is this alluding to the current style of batting lends itself to more strikeouts across the board?
because sticky tack pitchers have has lead itself to more strikeouts...
The best player in any sport today is
- Thread starter Halldan1
- Start date
because sticky tack pitchers have has lead itself to more strikeouts...
They give players a whole side to hit to. Tony Gwynn and Wade Boggs would bat .500 with sticky tack pitchers or not in todays game.
haha now youre claiming performance of old players in the current game. but cold hard facts have no place in your mind.
only speculation from the distant past and distant future matter ok.
Because teams always shift on hitters who can spray the ball around the field.
More likely, they would be players taught from a younger age to pull the ball and try to generate more power.
And what a tragedy that would have been. Being complete hitters was their trademark.
No one complained about baseball being boring back when those guys played. Now it's boring because you have fundamentally poor hitters who excel at the 3 most boring plays in baseball HR, BB, and K. Brooks Robinson and Ozzie Smith made more exciting plays in one game than some players make in a month.
Last edited:
And analytics. The analytics movement has driven the change in swing path and approach for many players. I played baseball in college, and talking to some of the former high-level players I came up with who now coach, kids are being taught about launch angle and things like that from a very young age.
Of course because they have the aluminum bat. That teaching would go out the window real quick with a wood bat or even a 1980s aluminum bat at a young age.
Last edited:
Ted Ballgame was a launch angle guy before that phrase was used
somewhere in the 80/90s they started teaching to swing down (to an extent) for backspin .....
Teddy Ballgame was not so much a launch angle guy as match the plane of the swing with the pitch. With pitchers trying to live low in the zone, he thought a slightly upward path was ideal. Now with todays pitchers living upstairs because of launch angle, his belief of a slight upward path through the zone would be different. My guess is Ted Williams would make the adjustment that today's hitter can't.
Last edited:
He was a "launch angle guy" but not how it is now (it is "launch angle" on steroids now).
When I was coming up and working with professional coaches in late middle school/high school/early college, there were a few different schools, but most came down to either (a) some version of the Teddy Ballgame approach (hit the ball over the SS/2b head, with normal weight transfer, which is what I did) or (b) the Hriniak/Lau disciples. Others used different approaches but in my experience they basically ended up close to one of those.
Different stuff being taught now, including dropping your back knee down farther to generate an upward swing path.
So you were expecting people to act like 5 year olds, base their opinion on a baseball player for one 1 bad outing, come ranting and raving this proves it. You were wrong. My thoughts on Ohtani are the exact same as yesterday. Amazingly unique player but not best in the game. I’ll still think Degrom is best in the game if he has the same type of outing next time out.
The fact that even crossed your mind is sad.
what would have been worse is if you would’ve been the 5 year old had he been awesome yesterday. At least you could brag he contributed to a win.
It was one bad outing, it happens. deGrom had a bad outing on Saturday. No sense in overreacting to it.
his era went from 2.5 to like 3.3. i thought thats what people would point out
But you're impressed by wins and Ohtani on the mound where his 3 wins are against the Tigers, Mariners, and Rangers. WOW
It did and while it is a pretty extreme example, we have to remember that we're still early enough in the year for average based numbers to be pretty volatile. Ohtani had 12 major league starts priot to this year (a number he's already doubled) so with only 3 months of pitching regularly in the bigs, we don't really know what he is as a pitcher yet. So both 2.5 and 3.3 should be taken with a grain of salt at this point.
For that matter, 0.69 probably should too. As spectacular as deGrom has been, he's in a position where even an outing with 9 innings of 1 run ball raises his era. Throw in a couple more games with 2 runs or even just 1 actually bad game and the sub-1 era is likely long gone.
Not so much for hitting stats, but with the leading (ip) pitchers still only around 100 innings pitched / 11 sets of 9, a bad start or 2 can still screw up their stats.
Who really cares about baseball. If want a worldwide best player who matters then it’s Messi or Ronaldo
The worst part about last night for the Angels was Ohtani doesn't play the field. So when he got blown up on the mound, he had batted once and from then on the pitcher (or a sub) was forced to bat against a team using a DH. In a nine inning game, the pitchers spot came up four more times.
Don't disagree here but in his last start deGrom allowed two earned runs in six innings and his ERA went from 0.50 to 0.69.
While his numbers really can only get worse (as you point out allowing even one earned run in an outing results in his ERA going up) at around 80 innings pitched, there's enough of a sample size to mitigate the effect. It's a bit different if he has one of those blow up outings that most starting pitchers experience at least once or twice a year.
A blow-up first inning last night briefly brought deGrom's era over one. He settled down to get it back to 0.95 though.
Damned impressive to stop the bleeding. 3 in the 1st. 1st and 3rd none out in the second, then strikes out the side, and then does it again. The great ones figure it out when their stuff isnt there at the start. I lived in NYC for the Doc and Guidry years, and you could feel the excitement the day one of them was pitching. Gotta be even more for deGrom.
Interesting question regarding hall of fame.I realize deGrom age 33 has some good years left ,but with 77 career wins, only pitching 200 innings in a season twice ,most wins in a season 15 once I believe. I realize he plays for a low scoring team etc. Does he get hall of fame if his career ends with say 150 wins and 2.5 era because he got multiple CY Young awards.I would say yes but he certainly would not be in GOAT consideration.
I haven't studied his numbers as comparison to others, but for certain guys, utter dominance over a short period of time is still enough. And frankly there are some unique individualized cases where a guy who is so great for a period of time is more hall-worthy in my opinion that a "compiler", not to diminish what someone who is good over a long period of time accomplished.
I'd have to study deGrom's numbers and see how he compares to date to those who are enshrined with shorter periods of dominance. Innings pitched won't matter as much anymore, and with the analytics movement impacting voters, I don't think the number of wins will be dispositive either.
It's always tough when you have a guy who is truly great for a shortened period but falls off. Use one of my sports idols, Don Mattingly, as an example. He has a 6-year peak that is better than other HOF first basemen. He was the best or one of the best players during that period, especially when you account for his superb defense on top of being an offensive machine. But he wrecked his back, and so he comes up short. If you look at Mattingly's 6-year run and compare to deGrom's best 6 years to date, I bet it looks similar from a WAR perspective (what many voters are using now). Of course deGrom if he stays healthy will have the chance to really add to that, increasing his likelihood of election.
Sandy Koufax is in the HOF with 165 wins. He pitched in parts of 12 MLB seasons but was only considered dominant for six of those seasons. Of those six successful seasons, one was not especially dominant and two others were injury shortened.
Through year six (1955-60), Koufax was 36-40 with an ERA of 4.10. The only two categories he led the league in during those six years was Wild Pitches (17 in 1958) and K/9 (10.1 in 1960). From 1961 on, he was 129-47 with a 2.19 ERA and won three Cy Youngs and an MVP. Among other accomplishments, Koufax led the NL in ERA his last five seasons and in K's four of his last six.
If deGrom maintains his dominant level for another two to three years beyond this, he will be a shoo-in HOFer. He has a legit chance this year to pull off the CY/MVP double which would give him three CYs and an MVP. Wins have become somewhat de-emphasized in measuring starting pitchers in recent years because of the change in the way the game is played. Starting pitchers are far less in control of wins and losses than they once were because most of them aren't around past the sixth or seventh inning.
Among the stats that came out of Thursday's deGrom start. The three runs allowed in the first inning were the first earned runs deGrom had allowed away from Citi Field all season (four starts covering 25 innings). He had gone 12 straight starts without allowing a first inning batter to reach base, retiring 37 straight first inning batters dating to his season opening start against Philadelphia on April 5.
FWIW, Koufax can still hit his driver 275. If you ever see a silver mustang convertible with Florida plates at a range....
Joey Chestnut has dominated the hotdog eating contest for years.
Happy Independence Day Hall fans!
Happy Independence Day Hall fans!
+1 for chestnut. Has the single season stats, the longevity and he produced about 50% more yesterday than second place. He has no peers, in a league of his own.
it’s chestnut and biles or biles and chestnut.
ohtani maybe third at best
it’s chestnut and biles or biles and chestnut.
ohtani maybe third at best
He ate 26 more dogs than the guy that came in 2nd! What athlete does 50% better than their nearest competition?
Similar threads
