Juiced Baseball Update

[Vanimal46]

 

This should be a giant red flag that something isn't right with the baseballs.

[biggentleben]

I put together a daily minor league thread for my site, highlighting top performances around the minors and previewing games of interest each day.

 

The last full week of April, on each day of the week, there were at least 40 home runs hit across AAA (IL and PCL combined). On some of those days, there were not even 10 games played. On multiple days there was at least one game with multiple players from the same team who hit multiple home runs. In one particular game, two teammates each hit 3 home runs, while a player on the opposing team hit 2...and there were still 3-4 more home runs throughout the game from other players as well.

 

It's incredibly skewed raw numbers in the minors this year because you really cannot look at a pitcher line in AAA the same as AA and below, which of course is the same with hitting.

[Vanimal46]

I put together a daily minor league thread for my site, highlighting top performances around the minors and previewing games of interest each day.

 

The last full week of April, on each day of the week, there were at least 40 home runs hit across AAA (IL and PCL combined). On some of those days, there were not even 10 games played. On multiple days there was at least one game with multiple players from the same team who hit multiple home runs. In one particular game, two teammates each hit 3 home runs, while a player on the opposing team hit 2...and there were still 3-4 more home runs throughout the game from other players as well.

 

It's incredibly skewed raw numbers in the minors this year because you really cannot look at a pitcher line in AAA the same as AA and below, which of course is the same with hitting.

What exactly did they do to the ball this year in AAA? And how are teams supposed to determine who's ready for MLB action when the numbers are skewed this bad?

[Mike Sixel]

What exactly did they do to the ball this year in AAA? And how are teams supposed to determine who's ready for MLB action when the numbers are skewed this bad?

They are using the major league ball this year. Should help know who is ready.....

[AceWrigley]

Guys are hitting them off the end of the bat, opposite field into the 2nd deck. I think it's ridiculous. I'm not a fan of the rabbit ball. The minors are using it this year too. The "3 true outcomes" (homerun, walk, strikeout) style of baseball is boring. Unjuice the ball, push back the fences some. Base hits rattling around inside the park are much more fun, for everyone.

[markos]

 

Guys are hitting them off the end of the bat, opposite field into the 2nd deck. I think it's ridiculous. I'm not a fan of the rabbit ball. The minors are using it this year too. The "3 true outcomes" (homerun, walk, strikeout) style of baseball is boring. Unjuice the ball, push back the fences some. Base hits rattling around inside the park are much more fun, for everyone.

I agree. But I think the changes you recommend have to be coupled with some kind of change to pitching. I do not think the increase in strikeouts is only because hitters are swinging for the fences all the time. Pitchers are throwing so much harder than they were just 10 years ago. If pitching isn't fixed somehow, than any ball/ballpark changes will just lead to more outs.

[dougd]

Robert Arthur had two  articles in BPro   concluding that the baseball has become less air resistant, just as it did in 2017, and now hundreds of long fly balls that might have died in the outfield are crossing the fences instead. He measures the air resistance of the baseball using pitch-tracking data. Tiny differences in air resistance multiply into five- or ten-foot changes in fly-ball distance.

[markos]

I often think about the "juiced" major league ball in the context of the prospect analysis from five-to-ten years ago. Specific to the Twins, I wonder how Dozier, Rosario and Sano would have been ranked from today's lens. I mean, today's analysis on batters focuses a lot on bat-to-ball skills, and much less on raw power. Analysts are now way more willing to bet that a player will develop power once they reach the big leagues, almost completely irrespective of their physiques. I know I was very critical of Rosario as he was coming up through the minors, mostly because I didn't think he would hit enough power to profile as a corner-outfielder. But now the baseball environment has changed in ways that perfectly complement his skills as a hitter. It makes me wonder who in the minors we are missing on because the game will change in ways we can't predict. Anyway, these are my deep thoughts for a Wednesday morning.

[nicksaviking]

 

Guys are hitting them off the end of the bat, opposite field into the 2nd deck. I think it's ridiculous. I'm not a fan of the rabbit ball. The minors are using it this year too. The "3 true outcomes" (homerun, walk, strikeout) style of baseball is boring. Unjuice the ball, push back the fences some. Base hits rattling around inside the park are much more fun, for everyone.

 

While I enjoy that more classic style of baseball, our Twins were built to compete in the HR derby-style game.

 

So, I'm going to have to pass on any changes if it's going to make the Twins obsolete once again, because I enjoy winning more.

[jkcarew]

It's a fine line, and we've crossed it. When all the guys in the batting order regardless of athletic/agility/speed profile and position played can reach the fence easily, then everyone develops the same approach and the same swing. And then pile on the analytical case for HR and K's over BA and balls in play. Diversity dies.

 

Don't really have an answer...but don't know why we have to have a juiced ball on top of it. Maybe when a pitcher gets killed by a line drive, we'll think about doing something. Although, I don't know if it's the 'rebound' properties (exit velo) that are contributing as much as the reduced wind resistance. And if you raise the seams to retard carry, guess what the pitchers will do with that...even more K's. No easy answers.

 

Very long term: the league should implement significantly greater dimensional minimums for new parks going forward.

[Vanimal46]

It's a fine line, and we've crossed it. When all the guys in the batting order regardless of athletic/agility/speed profile and position played can reach the fence easily, then everyone develops the same approach and the same swing. And then pile on the analytical case for HR and K's over BA and balls in play. Diversity dies.

 

Don't really have an answer...but don't know why we have to have a juiced ball on top of it. Maybe when a pitcher gets killed by a line drive, we'll think about doing something. Although, I don't know if it's the 'rebound' properties (exit velo) that are contributing as much as the reduced wind resistance. And if you raise the seams to retard carry, guess what the pitchers will do with that...even more K's. No easy answers.

 

Very long term: the league should implement significantly greater dimensional minimums for new parks going forward.

I concur... We're past the fine line now with the ball and something needs to be done about it. It's pretty silly when someone who's 5'9" 165 lbs soaking wet can mash 20 HRs a season.

 

There's going to be a lot of unnecessary clamoring for career minor leaguers because they're hitting 30 HRs with a juiced baseball.

[AceWrigley]

 

I agree. But I think the changes you recommend have to be coupled with some kind of change to pitching. I do not think the increase in strikeouts is only because hitters are swinging for the fences all the time. Pitchers are throwing so much harder than they were just 10 years ago. If pitching isn't fixed somehow, than any ball/ballpark changes will just lead to more outs.

Possibly. Major League hitters can time the big heaters. Players used to use bats with fatter handles for more surface area to connect with the baseball. Contact was key. Now everybody uses the thin-handled weighted bat they can hammer through the strike zone trying to drive the ball out of the park. I mean, you could lower the mound a little I suppose. You aren't going to get guys to throw the ball with less velocity, so I'm not sure how much tinkering on the pitching end would be useful. Maybe we'll just have to send hitters to the La Tortuga Hitting Academy. I still marvel at Joe Sewell's batting stats (1920-33). He averaged 10 strikeouts per 162 games. 114 Career strikeouts in 1,903 games. That's an average total for a full season today. Man, talk about contact.

[TheLeviathan]

I'm just happy the days of using two different baseballs is over.

 

That never made any sense to me.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I'm just happy the days of using two different baseballs is over.

 

That never made any sense to me.

 

only in AAA, though. Still weird, but an improvement!

[Danchat]

I'm confused why AAA used different balls... was there a reason, or just tradition? Is it because they have extra-small stadiums that have short distances to the outfield wall?

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I'm confused why AAA used different balls... was there a reason, or just tradition? Is it because they have extra-small stadiums that have short distances to the outfield wall?

all of the minor leagues do... different manufacturer. The switched AAA to MLB balls this year. 

[cardsfan]

Don't they re-use the ball more often than big leagues?

[Vanimal46]

[Nine of twelve]

 

The "3 true outcomes" (homerun, walk, strikeout) style of baseball is boring. Unjuice the ball, push back the fences some. Base hits rattling around inside the park are much more fun, for everyone.

A. The ball should have a higher air resistance and possibly a decreased hardness.

B. The mound should be lowered.

C. The strike zone should be enlarged.

 

A. and C. will result in fewer home runs. B. will result in fewer strikeouts. C. will result in fewer walks.

 

Pushing back fences, while probably a good idea for some stadiums, is plain and simply not possible except for very few stadiums. The same is true for increasing the height of outfield walls. 

[sftwinsfan]

I think even Al Newman would have hit at least 15 this year if he were still playing.  A game in Seattle comes to mind as I thought it was just crazy to see this little guy just barrel a ball with not even an aggressive swing and watch it sail out to dead center.  Pretty much makes the rule book irrelevent, kind of like the NFL. Maybe deadening the ball along with banning the defensive shifts would result in more players going for the base hit over trying to launch it over the fence.  

[notoriousgod71]

 

A. The ball should have a higher air resistance and possibly a decreased hardness.

B. The mound should be lowered.

C. The strike zone should be enlarged.

 

A. and C. will result in fewer home runs. B. will result in fewer strikeouts. C. will result in fewer walks.

 

Pushing back fences, while probably a good idea for some stadiums, is plain and simply not possible except for very few stadiums. The same is true for increasing the height of outfield walls. 

 

There are a number of stadiums where the fences have already been brought in. Move them back to their original dimensions. Fans sitting in left field in Detroit would probably enjoy not being 30 feet from the field.

 

Detroit, SD, NYM, and Seattle off the top of my head have all moved fences in recently.

[Vanimal46]

 

Trevor Plouffe had a funny reply to this tweet:

 

"Can't wait to tell my kids I played in the dead ball era."

[SomeGuy]

From Fangraphs, Makes it sound like they have mastered the art of making a baseball. Less seam drag, smoother leather, and a more perfect round to the baseballs. 

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/weve-reached-the-point-of-too-many-homers/

 

 

While one can point to the general trend of batters making greater efforts to elevate the ball — whether to hit it over shifted infielders or not — it’s more accurate to call that an adaptation to the new reality. The scientific evidence again points to the ball itself as being the driving factor. Earlier this week at The Athletic, Dr. Meredith Wills published a follow-up to last year’s breakthrough article, which itself was a follow-up to MLB’s Home Run Committee report. That committee, led by Dr. Alan Nathan, professor emeritus of physics at the University of Illinois, had found that the recent home run spike was caused by a decrease in the ball’s aerodynamic drag, but found no physical difference in the balls that would explain the change.

 

Conducting her own measurements using digital calipers and disassembled baseballs, Wills concluded that post-2015 balls’ laces, which were an average of nine percent thicker than balls from the 2010-14 period, were producing less bulging at the seams, yielding a more spherically symmetric ball with less aerodynamic drag — thus allowing them to fly further.

 

For her latest study, Wills examined 39 balls from this season, which she found differed from the 2015-18 balls and even earlier ones. Most notably, she found “demonstrably lower” seams, only 54.6 percent ± 15.0 percent as high as those on balls from previous seasons. By measuring the coefficient of static friction, she also found that the leather on this year’s balls is relatively smoother, concluding, “the static friction for the 2019 balls is 27.6 percent lower, a statistically significant result demonstrating the leather covers are genuinely smoother.” She measured the bulging of the seams and found, “Not only were the 2019 balls virtually round, what bulging they did show was slightly negative, suggesting the seams might be slightly ‘nestled’ into the leather.” The significantly rounder balls, which have thinner laces than last year’s (more in line with 2000-14 samples) produce even less drag than before, and thus even more carry. Wills noted that both the seam and smoothness issues jibe with anecdotal reports from pitchers about difficulties in gripping this year’s balls, as voiced by players such as Sean Doolittle, Jon Lester, and Noah Syndergaard.

 

As for commissioner Rob Manfred’s recent suggestion that a better-centered pill (the core of the ball) is a factor in creating less drag, Wills was largely dismissive, writing, “[T]his is the most difficult result to produce without significant manufacturing changes, since existing techniques make it hard to keep the pill from being centered to begin with… Therefore, it seems unlikely that pill-centering would explain a sudden change in drag; at the very least, we would be remiss not to also examine other possible sources.”

[Vanimal46]

I concur with Mr. Verlander.

 

 

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/27149029/verlander-mlb-juicing-balls-more-offense

[Squirrel]

I'll say this ... I much prefer a close 2-1 game than a blowout. While home runs are fun ... only when your team is hitting them ... they get boring when you see them 5-7 times/game. They are no longer 'special.'

 

That said ... when pitchers are being developed to pitch in the triple digits ... I do see this as a counter to that.

 

However, this 'all or nothing' approach takes the nuance out of it, which is why I like baseball ... for all the in betweens.

 

At least with the 'juiced ball' ... everyone is on the same playing field (I guess pun intended). It's not a case of juiced player vs non-juiced player (at least in theory and hopefully in practice).

 

But ... Verlander has really the best, and maybe truly only, serious argument. The MLB will end up killing their own sport in the effort of ... what? Satisfying the owners' wallets today without thinking of the cause/effect of the future of the sport? That, to me, is, well, criminal.

[Vanimal46]

I'll say this ... I much prefer a close 2-1 game than a blowout. While home runs are fun ... only when your team is hitting them ... they get boring when you see them 5-7 times/game. They are no longer 'special.'

 

That said ... when pitchers are being developed to pitch in the triple digits ... I do see this as a counter to that.

 

However, this 'all or nothing' approach takes the nuance out of it, which is why I like baseball ... for all the in betweens.

 

At least with the 'juiced ball' ... everyone is on the same playing field (I guess pun intended). It's not a case of juiced player vs non-juiced player (at least in theory and hopefully in practice).

 

But ... Verlander has really the best, and maybe truly only, serious argument. The MLB will end up killing their own sport in the effort of ... what? Satisfying the owners' wallets today without thinking of the cause/effect of the future of the sport? That, to me, is, well, criminal.

I couldn't agree more about home runs no longer being special. I think the MLB has the wrong strategy for trying to acquire a new audience... It's clear baseball wants more offense, more home runs, and more strikeouts to cater to the 15 second highlight watchers. I don't think this is doing anything positive to catch young kids' attention to the sport, and driving away some who enjoy the strategy of the game.

 

Like you I enjoy the in betweens the game has to offer. Hit and runs, double steals, sacrifices to advance runners. All of that is being thrown out the window because they determined statistically it's better to swing for the fences every time.

 

More home runs isn't getting more butts in seats at the ballpark. Competitive balance in the league and winning accomplishes that. Has Oakland seen a surge in attendance because they've hit 145 home runs? Doubtful.

 

I think this issue would gain more traction if another all time great hitter like Albert Pujols said, "You know, it used to be way more difficult to hit these baseballs out when I was 22. I shouldn't be able to hit a pop up at 39 and have it go over the fence."

[wsnydes]

I'm also wondering what impact the lesser drag has on a given pitch - particularly a fastball. How much does that aid guys hitting triple digits? How much does that impact movement of a breaking ball? 

 

Also, and I've been saying this for a few years now, but as exit velocities increase the odds of a pitcher getting killed go up. MLB is protecting fans more (with calls for even more protection) but there doesn't seem to be a lot of consideration to the one guy that is most exposed in all of this. I know there were experiments with helmets or armored/padded hats and the like a few years ago, but it seems as though a pitcher is going to have to get killed on the field by a batted ball in order to change this aspect. Batters are doing more to protect themselves, yet the pitcher is just left there with only a glove, cup and ability to react as their protection. I really hope that something far more serious doesn't need to occur in order for baseball to acknowledge this problem that they've help create.

[Kelly Vance]

Maybe its just me, but if baseball is juicing baseballs to increase the number of home runs, then why all the fuss about steroids doing the same thing?  Why the hypocrisy?

 

Bonds, Sosa, Magwire and Conseco took steroids and their HR numbers jumped.  That was illegal enough to keep them out of the HOF?  Then a few years later MLB buys Rawlings and juices the baseball.  But that is ok?  Really?

 

I realize that the baseball is juiced for all, and only some players used steroids.  But I remember Jim Bouton's book "Ball Four" and he talked about how, in the 60s and 70s many players used "greenies" to get "up for the game."  Bowie Kuhn called him to the Commissioner's office to dress him down for mentioning that .  Made his book sales soar. Greenie use continued. 

 

Anyway, this makes me think that, in hindsight, steroids era players got a bad deal. At least they should't be judged as harshly as they are and the doors to the HOF should be open to them. 

 

and Pete Rose

[ashbury]

Bonds, Sosa, Magwire and Conseco took steroids and their HR numbers jumped.  That was illegal enough to keep them out of the HOF?  Then a few years later MLB buys Rawlings and juices the baseball.  But that is ok?  Really?

I have never seen the medical community issue warnings about the health risks to players throwing or swinging at livelier baseballs. Maybe the teams will need to install netting around the players, as they do for fans further and further down the foul lines.

[wsnydes]

 

Maybe its just me, but if baseball is juicing baseballs to increase the number of home runs, then why all the fuss about steroids doing the same thing?  Why the hypocrisy?

 

Bonds, Sosa, Magwire and Conseco took steroids and their HR numbers jumped.  That was illegal enough to keep them out of the HOF?  Then a few years later MLB buys Rawlings and juices the baseball.  But that is ok?  Really?

 

I realize that the baseball is juiced for all, and only some players used steroids.  But I remember Jim Bouton's book "Ball Four" and he talked about how, in the 60s and 70s many players used "greenies" to get "up for the game."  Bowie Kuhn called him to the Commissioner's office to dress him down for mentioning that .  Made his book sales soar. Greenie use continued. 

 

Anyway, this makes me think that, in hindsight, steroids era players got a bad deal. At least they should't be judged as harshly as they are and the doors to the HOF should be open to them. 

 

and Pete Rose

Interesting and valid point. I guess, in my view, is that one is considered cheating and the other isn't. That does make a difference to me, but others will disagree. To each their own there.

 

It's interesting to note the connection with this and the steroids era though. Waning interest in the game in both scenarios with basically the same thought process to bring it back - the HR. The only real difference being the league office turned a blind eye to what was going on and in the other they instigated it.