tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538424.post6345522299656456144..comments2024-02-29T23:31:03.341-05:00Comments on Out Of Left Field: A'S-JAYS: ROGERS CENTRE, ON THE SHORES OF LAKE FLACCIDsagerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08757652892056684490noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538424.post-34960058892616557802007-08-22T19:25:00.000-04:002007-08-22T19:25:00.000-04:00N, I haven't seen the #'s but I believe you when y...N, I haven't seen the #'s but I believe you when you say the offensive explosion predates the 94 strike. I think it corresponds with the introduction and increase of steroids into the game. I would be interested in knowing if the increase in HR was accelerated post 94.<BR/><BR/>As for James, that's very interesting. I think Bill James is one of the most important people in baseball the past 20 years. I hadn't seen James theory on the offensive explosion but I have immense respect for his theories ( some of which he has admitted he now disagrees with, even he makes mistakes ).<BR/><BR/>I agree with James on all 5 of his factors although I admit I hadn't considered #'s 2 -4. When he / you say "acceptance of strength training" the use of steroids is part & parcel. There is not SERIOUS weight training without them. You want steroids, go to a gymn where you find "strength training". What did Greg Anderson do for a living before he was incarcerated for refusing to testify against Bonds? It's simple, you get better results from weight / strength training if you're on the juice. Are you too young to remember Charles Dubin? <BR/><BR/>I think James is remiss is not including the ball. I think it got really stupid post 94 ( do the numbers bear this out? ) Brady Anderson, Luis Gonzalez, Greg Vaughn et.al, good hitters who put up ridiculous #'s and the guys who took a quantum leap in HR, Sosa ( 3 seasons 60+ ) & the obvious Big Mac ( the reporters all saw the Andro - was it? - in his locker ) & Bonds.<BR/><BR/>There's one other factor although I think "acceptance of strength training" is the most significant. Ballparks. Camden Yards begat the building of baseball only parks practically everywhere in the game. With few exceptions ( Petco, Comerica, Safeco ) they are much, much more HR friendly than the parks that preceded them. Fans will pay more to be closer to the field.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, late for the Tigers / Indians game.Eric Tomshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00632341548970196518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538424.post-53105149059649390472007-08-22T18:53:00.000-04:002007-08-22T18:53:00.000-04:00I'm not sure how much it directly had to do with f...I'm not sure how much it directly had to do with fallout from the '94 strike... remember the numbers guys were putting up that year before the players walked off the job? The offensive explosion of the '90s predated the strike.<BR/><BR/>I checked my Bill James <I>New Historical Abstract</I> and his 5 reasons were 1) acceptance of strength training 2) abbreviating of pitcher's motions (i.e., the stretch) 3) aluminum bats in amateur ball 4) the policy of automatic fines and suspensions for fights and 5) bat design (the thin handles).<BR/><BR/>Reason No. 3's a good one... James pointed out people thought the aluminum bat would ruin hitters and it didn't. It opened their eyes to standing on top of the plate and blasting a pitch to the opposite field.<BR/><BR/>How many opposite field homers have the Jays hit this season? Not many. It's possible the pitchers have caught up and figured out how to take that away from batters.sagerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08757652892056684490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538424.post-45810727690252147162007-08-22T17:42:00.000-04:002007-08-22T17:42:00.000-04:00A new low point.Will Ricciardi weather the storm? ...A new low point.<BR/><BR/>Will Ricciardi weather the storm? Stay tuned.<BR/><BR/>TOS - I suspect you're right, the ball is back to "normal" after years of being "not normal". Think it had anything to do with the 94 strike? Is there a precedent in MLB history when they juiced the ball as a reaction to a big PR problem?Eric Tomshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00632341548970196518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538424.post-3519125723432649682007-08-21T21:50:00.000-04:002007-08-21T21:50:00.000-04:00As far as conspiracy theories go, maybe the best a...As far as conspiracy theories go, maybe the best answer as to why there are fewer homers is that the ball is back to normal, after years of being juiced or wound too tight.<BR/><BR/>Just a thought.<BR/><BR/>BTW - Welcome back Neate!Tao of Stiebhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12459135109404905466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538424.post-82972930463987303442007-08-21T18:44:00.000-04:002007-08-21T18:44:00.000-04:00Let's start with:1. HR are down in 07. Thanks to ...Let's start with:<BR/><BR/>1. HR are down in 07. Thanks to TOS (BTW I thought the movie was funny, particulary the Hitler riff but I digress ) for rooting this up. My instincts from reading the box scores and looking at indiviudal, random stats all season was that HR were down but I hadn't got round to looking up the facts. It is either because; a. there is less juice and hence less <BR/>bulk in the game and / or b. the ball has been deadened some to intentionally reduce the # of HR's and take some of the emphasis off this debate about the "Home Run / Steroids / Arena Baseball / Bonds " era in the press.<BR/><BR/>In support of b. subesequent to Thomas" comments re. deadened balls, I heard Alan Ashby <BR/>comment that the ball wasn't carrying at Rogers Center as well as it had earlier in the season....and he framed his comments in the context of a reaction to Thomas'...<BR/><BR/>2. Small ball is dead, rightly or wrongly and is a direct result of the influence of saber geeks on strategy. I agree with Dennis that the sac bunt has proven to be a "low percentage" play. Paul DePodesta during his brief tenure as Dodgers GM clashed with his <BR/>more traditional Mgr. Jim Tracy on the value of the sac bunt. I hink the saber guys and hence the relative absence of small ball are in the game to stay. Even teams that don`t employ a saber kinda GM (i.e. Daniels, Beane, Epstien, Silverman, Ricciardi ) employ these guys as advisers. Will the saber community be more sac friendly if HR & Runs continue to <BR/>decline or will they continue to believe it a waste of an out?<BR/><BR/>3. Naete, I thought Loaiza was getting the start tomorrow, where did you see Meyer? Meyer is an interesting guy, he was a key guy for the A's in the Hudson deal, but as with a lot of pitchers he hasn't been very healthy since. The A's obviously had pretty high hopes for this guy not too, too long ago.Eric Tomshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00632341548970196518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538424.post-79459491094984118572007-08-21T15:11:00.000-04:002007-08-21T15:11:00.000-04:00Earl Weaver put it best with small ball: "Play for...Earl Weaver put it best with small ball: "Play for one run and that's all you'll get."<BR/><BR/>With the younger kids, it's a good skill to teach <I>after</I> they've got the other stuff down — a nice level swing, knowing the strike zone, making solid contact. That was basically the context that youth coach was putting it in; his team could score runs, but needed to have the bunt in the backpocket. <BR/><BR/>I didn't mean to make him look bad, but only to point out the irony that Griffin's sultan of small ball was another coach's bad example for bunting.<BR/><BR/>Good point on the larger issue, Dennis... with the kids it is about making sure even the poorest player improves and goes home smiling.sagerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08757652892056684490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16538424.post-12056636984825466712007-08-21T14:09:00.000-04:002007-08-21T14:09:00.000-04:00Teaching 11 and 12 year olds how to bunt. Brillia...Teaching 11 and 12 year olds how to bunt. Brilliant! Boy, that'll teach 'em some fundamentals, eh? Give me a break. Do youth sports coaches ever read? Do any of them have an internet connection? "Small ball" and the sacrifice bunt are going the way of VHS as people crunch the numbers and figure out that, strategically, it's a low percentage play. Still, there's a chance it might work at the youth level, where fielding skills are weaker, to help you win a tournament, and God knows that's what it's all about! (insert eye roll here.) Teaching proper fundamentals and game strategy? Who cares about that when you can lay down a lame bunt in a game amongst 11 and 12 year olds, and maybe win!!! <BR/><BR/>We get the same thing in youth football -- doorknob coaches who ignore the teaching of fundamentals in order to maybe, maybe squeeze out another win. Then we act all surprised when kids quit and our turnover ratio goes up.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com