Hitters are stupid.

[BearSox]

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

[T R U]

Its because of the steroid crack down, get use to hitting going downhill

[NorthSideSox72]

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.

 

[Balta1701]

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.

[NorthSideSox72]

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.

 

[chw42]

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

[Chisoxfn]

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.

[Chisoxfn]

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.

[ZoomSlowik]

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.

[BigSqwert]

Hitters are stupid.

 

Nuh uh

 

You're stupid

 

*sticks out tongue*

[Jordan4life_2007]

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.

[southsider2k5]

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

[BearSox]

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

[ZoomSlowik]

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.

[BearSox]

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.

[Steve9347]

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.

[kitekrazy]

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.

 

[Balta1701]

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.

[fathom]

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?

[Balta1701]

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.

[fathom]

Of course not, that's just silly.

 

So how do we judge which player hit 50 home runs in a season fair and square?

[NorthSideSox72]

So how do we judge which player hit 50 home runs in a season fair and square?

Case by case.

 

[iamshack]

So how do we judge which player hit 50 home runs in a season fair and square?

By height.

[T R U]

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..

[Balta1701]

Case by case.

And there is zero perfect method of doing so.