NFBC Message Boards

The facts are indisputable: Scoring is down in Major League Baseball, balls in play is near an all-time low, strikeouts are way up, defensive shifts are making it tougher for hits to fall in, and length of games is up. It all adds up to a sport that needs to look in the mirror and ask what is going on.

Now I love baseball as much as the next person and I still enjoy the game immensely even with all of the facts above. The playoffs and World Series showed us what is so right about the game. But after attending the Arizona Fall League last week I realized that there is a better brand of baseball right in front of us.

In fact, I will say that the sport being played in the Arizona Fall League was more enjoyable to watch from a fan's perspective than anything we saw during last season and I wasn't quite sure why. From the first game I went to there were hard hit balls, towering home runs and great defensive plays everywhere. There were very few walks, a few strikeouts, and again several very hard hit balls. With the ball in play so often, there was a lot to watch in those games.

When all of the speakers went out to eat on Saturday night, I brought my perception up for discussion with some grizzled old baseball veterans and asked if they felt the same way. Did they think that the AFL games were more enjoyable and more like the baseball we used to watch? Almost to a man they said yes. So I asked the obvious question: Why?

One person involved with Major League Baseball explained it perfectly to me: He said that the strike zone is different in the majors than it is in the minors and the strike zone they are using in the AFL is the minor league strike zone. In the majors, they allow the strike zone to be extended lower than in the minors and every umpire knows that Pitchf/x data awaits them right after the game to show how they called that strike zone. If MLB wants a low strike, they have to call it. And they are calling it.

Here's a great column of what I'm talking about that I found on Hardball Times:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/the-strike ... f-control/

From this article: "The average strike zone size increased by 16 square inches in 2014 over 2013, growing the zone to a robust 40 square inches larger than just five seasons prior."

This is part of the reason why we have so many strikeouts in Major League Baseball and fewer balls in play. In the minors, there is a smaller strike zone and thus when the pitch is delivered in that zone at 95 mph it can also be hit more fiercely in that zone. And that's what you saw in the AFL: Impressive fastballs followed by hard hits somewhere. As one guy said, the goal of the game was to have the pitcher offer the ball and have the hitter hit it. That's not being done in Major League Baseball and thus the high amount of walks and strikeouts.

As for scoring, the 4.07 runs per game last year per team was the lowest since 1976 when MLB teams scored 3.99 runs per game. Teams averaged 4.61 runs per game in 2009 and 4.86 runs per game in 2006, even after the Steroid Era, so scoring isn't down just because of PEDs. The strike zone and now the defensive shifts are playing major roles in the lack of scoring.

Anyway, I figured the headline would get folks to take a look, so it was done for sensational reasons!! But I think there's a better game out there than what we're seeing in Major League Baseball and for fantasy purposes we'd like to see more Runs, more Home Runs, more RBIs rather than this steady increase in Strikeouts and a decrease in ERA. There's nothing wrong with that, but the changing of the strike zone is having more of an effect there than the lack of offensive talent or the increased velocity by pitchers. There have always been pitchers who threw hard and were hit hard, but now that 96 mph fastball below the knees is not only unhittable, it's being called Strike 3. And that's not good for the game and it won't attract new fans to the game. We want balls in play.

Do you agree or disagree?

Greg Ambrosius wrote:The facts are indisputable: Scoring is down in Major League Baseball, balls in play is near an all-time low, strikeouts are way up, defensive shifts are making it tougher for hits to fall in, and length of games is up. It all adds up to a sport that needs to look in the mirror and ask what is going on.

Now I love baseball as much as the next person and I still enjoy the game immensely even with all of the facts above. The playoffs and World Series showed us what is so right about the game. But after attending the Arizona Fall League last week I realized that there is a better brand of baseball right in front of us.

In fact, I will say that the sport being played in the Arizona Fall League was more enjoyable to watch from a fan's perspective than anything we saw during last season and I wasn't quite sure why. From the first game I went to there were hard hit balls, towering home runs and great defensive plays everywhere. There were very few walks, a few strikeouts, and again several very hard hit balls. With the ball in play so often, there was a lot to watch in those games.

When all of the speakers went out to eat on Saturday night, I brought my perception up for discussion with some grizzled old baseball veterans and asked if they felt the same way. Did they think that the AFL games were more enjoyable and more like the baseball we used to watch? Almost to a man they said yes. So I asked the obvious question: Why?

One person involved with Major League Baseball explained it perfectly to me: He said that the strike zone is different in the majors than it is in the minors and the strike zone they are using in the AFL is the minor league strike zone. In the majors, they allow the strike zone to be extended lower than in the minors and every umpire knows that Pitchf/x data awaits them right after the game to show how they called that strike zone. If MLB wants a low strike, they have to call it. And they are calling it.

Here's a great column of what I'm talking about that I found on Hardball Times:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/the-strike ... f-control/

From this article: "The average strike zone size increased by 16 square inches in 2014 over 2013, growing the zone to a robust 40 square inches larger than just five seasons prior."

This is part of the reason why we have so many strikeouts in Major League Baseball and fewer balls in play. In the minors, there is a smaller strike zone and thus when the pitch is delivered in that zone at 95 mph it can also be hit more fiercely in that zone. And that's what you saw in the AFL: Impressive fastballs followed by hard hits somewhere. As one guy said, the goal of the game was to have the pitcher offer the ball and have the hitter hit it. That's not being done in Major League Baseball and thus the high amount of walks and strikeouts.

As for scoring, the 4.07 runs per game last year per team was the lowest since 1976 when MLB teams scored 3.99 runs per game. Teams averaged 4.61 runs per game in 2009 and 4.86 runs per game in 2006, even after the Steroid Era, so scoring isn't down just because of PEDs. The strike zone and now the defensive shifts are playing major roles in the lack of scoring.

Anyway, I figured the headline would get folks to take a look, so it was done for sensational reasons!! But I think there's a better game out there than what we're seeing in Major League Baseball and for fantasy purposes we'd like to see more Runs, more Home Runs, more RBIs rather than this steady increase in Strikeouts and a decrease in ERA. There's nothing wrong with that, but the changing of the strike zone is having more of an effect there than the lack of offensive talent or the increased velocity by pitchers. There have always been pitchers who threw hard and were hit hard, but now that 96 mph fastball below the knees is not only unhittable, it's being called Strike 3. And that's not good for the game and it won't attract new fans to the game. We want balls in play.

Do you agree or disagree?

There has to be something that can be done... maybe some kind of stimulant that will pick up the power numbers

Be careful what you wish for.
On base percentage is not stressed in the Arizona Fall League. It is stressed, however, to players as they march up the minor league ladder. By the time they get to the Major League level, they are already 'working counts'.
If the pitch at the knees is not called a strike, we won't see more hitting.
We may even see more taking. More pitches. More boredom.
For some reason, to batting coaches and some organizations, a pop up on a 3-2 count is worth more than a pop up on a first pitch.
It used to be that tiring a pitcher or getting his pitch count up was a good thing.
But, with specialization in most bullpens, I don't think so.

Most hitters are better HITTERS early in a count.
Yet, the walk is stressed. Maybe it is still the Moneyball effect.

DOUGHBOYS wrote:Be careful what you wish for.
On base percentage is not stressed in the Arizona Fall League. It is stressed, however, to players as they march up the minor league ladder. By the time they get to the Major League level, they are already 'working counts'.
If the pitch at the knees is not called a strike, we won't see more hitting.
We may even see more taking. More pitches. More boredom.
For some reason, to batting coaches and some organizations, a pop up on a 3-2 count is worth more than a pop up on a first pitch.
It used to be that tiring a pitcher or getting his pitch count up was a good thing.
But, with specialization in most bullpens, I don't think so.

Nothing more enjoyable than watching a hitter work the count.

I disagree: If you tighten the strike zone you will see more hitting. The only thing you can do with that strike below the knees that is being called a strike now is ground into a double play. You're not lifting that 96 mph fastball below the knees into a home run. A normal strike zone (back to where it was) will create more hard hit balls and more scoring.

By the way, did anyone watch the ESPN "30 For 30" on Tuesday night about Livan Hernandez and El Duque defecting from Cuba? Another very good piece by ESPN. But take a look at the 1997 NLCS game against Atlanta when Livan struck out 14 Braves. The incredibly wide strike zone was amazing and anything a foot off the plate was being called a strike. It was a horrendous strike zone, but Livan took advantage of it. No doubt Wayne is still seething from that one!!

Greg Ambrosius wrote:

DOUGHBOYS wrote:Be careful what you wish for.
On base percentage is not stressed in the Arizona Fall League. It is stressed, however, to players as they march up the minor league ladder. By the time they get to the Major League level, they are already 'working counts'.
If the pitch at the knees is not called a strike, we won't see more hitting.
We may even see more taking. More pitches. More boredom.
For some reason, to batting coaches and some organizations, a pop up on a 3-2 count is worth more than a pop up on a first pitch.
It used to be that tiring a pitcher or getting his pitch count up was a good thing.
But, with specialization in most bullpens, I don't think so.

Nothing more enjoyable than watching a hitter work the count.

I disagree: If you tighten the strike zone you will see more hitting. The only thing you can do with that strike below the knees that is being called a strike now is ground into a double play. You're not lifting that 96 mph fastball below the knees into a home run. A normal strike zone (back to where it was) will create more hard hit balls and more scoring.

By the way, did anyone watch the ESPN "30 For 30" on Tuesday night about Livan Hernandez and El Duque defecting from Cuba? Another very good piece by ESPN. But take a look at the 1997 NLCS game against Atlanta when Livan struck out 14 Braves. The incredibly wide strike zone was amazing and anything a foot off the plate was being called a strike. It was a horrendous strike zone, but Livan took advantage of it. No doubt Wayne is still seething from that one!!

At the same time, when folks look back at Buster Posey, not squatting, but almost standing behind the plate asking for high fastballs from Bumgarner, some are going to wonder what that strike zone was.

Greg Ambrosius wrote:

DOUGHBOYS wrote:Be careful what you wish for.
On base percentage is not stressed in the Arizona Fall League. It is stressed, however, to players as they march up the minor league ladder. By the time they get to the Major League level, they are already 'working counts'.
If the pitch at the knees is not called a strike, we won't see more hitting.
We may even see more taking. More pitches. More boredom.
For some reason, to batting coaches and some organizations, a pop up on a 3-2 count is worth more than a pop up on a first pitch.
It used to be that tiring a pitcher or getting his pitch count up was a good thing.
But, with specialization in most bullpens, I don't think so.

Nothing more enjoyable than watching a hitter work the count.

I disagree: If you tighten the strike zone you will see more hitting. The only thing you can do with that strike below the knees that is being called a strike now is ground into a double play. You're not lifting that 96 mph fastball below the knees into a home run. A normal strike zone (back to where it was) will create more hard hit balls and more scoring.

By the way, did anyone watch the ESPN "30 For 30" on Tuesday night about Livan Hernandez and El Duque defecting from Cuba? Another very good piece by ESPN. But take a look at the 1997 NLCS game against Atlanta when Livan struck out 14 Braves. The incredibly wide strike zone was amazing and anything a foot off the plate was being called a strike. It was a horrendous strike zone, but Livan took advantage of it. No doubt Wayne is still seething from that one!!

Greg,

I saw that piece the other night. It was a great piece. Yeah, the late great Eric Gregg had the widest zone in all of baseball. If the catcher caught it, he rung it up. The best part about that game was the hitter reactions. You could tell that they all disagreed with the zone, but could not argue because it went both ways.

John

Greg- are you assuming mlb wants this strike zone or have you seen a statement from mlb in that regard? Maybe you have seen unpublished reports ? if not- maybe the unionized umps are doing it on there own. joe west- for instance- seems to be able to do whatever he wants- without fear of being replaced. maybe the umps have decided this strikzone. If not then that is the easiest fix- make the strike zone smaller. this last year and especially this world series were the most boring display of baseball i have ever seen. It wasn't that the pitching was so great- but the hitting was just awful. When you can't hit guthrie- something is wrong.

DOUGHBOYS wrote:Be careful what you wish for.
On base percentage is not stressed in the Arizona Fall League. It is stressed, however, to players as they march up the minor league ladder. By the time they get to the Major League level, they are already 'working counts'.
If the pitch at the knees is not called a strike, we won't see more hitting.
We may even see more taking. More pitches. More boredom.
For some reason, to batting coaches and some organizations, a pop up on a 3-2 count is worth more than a pop up on a first pitch.
It used to be that tiring a pitcher or getting his pitch count up was a good thing.
But, with specialization in most bullpens, I don't think so.

Most hitters are better HITTERS early in a count.
Yet, the walk is stressed. Maybe it is still the Moneyball effect.

I agree. If they shrink the zone for major league hitters then all we will see is more walks and more working of the count. the hitters need too adjust to the new strike zone and quit taking so many pitches and swinging from the heels with 2 strikes and put the ball in play more.

headhunters wrote:Greg- are you assuming mlb wants this strike zone or have you seen a statement from mlb in that regard? Maybe you have seen unpublished reports ? if not- maybe the unionized umps are doing it on there own. joe west- for instance- seems to be able to do whatever he wants- without fear of being replaced. maybe the umps have decided this strikzone. If not then that is the easiest fix- make the strike zone smaller. this last year and especially this world series were the most boring display of baseball i have ever seen. It wasn't that the pitching was so great- but the hitting was just awful. When you can't hit guthrie- something is wrong.

It's the Pitchf/x zone that MLB has. It's the same box that Fox or any other TV network shows for balls and strikes. Those umps get graded based on their calls in that required strike zone from Major League Baseball. It's pretty common knowledge and the umps are definitely getting better in calling that strike zone. Until MLB changes the low strike, we're in for another year of this, but read the HardballTimes.com piece and you'll see how the strike zone enlarged this year compared to last year.

The philosophy of baseball has changed. Players are instructed and almost seem entitled to taking more and more pitches.
Watching a Joey Votto or Carlos Santana at bat is like turning an episode of 'Seinfeld' into a mini-series.
I saw a Dustin Pedroia at bat with 12 or 13 pitches called a terrific at bat by the announcer.
He struck out.
A player striking out on three pitches is berated.
Didn't have the sense to take a ball.

The fact is that most baseball hitters used to swing at most pitches that were a strike. From an animalistic point of view, they were wolves going to the plate.
Hungry for strikes.
Now, those wolves have turned to finnicky cats.
Last year, 117 hitters struck out 100 times. 1900 to 1970 saw less players striking out 100 times.
Those players had a knee to letters strike zone.
BUT, they were wolves. They went deep in counts, for the most part, only if a pitcher was wild.
Now, with fennicky cats as hitters, we hardly ever see single digit pitch counts for an inning.
Even in a 1-2-3 inning.
Called pitches and foull balls are boring. We're seeing more and more of both.
Even before this writers 'enlarged' strike zone for 2014.

DOUGHBOYS wrote:Blaming the boredom of baseball on a enlarged strike zone over the past year is silly.

Really? Okay, it's pitch counts then Dan. You are right, as always.

I'm just in favor of a more exciting product with the ball actually being in play more often. I enjoyed baseball in Arizona and now I'll shut up about it. But it's still a fun discussion.

Greg Ambrosius wrote:

DOUGHBOYS wrote:Blaming the boredom of baseball on a enlarged strike zone over the past year is silly.

Really? Okay, it's pitch counts then Dan. You are right, as always.

I'm just in favor of a more exciting product with the ball actually being in play more often. I enjoyed baseball in Arizona and now I'll shut up about it. But it's still a fun discussion.

Holy Cow, Greg.
I too thought we were having a discussion.
Sorry.

Edit- Tell my wife I'm always right, willya Greg?
She'd get a kick out of that.
You also did not see my teams last year.
Not one was right.
Glad you had fun in Arizona, Greg.

I don't mind the low scoring games - a good pitcher's dual is just fine. But MLB has to find a way to speed up these games. I go to a few hockey games each season, and while I don't like hockey as well as baseball, one thing I do prefer is that the games are usually around 2 hours and 30 minutes. Perfect. 4 hour, 5 hour baseball games, sorry, don't have the time to watch. Solution: put a time clock on the pitchers, and limit trips to the mound and anything else that results in 'dead air'. It's not 1950 anymore and the younger generation isn't going to be a baseball generation unless some changes are made.

Speed:
- enforce 12 second rule for Ps (already on the books, never seen it called on e.g. Joel Peralta, his avg. time between pitches in 2014 was 31.2 seconds...david price worst offender as an SP at 26.6 seconds)
- Stepping out of batters box is a strike (Papi doesn't need to adjust his gloves after each pitch)
- As specialty RPs and lots of RP changes are here to stay, reduce transition times by having a hard ceiling on how long the substitution can actually take (like, not enough time for a commercial break...I'm sure MLB would love that...)

Power:
- Shrink the zone back to pre-PITCHf/x levels (esp. @ the knees)
- Lower the mound
- Bring in the fences
- Relax PED testing (or just wait for a new, undetectable, mass building PED to arrive...I'm sure it will)

Baseball/Rob Manfred will "fix" both pace and scoring, I believe. I, as a baseball fan, accept the nature of a game w/o a clock. "The youth" may not, and one would assume that baseball is both cognizant and concerned about their ability to attract younger fans, and will effectuate some degree of change to "fix" these issues.

EWeaver wrote:Speed:
- enforce 12 second rule for Ps (already on the books, never seen it called on e.g. Joel Peralta, his avg. time between pitches in 2014 was 31.2 seconds...david price worst offender as an SP at 26.6 seconds)
- Stepping out of batters box is a strike (Papi doesn't need to adjust his gloves after each pitch)
- As specialty RPs and lots of RP changes are here to stay, reduce transition times by having a hard ceiling on how long the substitution can actually take (like, not enough time for a commercial break...I'm sure MLB would love that...)

Eliminate the 8 warm-up pitches for relief pitchers entering during the middle of an inning. They just warmed up in the bullpen, they need to be ready to go when called into the game.