Olney Article on offense...

[Inside Pitch]

Buster Olney of ESPN has an insider article that essentially blames the downturn in offense for the parity..

 

Just out of curiosity, are people that bent out of shape about teams scoring less?  Is parity a bad thing?  I understand that leagues need a superpower to hate and that beating the top team is always enjoyable but, if indeed this game is to be ruled by something other than the almighty dollar, then why is parity such a bad thing?  Anyway, the crux of Olney's article is that in order to change the parity issue, MLB needs to do something to increase offense, be that lowering the mound or juicing the baseball.   Obviously the Angels would stand to gain in that sort of situation, a lot of our hitters suddenly become more formidable with a juiced ball, but that would likely also be the nail in Jered Weaver's coffin.

 

In a related article, Joe Maddon is quoted as saying the equation is No PEDs+defensive shits = parity.  I seriously wonder how long before the sting of the Biogenesis scandal and subsequent suspensions plus Arod's one year ban gives way to a desire for more offense.

 

Here is a link to the article, It's behind ESPN's pay wall but an interesting read for anyone who has it and may have missed it.  http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/buster-olney/post?id=6963

 

 

[mancini79]

 

In a related article, Joe Maddon is quoted as saying the equation is No PEDs+defensive shits = parity.  I seriously wonder how long before the sting of the Biogenesis scandal and subsequent suspensions plus Arod's one year ban gives way to a desire for more offense.

 

Here is a link to the article, It's behind ESPN's pay wall but an interesting read for anyone who has it and may have missed it.  http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/buster-olney/post?id=6963

 

So Fangraphs now has a metric for bowel movements. They've thought of everything!! I wonder if this will be a part of WAR.

[arch stanton]

ESPN only hates parity because they can't sell 10 Yankee-Red Sox Sunday nighters as great baseball. It's always cycled between offense and pitching and always will. Maybe this paves the way for more versatile offensive players who aren't so susceptible to the shift. One way or another they'll figure out how to score.

[Hollyw00d]

The crackdown on PEDs has certainly had an effect, but I have enjoyed this season as much as any other even with run scoring down.  It just makes runs that much more precious and makes the games more exciting.  It's also fun watching division races that are tighter because teams are more evenly matched.   There's nothing more boring than watching some juggernaut in cruise control in august with a 10+ game lead in the division.  

 

People might say the league is "weak" this year, but I completely disagree.  The strength is more evenly distributed amongst all teams.  This september will be fun!

[Hollyw00d]

ESPN only hates parity because they can't sell 10 Yankee-Red Sox Sunday nighters as great baseball. It's always cycled between offense and pitching and always will. Maybe this paves the way for more versatile offensive players who aren't so susceptible to the shift. One way or another they'll figure out how to score.

 

 

red sox-yankee games have never been great, or exciting to me.  They never seem to play a close game, it's always a blowout one way or another with one team looking awful and the other good.  Plus I hate all the fake drama they and the media conjure up between each other.

 

most overrated rivalry in sports.  The A's-Angels rivalry is better by a bunch

[stormngt]

If they want to eliminate parity just eliminate the luxury tax. Eliminate the draft make them all free agents.

Weren't those 5th go designed to increase parity? I always thought parity was good.

[Docwaukee]

So Fangraphs now has a metric for bowel movements. They've thought of everything!! I wonder if this will be a part of WAR.

WAR - Wipes around rectum

[eaterfan]

The A's are a really good team this year. Just because the Red Sox and Yankees are mediocre doesn't mean there is more parity.

Anyway, everything MLB has done for the last 20 years is encourage parity why discourage it now? Adding a second wild card, the draft, draft caps, international caps, caps on posting fees, and the luxury tax are all examples.

[Spirit]

For east coast media members, parity = the AL East sucks.  

 

If the season ended today, the AL West would be sending 3 teams into the playoffs.  This is an outrage!!!  (to them) 

[YouthofToday]

They should lower the mound.

Defensive shifts and the increase in depth of relievers has helped to really decrease run scoring.

[Docwaukee]

Parity is great for the game as far as I'm concerned.  I think it's multifactorial.  

 

I had typed out an entire argument that is was related to pitchers throwing more strikes because they were less inclined to get hurt, and that the defensive shifts further aided the number of outs being made

 

It just isn't true.  BABIP, FB, LD, GB rates are all about stable.  Hr/9 is slightly down and HR/FB rates are pretty stable.  

 

BB rates are down and K rates are up.  I figured it was because pitchers were throwing more strikes but nope.  They are actually throwing fewer strikes.  There has been an increase in the number of breaking and offspeed pitches being thrown, and oddly enough, avg fastball velocity is up almost 2 mph from 2002.  

 

The out of zone swing% has increased dramatically.  From 18% in 2002 to 30% now.  

 

This could very well be PED related as hitters can't let the ball as deep because they aren't as quick thru the zone, but it could also be because pitchers are throwing harder.  More max effort.  Which could also explain the increase in TJs over the last several years.  

[Stradling]

They shouldn't change a thing, well except have a pitch clock. I wouldn't lower the mound. I like the idea of hitters having to hit away from the shift. Like someone said baseball is cyclical.

[Docwaukee]

I feel like lowering the mound is just going to increase injuries to pitchers.  

[Hollyw00d]

Batters need a clock as well. The amount of times some players take between pitches is ridiculous. I was watching a cubs game the other day (I don't know why either), and I had the "pleasure" of watching a Luis valbuena at bat. Between.every single pitch, this dude would leave the batters box and go all the way to the edge of.the batters circle, for no apparent reason. The entire at bat, the pitcher, catcher, and umpire would stare.at this dude waiting for him to do his little walk, adjust his gloves, take some practices swings, tap the plate, then finally get ready to hit.

if I were the pitcher, I would just throw the pitch, whether he was ready or not.

[Jim]

Parity is great for the game as far as I'm concerned.  I think it's multifactorial.  

 

I had typed out an entire argument that is was related to pitchers throwing more strikes because they were less inclined to get hurt, and that the defensive shifts further aided the number of outs being made

 

It just isn't true.  BABIP, FB, LD, GB rates are all about stable.  Hr/9 is slightly down and HR/FB rates are pretty stable.  

 

BB rates are down and K rates are up.  I figured it was because pitchers were throwing more strikes but nope.  They are actually throwing fewer strikes.  There has been an increase in the number of breaking and offspeed pitches being thrown, and oddly enough, avg fastball velocity is up almost 2 mph from 2002.  

 

The out of zone swing% has increased dramatically.  From 18% in 2002 to 30% now.  

 

This could very well be PED related as hitters can't let the ball as deep because they aren't as quick thru the zone, but it could also be because pitchers are throwing harder.  More max effort.  Which could also explain the increase in TJs over the last several years.  

Could it also be that with the shift becoming a frequently used option for teams this year that more batters are forced to change their approach? With more batters changing their approach at the plate, isn't it possible they could be more susceptible to the pitchers pitch? Hence the K's rate rising.

[Angelsjunky]

I thought a defensive shit was when your in-laws are over and you disappear into the bathroom for 45 minutes.

[Docwaukee]

I thought a defensive shit was when your in-laws are over and you disappear into the bathroom for 45 minutes.

or when you are at a lame party with people that don't want to leave so you drop a deuce in the hoop right next to where everyone is hanging out.  

[Angelsjunky]

On a serious note, the current major league runs/game is at 4.13, which is the lowest  it has been since 1992 when it was 4.12. 1993 was considered the beginning of the "Roid Era" and the R/G jumped to 4.60. The high point was 2000 when it was 5.14. It was historically high from 1993 to 2009, never ranging below 4.60. 2009 (4.61) was the end of the "Roid Era," and then it dropped to 4.38 in 2010, 4.28 in 2011, 4.32 in 2012, 4.17 in 2013 and 4.13 this year.

 

Anyhow, the current context is fairly typical. Except for 1987 (4.72), the 1969-1992 era was usually in the low 4.00s, with a few years in the high 3.00s.

 

I personally don't miss the Roid Era. Take 2000, for instance, when fully 16 players hit 40+ HR and 45 hit 30+ HR. 15 players hit .330+ and 53 players hit .300+. It just devalues these historically significant thresholds. Remember Richard Hidalgo? Probably not everyone does. He hit .314/.391/.636 with 44 HR in 2000. Or what about Jeffrey Hammonds or David Segui? They hit .335 and .334 respectively.

 

Compare that to 2013, when 2 players hit 40+ HR and 14 players hit 30+ HR, and 2 players hit .330+ and 24 .300+.

 

I say, leave the game be and let it regulate itself. Fluctuations will naturally occur.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Angelsjunky

[YouthofToday]

Lowering the mound would most likely decrease pitcher injuries.

http://www.fangraphs.com/community/its-time-to-lower-the-mound-again/

http://www.si.com/mlb/2014/05/13/jose-fernandez-miami-marlins-injury

[stormngt]

If there is a shift then learn to hit the other way.

They shouldn't change a thing, well except have a pitch clock. I wouldn't lower the mound. I like the idea of hitters having to hit away from the shift. Like someone said baseball is cyclical.

[AngelsLakersFan]

There was a discussion on fan graphs not too long ago about the decrease in offense being related to the inclusion of the pitching(fx) data being gathered at each park and the umpires being graded on their strike zones. The idea being that the strike zone has marginally increased up in the zone, closer to the rule book definition.

[Inside Pitch]

They should lower the mound.

Defensive shifts and the increase in depth of relievers has helped to really decrease run scoring.

 

Pretty sure you meant defensive shits.

[arch stanton]

There was a discussion on fan graphs not too long ago about the decrease in offense being related to the inclusion of the pitching(fx) data being gathered at each park and the umpires being graded on their strike zones. The idea being that the strike zone has marginally increased up in the zone, closer to the rule book definition.

The strike zone is absolutely higher than it was in the '90s. Back then the belt was the top of the zone, although the corners went out a little wider, or a lot wider if you were Eric Gregg. Frank Thomas would blow a gasket if an ump called a strike above the belt. 

[arch stanton]

On a serious note, the current major league runs/game is at 4.13, which is the lowest  it has been since 1992 when it was 4.12. 1993 was considered the beginning of the "Roid Era" and the R/G jumped to 4.60. The high point was 2000 when it was 5.14. It was historically high from 1993 to 2009, never ranging below 4.60. 2009 (4.61) was the end of the "Roid Era," and then it dropped to 4.38 in 2010, 4.28 in 2011, 4.32 in 2012, 4.17 in 2013 and 4.13 this year.

 

Anyhow, the current context is fairly typical. Except for 1987 (4.72), the 1969-1992 era was usually in the low 4.00s, with a few years in the high 3.00s.

 

I personally don't miss the Roid Era. Take 2000, for instance, when fully 16 players hit 40+ HR and 45 hit 30+ HR. 15 players hit .330+ and 53 players hit .300+. It just devalues these historically significant thresholds. Remember Richard Hidalgo? Probably not everyone does. He hit .314/.391/.636 with 44 HR in 2000. Or what about Jeffrey Hammonds or David Segui? They hit .335 and .334 respectively.

 

Compare that to 2013, when 2 players hit 40+ HR and 14 players hit 30+ HR, and 2 players hit .330+ and 24 .300+.

 

I say, leave the game be and let it regulate itself. Fluctuations will naturally occur.

'93 was also an expansion year and that has always lead to an increase in offense as 10-15 AAA starters try to get out major league hitters.

[Slegnaac]

'93 was also an expansion year and that has always lead to an increase in offense as 10-15 AAA starters try to get out major league hitters.

Expansion also means more AAA hitters facing MLB pitchers