PDA

View Full Version : Shattered Bats Decrease by 50% in 2011


johnny bench
06-15-2011, 05:33 PM
So I learned some new stuff about bats...

There are new standards for bats manufacture that are driving down the number of shattered bats and new MLB players cannot use maple bats.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2015309068_apbbobrokenbats.html

Sox
06-15-2011, 05:41 PM
I'm all for it. Especially if it reduces the possibility of injury.

DumpJerry
06-15-2011, 05:45 PM
Another benefit of no Steroids.

Nellie_Fox
06-16-2011, 01:21 AM
So I learned some new stuff about bats...

There are new standards for bats manufacture that are driving down the number of shattered bats and new MLB players cannot use maple bats.
I hate the "grandfathering" crap in MLB. In any other sport, everybody plays by the same equipment rules. When hockey changed the size of goalie pads and catching gloves, they didn't "grandfather" the goalies already in the league, nor did Bobby Hull and Stan Mikita get to keep using the huge hook on their blades. New rule, new day. Okay, they grandfathered on helmets, but that wasn't something that gave a competitive advantage, just personal protection.

If maple bats are dangerous, ban them for everybody. If they're okay for veterans, they're okay for rookies. The same thing happened with that huge hinged armor plate Barry Bonds wore on his arm. He was "grandfathered" and given a major advantage.

StillMissOzzie
06-16-2011, 01:47 AM
Another benefit of no Steroids.

Absolutely. Once they started testing the trees for steroids, they got less brittle!

SMO
:tongue:

TDog
06-17-2011, 07:25 PM
I hate the "grandfathering" crap in MLB. In any other sport, everybody plays by the same equipment rules. When hockey changed the size of goalie pads and catching gloves, they didn't "grandfather" the goalies already in the league, nor did Bobby Hull and Stan Mikita get to keep using the huge hook on their blades. New rule, new day. Okay, they grandfathered on helmets, but that wasn't something that gave a competitive advantage, just personal protection.

If maple bats are dangerous, ban them for everybody. If they're okay for veterans, they're okay for rookies. The same thing happened with that huge hinged armor plate Barry Bonds wore on his arm. He was "grandfathered" and given a major advantage.

I agree. The rule that required earflaps on helmets, even the rule that required helmets involved personal risk. Bat standards involve risk of injury to others. I read that when baseball made the spitball illegal, they grandfathered it in, so that spitball pitchers who were in the league could continue to throw it, but it would be illegal for anyone else to throw it. I always thought that was a little odd.

DonnieDarko
06-19-2011, 01:03 AM
I also seem to remember MLB "grandfathering" spitballers. After the pitch was outlawed, several pitchers who had pretty much built their career on the pitch were allowed to keep using it until they retired. At least I'm told that was the case.

Nellie_Fox
06-19-2011, 01:29 AM
I also seem to remember MLB "grandfathering" spitballers. After the pitch was outlawed, several pitchers who had pretty much built their career on the pitch were allowed to keep using it until they retired. At least I'm told that was the case.You were told correctly. And they were wrong then, too.

DonnieDarko
06-19-2011, 01:42 AM
You were told correctly. And they were wrong then, too.

Not saying that they were right, by any means. What I was getting at was that there is a history of this, so it's not like it's something that they just up and decided to do. So we shouldn't be shocked, I suppose.

Nellie_Fox
06-19-2011, 02:01 AM
Not saying that they were right, by any means. What I was getting at was that there is a history of this, so it's not like it's something that they just up and decided to do. So we shouldn't be shocked, I suppose.Even "grandfathering" spitballers made more sense than grandfathering maple bats. I wasn't around then, but I'd imagine there was some concern about taking away the careers of the few spitballers they grandfathered. Nobody's career will be over if they take away maple bats.

Jurr
06-19-2011, 08:14 AM
Yeah, what the hell with the spitballers? A man DIED, which caused the rule change, yet they still allowed older pitchers to use it? Crazy.

gobears1987
06-19-2011, 08:15 AM
Even "grandfathering" spitballers made more sense than grandfathering maple bats. I wasn't around then, but I'd imagine there was some concern about taking away the careers of the few spitballers they grandfathered. Nobody's career will be over if they take away maple bats.

That's pretty much how I see it. Players using maple bats will still have jobs if they use ash. A lot of those spitballers wouldn't have jobs if they had that pitch banned.

One of the grandfathered spitballers was the Sox Eddie Cicotte, but he didn't get to stick around long after the pitch was banned as he was one of the 8 players banned for throwing the 1919 Series.

gobears1987
06-19-2011, 08:18 AM
Yeah, what the hell with the spitballers? A man DIED, which caused the rule change, yet they still allowed older pitchers to use it? Crazy.

I think the poor lighting conditions were more responsible for the circumstances in Chapman's death than the spitball. Banning the pitch was an overreaction. The fact is many, many pitchers have doctored balls since and no other player has died from being hit by a pitch. Gaylord Perry made a Hall of Fame career out of throwing spitballs into the 1980s

Maple bats on the other hand were certainly going to kill a player or fan if they were allowed to continue. What pisses me off is several fans suffered severe injuries from bats, but it wasn't until a player got injured that MLB stepped up. Say what you will about Hawk Harrelson, but he was dead on the last several years when he complained about the bats.

eastchicagosoxfan
06-19-2011, 01:07 PM
Yeah, what the hell with the spitballers? A man DIED, which caused the rule change, yet they still allowed older pitchers to use it? Crazy.

Carl Mays did throw the spitter, but he killed Ray Chapman with a fastball. He threw from the side, like Quisenberry, but at times he almost threw underhanded, like a fast-pitch softballer. The pitch that killed Chapman was a sidearm pitch delived just above ground level. Mays said that during his delivery he saw Chapman shift his weight, suggesting a bunt. Mays decided to throw one high and tight. Mudd Ruehl, the Yankees catcher thought the pitch would be a strike, but he always had a hard time catching Mays when Mays threw from the side. Chapman saw the ball, but made no effort to get out of the way. The ball struck Chapman on the left temple and made an awful cracking sound upon impact. Chapman almost walked off the field, but had to be helped about halfway across the field. He after surgery failed to relieve pressure off his brain. Mas claimed the ball was scuffed up, and the scuff caused him to loose control of the pitch. Mays was not one of the grandfathered spitballers.

WhiteSox5187
06-19-2011, 02:07 PM
Carl Mays did throw the spitter, but he killed Ray Chapman with a fastball. He threw from the side, like Quisenberry, but at times he almost threw underhanded, like a fast-pitch softballer. The pitch that killed Chapman was a sidearm pitch delived just above ground level. Mays said that during his delivery he saw Chapman shift his weight, suggesting a bunt. Mays decided to throw one high and tight. Mudd Ruehl, the Yankees catcher thought the pitch would be a strike, but he always had a hard time catching Mays when Mays threw from the side. Chapman saw the ball, but made no effort to get out of the way. The ball struck Chapman on the left temple and made an awful cracking sound upon impact. Chapman almost walked off the field, but had to be helped about halfway across the field. He after surgery failed to relieve pressure off his brain. Mas claimed the ball was scuffed up, and the scuff caused him to loose control of the pitch. Mays was not one of the grandfathered spitballers.

Another thing that factored in this was that umpires did not use new baseballs unless there was a home run or something. It was not uncommon to use one or two baseballs through out the course of the game which meant they would be very hard to see especially during the twi-light hours, which is when the Chapman incident happened. I also heard that when the ball hit Chapman's head it actually bounced all the way to the third baseman who thought the ball was in play and off of Chapman's bat.

Railsplitter
06-19-2011, 02:16 PM
I also seem to remember MLB "grandfathering" spitballers. After the pitch was outlawed, several pitchers who had pretty much built their career on the pitch were allowed to keep using it until they retired. At least I'm told that was the case.
Yes. Burliegh Grimes was throwing spitballs as late as 1934. At one point in the 1930 World Series, Connie Mack mentioned Grimes might go through the spitter motions and throw a cruve. Jimmie Foxx took note of it pounded one of those curves for a homer that was the difference in the game it happened in.

To saty on topic: good. Fewer splinterring bats mean fewer chances of somebodu getting speared by bat fragaments.