BearSox Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 Practically 3 perfect games (not to mention 1 no-no) into the season already, and the season isn't even close to being half over. It is ridiculous. No doubt a Perfect Game is still a great feat, but it seems to be losing what made it so special. Why are these perfect games happening more often than ever (lets face it, 3 perfect games in less than a month. That's a joke)? It's because these players who call themselves major league hitters are stupid or greedy or both. Hitters more than ever focus on trying to hit the home run. Why? Because that is where the money is at. They think that they are all big home run hitters, practically everyone does, and they think if they can hit 20+ home runs a year, they will get a fat pay check. And that is the sad truth. Chicks dig the long ball, and it is bringing down the quality of offense and productive hitters in baseball. Just look at the White Sox for instance. Everyone tries to pull the ball 400 feet for a home run every single at bat. 2 strikes with a pitcher who throws 99 mph, what do all of them do? Swing from the heels and try and hit the ball 500 feet. Choking up on the bat and trying to just meet the ball is for p*****s right? I guess you can mark Ted Williams down as a p****. It is sad and very frustrating to see. Look at the best hitters in the game. What do they have in common? They aren't dead pull hitters. Frank Thomas was the most dominant hitter in baseball when he would hit everything to RF. When did Frank Thomas start to decline as a hitter? When he saw Mark McGuire hit all these home runs and figured he could do that to if he tried to pull everything. Perfect example of what a good hitter looks like is what we saw tonight for the Rangers, Michael Young. You can tell right away he is focused on driving the ball to RF. He'll naturally pull the ball when they pitch it in, but otherwise, he is just trying to drive the ball the other way. Is Pujols trying to pull everything? Hell no. It just amazes me how everyone tries to pull the ball. Pierzynski became practically a .300 hitter throughout his career by using left, left center. However, when he tries to pull the ball, he's god awful as we see so far this year. It is so frustrating. I'm not enough of a stat geek to be able to find this out, but if its at all possible, can someone find out the number of regulars who batted below .250 in the past year and compare that to 10-20 years ago, or even better yet to the 1940's and 50's? I guarantee you the number of players batting under .250 today blows the other years out of the water. /end rant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 Its because of the steroid crack down, get use to hitting going downhill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 You cannot associate the frequency of a black swan event, over a very short period, with any sort of trend. If over 5 or 10 years, you start seeing a big increase in no-hitters and perfect games, then maybe its meaningful. But to look at the 19th, 20th, and maybe 21st events of something happening in about a MILLION games played, and try to draw any sort of conclusion from it, just isn't meaningful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 3, 2010 -> 10:30 AM) You cannot associate the frequency of a black swan event, over a very short period, with any sort of trend. If over 5 or 10 years, you start seeing a big increase in no-hitters and perfect games, then maybe its meaningful. But to look at the 19th, 20th, and maybe 21st events of something happening in about a MILLION games played, and try to draw any sort of conclusion from it, just isn't meaningful. Still...after 4-5 occurrences of a formerly 1/year or 1/5 year event within the space of less than a year, you can't rule out the possibility that there's been a fundamental shift in the probability of that event happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 3, 2010 -> 09:37 AM) Still...after 4-5 occurrences of a formerly 1/year or 1/5 year event within the space of less than a year, you can't rule out the possibility that there's been a fundamental shift in the probability of that event happening. Of course you can't rule it out - you can't rule it out even if it were just two in a year. What I said was, you can't draw any reasonable CONCLUSION from it. There is a much greater chance of it being an aberration than a trend, and in any case, you couldn't see a trend at this point. To put it in terms you would use, and agree with, you can't look at a partial season of hurricanes in one year and draw any sort of meaningful conclusion about a particularly large or small number of them. You need more data than that, otherwise you are just pulling conclusions out of your ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 (edited) It's happened to the Rays twice in a year, and they're one of the best hitting teams in baseball. I doubt you can put the "stupid hitter" argument there. It's flat out luck in those two cases. The last two have been against the Indians and Marlins. Those do make sense from the "stupid hitter" perspective, especially the one last night. Edited June 3, 2010 by chw42 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 QUOTE (T R U @ Jun 2, 2010 -> 11:06 PM) Its because of the steroid crack down, get use to hitting going downhill It is a combination of no steroids, no HGH, and more importantly no amphetamines. Players aren't able to get "up" like they used to, especially on extended road trips, etc. In addition to that we are entering an era with some really really good pitchers. And I don't think perfect games are going to become a common occurrence. Hitters today are more patient than ever before and while they might strike out a lot, they also tend to walk more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 3, 2010 -> 07:30 AM) You cannot associate the frequency of a black swan event, over a very short period, with any sort of trend. If over 5 or 10 years, you start seeing a big increase in no-hitters and perfect games, then maybe its meaningful. But to look at the 19th, 20th, and maybe 21st events of something happening in about a MILLION games played, and try to draw any sort of conclusion from it, just isn't meaningful. Over the past 2 years, no hitters, 1 hitters, 2 hitters, and perfect games are up a total of 50% over the average of the most recent 10 year span of the Steroid Era. I think it is interesting to note how much baseball is shifting back to a pitchers league and I think we will see the way the game is played get altered a bit in the near future. Some of the little things that help you scrap out a run or two will become more important. As will having guys that can play incredible defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 2, 2010 -> 11:33 PM) It is so frustrating. I'm not enough of a stat geek to be able to find this out, but if its at all possible, can someone find out the number of regulars who batted below .250 in the past year and compare that to 10-20 years ago, or even better yet to the 1940's and 50's? I guarantee you the number of players batting under .250 today blows the other years out of the water. /end rant This isn't remotely close to true. League batting averages: 2010- .258 2009- .262 2008- .264 2007- .268 2006- .269 (keep in mind this next set is from the peak of the steroid era) 2000- .270 1999- .271 1998- .266 1997- .267 1996- .270 1990- .258 1989- .254 1988- .254 1987- .263 1986- .258 1959- .257 1956-58- .258 1955- .259 1954- .261 1953- .264 1952- .253 1951- .261 1950- .266 1948-49- .263 1947- .261 1946- .256 1945- .260 1944- .260 1943- .253 1942- .253 1941- .262 I guess there were plenty of "stupid hitters" in those eras too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 Hitters are stupid. Nuh uh You're stupid *sticks out tongue* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Jun 3, 2010 -> 10:55 AM) This isn't remotely close to true. League batting averages: 2010- .258 2009- .262 2008- .264 2007- .268 2006- .269 (keep in mind this next set is from the peak of the steroid era) 2000- .270 1999- .271 1998- .266 1997- .267 1996- .270 1990- .258 1989- .254 1988- .254 1987- .263 1986- .258 1959- .257 1956-58- .258 1955- .259 1954- .261 1953- .264 1952- .253 1951- .261 1950- .266 1948-49- .263 1947- .261 1946- .256 1945- .260 1944- .260 1943- .253 1942- .253 1941- .262 I guess there were plenty of "stupid hitters" in those eras too. I wish I wasn't so lazy. I was thinking of searching for something like this. I don't buy a "hitters became stupid" in 2010 theory one bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Jun 3, 2010 -> 10:55 AM) This isn't remotely close to true. League batting averages: 2010- .258 2009- .262 2008- .264 2007- .268 2006- .269 (keep in mind this next set is from the peak of the steroid era) 2000- .270 1999- .271 1998- .266 1997- .267 1996- .270 1990- .258 1989- .254 1988- .254 1987- .263 1986- .258 1959- .257 1956-58- .258 1955- .259 1954- .261 1953- .264 1952- .253 1951- .261 1950- .266 1948-49- .263 1947- .261 1946- .256 1945- .260 1944- .260 1943- .253 1942- .253 1941- .262 I guess there were plenty of "stupid hitters" in those eras too. That is one hell of a downward trend though... glad to see steroids really didn't have anything to do with the offensive explosion in baseball :rolly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted June 3, 2010 Author Share Posted June 3, 2010 (edited) I'm not gonna lie, between the white sox blowing chunks and the fact the Buehrle's perfect game is losing some of what made it so special lead to me over exaggerating and speaking out of anger. Not all hitters are stupid, but there are a decent amount of just dumb players. Would steroids/peds play into effect? Yeah, that makes sense. But you can't ignore that fact that it seems like at least 90% (I don't know, I'm pulling that number out of my ass, but it's likely well more than half) of the hitters in the league are focused on only hitting the home run. Just watch hitters. They all have open stances, which helps you "pull" the ball and they all swing from the heels no matter what. What is the most frustrating is when you got a guy like Mark Kotsay who is overmatched by a fastball, so what does he do? He doesn't choke up and still tries to hit the s*** out of the ball, even though he is clearly overmatched. And Kotsay isn't the only culprit. Alexei is the poster child for trying to pull everything over the fence. I can't remember the last time I saw Ramirez hit a solid hit ball to RF. Its sad too because what made me like him in the first place when he first came here was the fact he used LF so well. That's just my observation. Also, it's not something exclusive to 2010, but rather something that has been going on for a while, and slowly progressed. Edited June 3, 2010 by BearSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted June 3, 2010 Share Posted June 3, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 3, 2010 -> 11:16 AM) That is one hell of a downward trend though... glad to see steroids really didn't have anything to do with the offensive explosion in baseball :rolly If I had posted 2001-2005, it would look far less pronounced (wasn't relevant to the last discussion)... 2010- .258 2009- .262 2008- .264 2007- .268 2006- .269 2005- .264 2004- .266 2003- .264 2002- .261 2001- .264 Not everything goes in linear trends, there are some random spikes. They're off to a slow start this year, but if guys get hot in June/July/August they can still get back to a more normal total. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted June 3, 2010 Author Share Posted June 3, 2010 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 3, 2010 -> 10:13 AM) It is a combination of no steroids, no HGH, and more importantly no amphetamines. Players aren't able to get "up" like they used to, especially on extended road trips, etc. In addition to that we are entering an era with some really really good pitchers. And I don't think perfect games are going to become a common occurrence. Hitters today are more patient than ever before and while they might strike out a lot, they also tend to walk more. According to the averages of every year, the walk rate has remained pretty consistent since around the 1920's till now. I was actually surprised by that. In fact, MLB saw the highest averages in walks in 1949 and 1950. It was actually surprising. Another couple of notes: SO's steadily increased by decade. In the 40's the average was about 7-8 K's per 9 innings (for both sides). In the 70's it was around 10-11. And now its 14-15 per game. Also, not surprisingly, in 1994 we saw the highest increase in the HR rate. Actually, by looking at a lot of the numbers the only categories that changed a lot with time are: K, SLG, and HR. HR can be attributed to steroids, smaller ball parks, and people wanting the big pay check. And naturally the more HR's, the higher the SLG%. But over time, what once was considered a "disgrace" the strikeout became no big deal. People wanted to hit more HR's, the K rates went up. People, managers, and front offices didn't care as long as you were hitting home runs. And I think the argument a SO is no different than any other out is BS. But we'll save that for another day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 QUOTE (T R U @ Jun 3, 2010 -> 01:06 AM) Its because of the steroid crack down, get use to hitting going downhill Your theory is wrong. Steve Stone himself has said numerous times on the Score that something else is going around the game, and that's why hitters like Vlad, Ortiz, and Tejada, among others, are seeing a revival to their careers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitekrazy Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 3, 2010 -> 10:14 AM) Over the past 2 years, no hitters, 1 hitters, 2 hitters, and perfect games are up a total of 50% over the average of the most recent 10 year span of the Steroid Era. I think it is interesting to note how much baseball is shifting back to a pitchers league and I think we will see the way the game is played get altered a bit in the near future. Some of the little things that help you scrap out a run or two will become more important. As will having guys that can play incredible defense. Sounds like something Ozzie would say and believes. Another thing is the league is so lopsided as far a hitters go. The average to below average AL pitcher can go the the NL and have success. I'm not surprised Peavy more more lit up than lights out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 Some other data to throw into the stewing pot. Let's wait to see if offense picks up over the warmer summer months before we put a non-stick label on this season. But the first one-third of the season has belonged to the pitchers. Two perfect games and nearly a third don't define a trend. But when you check out what's been going on, baseball hasn't belonged this much to the guys on the mound since everything started to blow up in 1993, the first of two expansions in six years and the ascendant years of The Steroid Era. Check out some of the oddly poor offensive signs so far: • There have been seven individual shutouts with one or no hits. With two-thirds of the season still to play, that's already more than occurred in either of the past two seasons and five of the past six years. • The Dodgers and Diamondbacks scored two runs in 48 turns at bat in back-to-back games in Los Angeles. • The Braves won nine straight games while allowing three runs or less in every game. • The Phillies have scored 11 runs in their past 14 games. • Team pitching staffs allowed one or no runs 266 times over the first one-third of the season, or 16.7 percent of their games -- that's up 33 percent from 10 years ago in the heart of The Steroid Era (12.5 percent). • AL teams are scoring runs at a rate that if it holds up would be the league's worst since 1992. The NL rate, which has held steady from last year, also hasn't been worse than this since 1992. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 Here's my question: with numbers declining everywhere on offense, does this mean anyone that put up huge numbers in the last decade was using illegal enhancers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 4, 2010 -> 03:20 PM) Here's my question: with numbers declining everywhere on offense, does this mean anyone that put up huge numbers in the last decade was using illegal enhancers? Of course not, that's just silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 4, 2010 -> 07:24 PM) Of course not, that's just silly. So how do we judge which player hit 50 home runs in a season fair and square? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 4, 2010 -> 02:28 PM) So how do we judge which player hit 50 home runs in a season fair and square? Case by case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 4, 2010 -> 01:28 PM) So how do we judge which player hit 50 home runs in a season fair and square? By height. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 4, 2010 -> 09:16 AM) Your theory is wrong. Steve Stone himself has said numerous times on the Score that something else is going around the game, and that's why hitters like Vlad, Ortiz, and Tejada, among others, are seeing a revival to their careers. If there is some other enhancer going around for those reviving their career, then wouldn't that make my theory correct? Unless of course you are being sarcastic and im just missing it.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 4, 2010 Share Posted June 4, 2010 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 4, 2010 -> 03:30 PM) Case by case. And there is zero perfect method of doing so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.