English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Because I wasnt alive at the time..

I was wondering how one would compare the pitching in the Hank Aaron times compared to the pitching today. I'm writing an essay arguing for both athletes, but from a baseball fans perspective alive at the time.. which generation had the more dominant pitching?

2007-08-07 05:44:17 · 10 answers · asked by agressivve707 2 in Sports Baseball

10 answers

Overall pitching was better when Aaron played because, for much of his career, there were only eight NL teams and pitching wasn't spread as thinly as it is today with sixteen NL teams. It wasn't until 1969 that the pitching mound was lowered from 15" to 10" and the strike zone was compressed. The higher mound was in place for much of Aaron's career which gave the pitchers much more leverage on their pitches and it was much more difficult for the hitters to hit the ball squarely because of the angle the pitches crossed the plate. All you have to do is look at the lower scoring back when Aaron was playing, as compared to today, and you will come to the same conclusion that it was more difficult for the hitters at that time. So, although the pitchers themselves were probably no better than today the the pitchers had a decided advantage when compared to pitchers today which made it more difficult for the hitters.

2007-08-07 06:20:23 · answer #1 · answered by Frizzer 7 · 0 0

The 1960s, which formed the heart of Hank Aaron's playing time, is generally regarded as the strongest pitching era of the modern (post-1920) baseball era. During the 1960s, the average National League ERA varied from 3.43 (1968) to 4.52 (1961). Compare that to the last ten years: the average ERA has varied from 4.45 (2005) to 5.00 (2000).

Overall, the current game is more hitter-friendly than it was in the 1960s. Several things account for the difference: the lowering of the pitchers mound in 1969 and the building of more hitter-friendly ballparks over the last 15 years are the most significant factors.

2007-08-07 06:35:32 · answer #2 · answered by JerH1 7 · 0 0

Here's one point you would want to include in your essay: The height of the pitching mound was lowered to its current height of 10 inches during Aaron's time. It was 15 inches to begin with. This made pitching much more difficult and I can't imagine how many homers would have been given up by pitchers struggling to accommodate this change.

Pitching as a whole back then was a little less important that it is today. Obviously in the game of baseball, the pitcher is the only one to hold the ball on every play, but now pitching is so important to players and managers and strategy as well as science have really changed it. Breaking balls break more, they are used strategically more than they were back then. Not to say that there was no strategy in pitching back then, but it got a little less focus in Aaron's time

2007-08-07 05:59:01 · answer #3 · answered by MLBfreek35 5 · 0 0

No comparison. The 1960s, when Aaron got the majority of his homers, was one of the most dominant periods of pitching in history.

To give you an idea, In 1968 Bob Gibson had an all-time low ERA of 1.18!!!. And despite giving up only 1 run a game (and NEVER being lifted from a game except for a pinch hitter) he still lost 8 games.

Bonds has gotten most of his homers during an era of unpresidented homerun hitting with small, hitter friendly ballparks being built all around the leagues.

This really makes Aarons achievement all the more remarkable.

2007-08-07 06:17:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I think the pitching was better during Aaron's era. There were less teams, so the pitching pool was less diluted. Some of the guys pitching today would not have made a major league roster in those days. Secondly, pitchers were capable of going 9 innings and giving you a complete game in those days. Today, you're lucky if your starter gives you 6 good innings.

2007-08-07 05:51:01 · answer #5 · answered by Dude 6 · 1 0

He had to face people like Sandy Koufax, Juan Marichal, Bob Gibson, Don Drysdale, Tom Seaver, Steve Carlton, Nolan Ryan, JR Richards, Claude Osteen, and Robin Roberts. It was just a little rough! The ball hadn't been juiced up yet, the mound was still high, and as I'm writing this, about 6 other hall of famers come to mind that he had to face. No easy go for Hank Aaron.

2007-08-07 07:38:38 · answer #6 · answered by Sarrafzedehkhoee 7 · 0 0

They throw harder today and throw more junk pitches. it seems a new pitch gets added in every ten years or so. plus today the relievers come in earlier which means you dont get as many looks at a guy and cant adjust to his stuff. its alot harder today.

2007-08-07 05:50:48 · answer #7 · answered by George C 4 · 0 0

i think the pitching was better this year, i mean in the lil leagues some kids are throwing up to 90 mph!!!!

2007-08-07 05:48:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Meat on the Mound

2007-08-07 05:47:37 · answer #9 · answered by Magic Man 5 · 0 0

plain out, it was better than now.

2007-08-07 08:50:42 · answer #10 · answered by Zaza 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers