Most major changes we have seen in MLB during the past (40) years have been implemented to promote more offensive production; Such as the Designated Hitter, Smaller Ballparks, and lowering the pitching mound. Is more offensive production the answer to bringing in the fans or would the fan like to see a well pitched game. Pitching dominated the game in the 1960's and MLB decided to lower the pitching mound from 15" to 10" in 1968. The higher the mound the more leverage the pitcher has and it makes it more difficult for a hitter to hit the ball squarely. This one single change has skewed the power numbers in favor of the hitters far more than steroids could ever do, while at the same time rolling up ERA's for the pitchers. It is very possible that someone like Johan Santana would have Gibson and Koufax type numbers if he pitched using a 15" mound. Is it time to even the playing field and start looking at some changes that will benefit the pitchers?
2007-05-23 03:08:33 · 5 answers · asked by Frizzer 7 in Sports ➔ Baseball
If you read some of my rants about this you know that I completely agree with you.
The young guys on this site love telling us old guys about how much better an athlete today's ballplayer is than his predecessor were .
OK If today's ballplayer is that much better than he would have no difficulty adjusting to a ball thrown from a higher mound, a Don Drysdale/Sal Maglie/ Bob Gibson type brush-back pitch or another 50-60' added to the distance to centerfield from home plate.
If the distance was good enough for Mantle it should be good enough for Damon.
2007-05-23 04:18:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
America is obsessed with the longball, which is why no one cared when Canseco, Caminitti, McGuire, and all the others were belting out homers in record numbers. Should we level the playing field? Of course. Nowadays, with 500+ homers being an automatic key to the Hall of Fame, we need to curb the homer and help more pitchers get into the Hall. After Johnson, Clemens, Glavine, Maddux, Smoltz, and a few others get in, what candidates do we have?
2007-05-23 10:22:27 · answer #2 · answered by s_talouis 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Very interesting theory, but, unfortunate people in this day and age like the excitement of a home run, and don't find a well pitched game exciting. In fact a well pitched, few hit game is boring to most fans.
2007-05-23 10:24:39 · answer #3 · answered by max_power 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Attendance is at an all-time high. I personally agree with everything you said, but every time in baseball history that offense has dropped, attendance has dropped with it. Owners and players will follow the money, and the money likes offense.
2007-05-23 10:22:13 · answer #4 · answered by pob14 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Leaguewide batting average is always around .260 -- go back one hundred years and this holds mostly true. It varies a bit, of course, but it always comes back to .260ish.
If it moves up to .280 and stays there for a half-decade, then worry.
2007-05-23 13:51:31 · answer #5 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋