue again too.