White Sox Interactive Forums
Talking Baseball

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Talking Baseball
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 02-09-2019, 08:34 PM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 4,237
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoochile View Post
The comment might be referring to casual fans. People who enjoy going out and having fun but don't care as much what they are doing. Movie, game, concert, etc. It's all fun but they won't prioritize baseball over other things.

Most sports rely on these casual fans on a regular basis. Those people just want to go out and enjoy the sites and sounds and bond with other people - mingle with the masses as it were.

Baseball needs those people more than other sports because they have a lot more seats to sell. Baseball also has the slowest moving game with the least moments of "action" so the idea MLB would try to liven things up would seem a natural outgrowth of the faster pace world we live in.

But that's just IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
Looking back perhaps I used the wrong word which has confused some. Instead of "fan base" I should have wrote "group of people" or "people of a certain age group." who don't care about baseball.
So now the owners of baseball teams have to become owners of "special event" centers.

Great, let's wrap an amusement park around the ballpark and declare victory. While we're at it lets engage in some expansion. Then we'll have another organization reliant on the turn-style to meet their expenses.

It's so sad it's laughable.
__________________
ďThere were a few hard rules, but everybody was unique, and he understood that. Georgeís great strength was he didnít overcoach. Thereís no place for panic on the mound.Ē - Jim Palmer on George Bamberger ďArms and the man,Ē Sports Illustrated, April 19, 2004

Last edited by Grzegorz; 02-09-2019 at 08:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 02-10-2019, 12:20 AM
mzh mzh is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,368
Default

I think lowering the mound slightly is actually the best solution to all of the problems that have been beaten to death here over the last couple years. The fact is, the issue of the three true outcomes approach is a result of the fact that technology has allowed for the physical optimization of pitchers much more so than it has hitters. A 98 MPH fastball is much harder to hit than one at 95 MPH, which is much harder to hit than one at 92 MPH, etc etc. The all or nothing hitting approach that's been adopted recently is a function of the fact that pitchers are throwing harder than ever: because hitters are making less contact overall, they therefore need to maximize the contact that they do make, which necessitates a swing that will lead to either an XBH or a swing and miss. That's why the number of ABs that result in either Ks or HRs has skyrocketed. Pitchers learning to throw harder isn't something that can be mitigated by rule changes. The only feasible way to change this is to adjust the physical pitcher-hitter dynamic so that a 98 MPH fastball functions more like what a 94-95 MPH fastball would have looked like in the past. That means lowering the mound--the only other option would be to adjust from 60 feet six inches, which for me ought to be totally off the table.

Last edited by mzh; 02-10-2019 at 12:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 02-10-2019, 01:20 AM
WhiteSox5187 WhiteSox5187 is offline
Winner 2016 WSI Preseason Prediction Contest
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southside
Posts: 15,967
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
Looking back perhaps I used the wrong word which has confused some. Instead of "fan base" I should have wrote "group of people" or "people of a certain age group." who don't care about baseball.
If the people of a certain age group who donít care about baseball are young people, then baseball has a major problem because if older people are the only ones who care about it, what happens when they die?

I think there are some things baseball could do to improve pace of play, but it seems like the game has really struggled to market itself and its stars for almost 20 years now.
__________________

Go Sox!!!
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 02-10-2019, 05:45 AM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 4,237
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mzh View Post
A 98 MPH fastball is much harder to hit than one at 95 MPH, which is much harder to hit than one at 92 MPH, etc etc.
Yeah right... I give you Nate Jones; I give you Kyle Farnsworth. Without location and movement they really suffered no matter how hard they threw.

Pedro Martinez, arguably the best pitcher in a generation, didn't throw harder in order to be harder to hit. Greg Maddox, Tom Glavine, Orel Hershiser, Mike Mussina, Kevin Appier, Frank Viola, Curt Shilling, etc...

Go ahead lower the mound in an attempt to get the affection of the young video gamer of today. Make the game a bigger joke than it is now.

They can central plan all they want; they'll still fail. You will not build the fan base needed to grow the game until you get kids back playing the game.

Last edited by Grzegorz; 02-10-2019 at 10:53 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 02-10-2019, 12:46 PM
Lip Man 1 Lip Man 1 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chubbuck, Idaho
Posts: 33,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grzegorz View Post
Yeah right... I give you Nate Jones; I give you Kyle Farnsworth. Without location and movement they really suffered no matter how hard they threw.

Pedro Martinez, arguably the best pitcher in a generation, didn't throw harder in order to be harder to hit. Greg Maddox, Tom Glavine, Orel Hershiser, Mike Mussina, Kevin Appier, Frank Viola, Curt Shilling, etc...

Go ahead lower the mound in an attempt to get the affection of the young video gamer of today. Make the game a bigger joke than it is now.

They can central plan all they want; they'll still fail. You will not build the fan base needed to grow the game until you get kids back playing the game.
A lot of truth to this in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 02-10-2019, 01:43 PM
mzh mzh is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
A lot of truth to this in my opinion.
I mean, it's going to look like truth when you change the goalposts into a comparison of Mike Mussina and Kyle Farnsworth. But if there's a flaw in my logic that can be expressed in terms other than "what about player X who threw soft and was good, compared to player Y who threw hard and was bad," I'm totally listening.

As I said above, my own conclusions are based on more than just a few upper-echelon pitchers who make up a tiny percentage of all the pitchers and pitches thrown in baseball. Maddux, Mussina, Buerhle, Hendricks et al. are the definition of the exceptions that prove the rule. Yes, you can be successful throwing 90 MPH if you also have exceptional command, movement, and pitch sequencing. When you throw 99, you can be successful without all those things, because 99 is harder to hit than 90. To cherry pick a one more example: Greg Maddux was a HOFer because he was exceptionally excellent at doing everything you needed to succeed without throwing hard. Nolan Ryan was a HOFer because he threw really hard and didn't have to do a lot else. It's a lot easier to become one of those things than the other, and the easier path isn't the one that involves complete mastery of four or five skills outside of "throw hard."
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 02-10-2019, 02:18 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 10,092
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grzegorz
If you want to build the fan base get kids back outside playing the game.
Itís not for a lack of effort on MLBís part that kids donít play baseball as often nowadays. The White Sox and Cubs in particular go to great lengths to make the sport more accessible to Chicagoís youth. The White Sox have built several youth diamonds in underserved communities, and the Cubs organize several events that provide accessibility opportunities for children with exceptionalities.

I would imagine that the other 28 teams in MLB are doing similar things.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemaster Fred
This is the major leagues so get it how you live and letís fight tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 02-10-2019, 02:33 PM
mzh mzh is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
It’s not for a lack of effort on MLB’s part that kids don’t play baseball as often nowadays. The White Sox and Cubs in particular go to great lengths to make the sport more accessible to Chicago’s youth. The White Sox have built several youth diamonds in underserved communities, and the Cubs organize several events that provide accessibility opportunities for children with exceptionalities.

I would imagine that the other 28 teams in MLB are doing similar things.
Can confirm - I've seen/worked with a couple organizations in the NY area that are doing the same thing, and that's outside the initiatives coming from the top of MLB themselves. They're definitely trying.

It's also important to remember that in terms of being the predominant professional sport in the American consciousness, MLB basically had a 50 year head start over the NBA and NFL, so I don't think there's as much to be gained by trying to recreate the past as we usually think--we're never going to go back to the days of 50 cent bleacher tickets, and likewise, we're not going to take it back to an era where a baseball player was by default the biggest kind of athletic superstar in the eye of the public.

In basketball, for example, the culture of the game is predicated on individual personalities and styles in a way that's super compatible with the internet age. It's much more conducive to spontaneous highlights and soundbites in a way that baseball isn't.

There's not a whole lot MLB can do about that but get kids on a track to play baseball at a much younger age, which is essentially what they're trying to do. As ****ed up as the international system is, a big part of the reason baseball is still the dominant sport throughout most of Latin America is that the pipeline starts at age 11 or 12. By the time most pro-bound Americans are 18 years old and making a final choice between baseball and football and basketball, their equivalents in the DR have already been signed and in a pro organization for over a year.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 02-10-2019, 02:42 PM
Lip Man 1 Lip Man 1 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chubbuck, Idaho
Posts: 33,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mzh View Post
I mean, it's going to look like truth when you change the goalposts into a comparison of Mike Mussina and Kyle Farnsworth. But if there's a flaw in my logic that can be expressed in terms other than "what about player X who threw soft and was good, compared to player Y who threw hard and was bad," I'm totally listening.

As I said above, my own conclusions are based on more than just a few upper-echelon pitchers who make up a tiny percentage of all the pitchers and pitches thrown in baseball. Maddux, Mussina, Buerhle, Hendricks et al. are the definition of the exceptions that prove the rule. Yes, you can be successful throwing 90 MPH if you also have exceptional command, movement, and pitch sequencing. When you throw 99, you can be successful without all those things, because 99 is harder to hit than 90. To cherry pick a one more example: Greg Maddux was a HOFer because he was exceptionally excellent at doing everything you needed to succeed without throwing hard. Nolan Ryan was a HOFer because he threw really hard and didn't have to do a lot else. It's a lot easier to become one of those things than the other, and the easier path isn't the one that involves complete mastery of four or five skills outside of "throw hard."
MZH: I was specifically referring to his last line "You will not build the fan base needed to grow the game until you get kids back playing the game."

Sorry for the confusion.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 02-10-2019, 06:19 PM
FielderJones's Avatar
FielderJones FielderJones is offline
WSI Village Atheist
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Clarendon Hills
Posts: 6,012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187 View Post
I HATE the idea of lowering the mound. While I like the DH, for some reason I like the quirk that the pitcher hits in the NL but not the AL.

I'm ready for the NL to join the rest of baseball. Seeing the Sox play in Cincinnati this year just reinforced how much I like the DH.


https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...6-year-mistake
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 02-10-2019, 06:58 PM
mzh mzh is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,368
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
MZH: I was specifically referring to his last line "You will not build the fan base needed to grow the game until you get kids back playing the game."

Sorry for the confusion.
No worries--that's definitely a fact. As I pointed out in another thread, as terrible as the current international system is, there's a reason that baseball remains the number one sport throughout the majority of Latin America. When kids in the United States hit 17 or 18 and are making their final commitments between baseball, basketball, or football, their peers in the DR have already been signed and in the MLB pipeline for 2 years, because the development track starts at age 11 or 12.

Not that I'm saying we should have that system here in the US; it's just an affirmation of that point. As two and three sport athletes become rarer, you have to get them to commit earlier to stay involved.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 02-14-2019, 10:20 AM
Jerko Jerko is offline
2008 WSI Pick 'Em Champion
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 10,584
Default

Well, as much as I hate the "one pitcher for one batter" strategy, especially in days of yore when Duke came in and walked a lefty, a new pitcher came in and got a righty out, then Jennings came in and gave up a hit to a lefty...........all in the span of 3 batters, I'm against the "must face 3 batters" rule. Also, as much as I hate when the Sox are at a national league park and the pitcher bats, I think I'm also against the universal DH. Maybe I just like the game the way it is? I don't want to see the baseball equivalent of 3 on 3 (which I guess would be the "start the 11th inning with a guy on 2nd") rule either. Managers do not HAVE to make so many moves. And yes I agree, if a guy is getting people out, leave him in, handedness be damned. Managers ARE out of control with late inning moves but to MAKE a pitcher stay in for a certain number of batters just takes away strategy. Which is what we like about the game in the first place.
__________________
Playoffs? PLAYoffs?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:10 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.