Home Sports Talk

Is the ball juiced or is pitching that bad again.

4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

Have you seen the scores of MLB games from the first two days. Very high scoring.

Diamondbacks 14 runs in 1 inning.
Over 70% of the games 10+ runs combined.

Small sample size but something to keep an eye on. Is MLB lacking HOF pitching right now ? I know it goes in spurts.

«1

Comments

  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 29,460 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Eh opening day was yesterday, I don't really look at Spring Training too much

    Let's get the season rolling along a bit then revisit this conversation

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

    @perkdog said:
    Eh opening day was yesterday, I don't really look at Spring Training too much

    Let's get the season rolling along a bit then revisit this conversation

    True. The norm has always been the bats get going when the weather gets warmer.

    Let’s see how the entire month of April goes first.

  • craig44craig44 Posts: 10,503 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I agree. lets revisit after at least a month.

    George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    It's been a weird year with several undefeated teams too.

  • Alfonz24Alfonz24 Posts: 3,042 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nick Martini on pace to hit 324 homers.

    #LetsGoSwitzerlandThe Man Who Does Not Read Has No Advantage Over the Man Who Cannot Read. The biggest obstacle to progress is a habit of “buying what we want and begging for what we need.”You get the Freedom you fight for and get the Oppression you deserve.
  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

    @Alfonz24 said:
    Nick Martini on pace to hit 324 homers.

    I’ll drink to that.

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

    Then again, who cares about watching baseball when you could instead follow a Bahamas trip of America’s favorite duo.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 27,697 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @4Boston said:
    Then again, who cares about watching baseball when you could instead follow a Bahamas trip of America’s favorite duo.

    Is Taylor that much of an alcoholic that she needs to be holding a drink when taking a stroll on the beach? 😆

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    Its early and all the rule changes including the faster pitch clock are designed to increase scoring. Pitchers are going to give up more runs fatiguing faster.

    That said players have long accused the league of juicing balls for big events like nationally televised games and opening day. The league would rather see a 15-14 game than a 1-0 game as they think scoring is a more exciting product.

    There were several HRs that went about 30-40 feet further than average for their launch angle and exit velocity. They would have been HRs either way in most cases but they were now further ones that looked more impressive. Its known the league messes around with balls and pitchers have talked about playoff balls feeling different and more like the old ones etc.

    The league controls the production of the baseballs so they can wind them a little tighter, make them a little more aerodynamic and things like that at will. They probably were more offensively friendly balls on opening day

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭
    edited March 30, 2024 6:42AM

    80% of last nights games had 8+ runs scored.

    The Braves got 7 in the 8th against the Phillies.

    It’s April. It’s still cold in Philly. Only the cheesesteaks are warm. I could understand if these games were in the Bahamas.

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

    16 runs in Philly last night.
    Pic from my son.
    Good crowd.
    But Travis and Taylor weren’t in attendance.
    Who said no one likes baseball anymore.

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

    In total all MLB games on Saturday averaged 12.5 runs per game.

    Either pitching stinks again or Barry Bonds now makes baseballs for MLB.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    Just wait till Auguest when pitchers are really fatigued. At least Joey Gallo is doing his best as always to keep scoring down.

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭
    edited March 31, 2024 8:38AM

    Holy RBIs Batman.
    Look at the R/G so far this year.
    It’s early, but the pitchers could be drinking more then Taylor. 🍻

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 31, 2024 8:59AM

    It is very hard to draw conclusions so early, but if looking at the early stats, home runs are actually down per game compared to last year.

    Last year ushered in two new major rules, the banning of the shift and the stolen base rules, both of which we don't know the full effect of their impact based on just one season(last year).

    The stolen base rate this year remains the same as last year(and up significantly compared to previous years), and the other area that is up are singles(and batting average) compared to last year. Both of which are directly related to the shift ban and stolen base rules that were adopted last year.

    Doubles and Home runs are down. Triples the same. So not the pitching. The pitchers are the same as last year.

    Base on Balls up this year too(so that is pitching too). I think that will settle down.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:
    It is very hard to draw conclusions so early, but if looking at the early stats, home runs are actually down per game compared to last year.

    Last year ushered in two new major rules, the banning of the shift and the stolen base rules, both of which we don't know the full effect of their impact based on just one season(last year).

    The stolen base rate this year remains the same as last year(and up significantly compared to previous years), and the other area that is up are singles(and batting average) compared to last year. Both of which are directly related to the shift ban and stolen base rules that were adopted last year.

    Doubles and Home runs are down. Triples the same. So not the pitching. The pitchers are the same as last year.

    Base on Balls up this year too(so that is pitching too). I think that will settle down.

    We know for sure that the shorter base paths have and will increase offense. We dont need multiple years of data for that especially combined with the oven mitts. The real surprise was that no one swiped 100+

    What we dont know is what impact the shift banning has actually had because it came at the same time as the pitch clock. The pitch clock has impacted a number of pitchers stuff and then they shortened it again this year. Even for the guys that played with the clock in college the MLB clock is significantly shorter.

    All the models basically showed the shift banning should add a hit a game but that didnt account for a decline in pitcher stuff. Not everyone has been impacted by it, but a lot have and some have been significantly.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:
    It is very hard to draw conclusions so early, but if looking at the early stats, home runs are actually down per game compared to last year.

    Last year ushered in two new major rules, the banning of the shift and the stolen base rules, both of which we don't know the full effect of their impact based on just one season(last year).

    The stolen base rate this year remains the same as last year(and up significantly compared to previous years), and the other area that is up are singles(and batting average) compared to last year. Both of which are directly related to the shift ban and stolen base rules that were adopted last year.

    Doubles and Home runs are down. Triples the same. So not the pitching. The pitchers are the same as last year.

    Base on Balls up this year too(so that is pitching too). I think that will settle down.

    We know for sure that the shorter base paths have and will increase offense. We dont need multiple years of data for that especially combined with the oven mitts. The real surprise was that no one swiped 100+

    What we dont know is what impact the shift banning has actually had because it came at the same time as the pitch clock. The pitch clock has impacted a number of pitchers stuff and then they shortened it again this year. Even for the guys that played with the clock in college the MLB clock is significantly shorter.

    All the models basically showed the shift banning should add a hit a game but that didnt account for a decline in pitcher stuff. Not everyone has been impacted by it, but a lot have and some have been significantly.

    Agree that the base stealing efficiency(and stealing more at a higher efficiency) certainly leads to an increase in runs scored. I too am surprised they aren't running even more.

    The shift ban certainly leads to more singles for certain hitters. Doesn't matter as much for others.

    I said before last year that Corey Seager would have been the biggest beneficiary to the shift ban.

    Overall the shift ban helps offense.

    Just because there is an increase in runs from one year to the next, it could mean nothing other than just chance. If nothing changes in the league, then runs scored from year to year will still fluctuate for no reason other than chance. We do know that things certainly changed last year that are indeed having an effect.

    We do know that certain things do influence it greatly though, especially things like mound height changes, fences being brought in, etc.. The rule changes last year. So it does take a few years of results to get a little better idea.

    Teams will adapt to the new rules and start taking advantage of them more. There is a gradual adaptation because contracts prevent sudden personnel change. Could take two or three years before teams league wide can fully employ players that will take advantage of any new rule. Most likely longer as some amateur players will become more attractive with the new rules in mind for the future.

    Pitch clock is mixed somewhere in there too...and will probably be impossible to know how much it helps or hurts offense.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:
    It is very hard to draw conclusions so early, but if looking at the early stats, home runs are actually down per game compared to last year.

    Last year ushered in two new major rules, the banning of the shift and the stolen base rules, both of which we don't know the full effect of their impact based on just one season(last year).

    The stolen base rate this year remains the same as last year(and up significantly compared to previous years), and the other area that is up are singles(and batting average) compared to last year. Both of which are directly related to the shift ban and stolen base rules that were adopted last year.

    Doubles and Home runs are down. Triples the same. So not the pitching. The pitchers are the same as last year.

    Base on Balls up this year too(so that is pitching too). I think that will settle down.

    We know for sure that the shorter base paths have and will increase offense. We dont need multiple years of data for that especially combined with the oven mitts. The real surprise was that no one swiped 100+

    What we dont know is what impact the shift banning has actually had because it came at the same time as the pitch clock. The pitch clock has impacted a number of pitchers stuff and then they shortened it again this year. Even for the guys that played with the clock in college the MLB clock is significantly shorter.

    All the models basically showed the shift banning should add a hit a game but that didnt account for a decline in pitcher stuff. Not everyone has been impacted by it, but a lot have and some have been significantly.

    Agree that the base stealing efficiency(and stealing more at a higher efficiency) certainly leads to an increase in runs scored. I too am surprised they aren't running even more.

    The shift ban certainly leads to more singles for certain hitters. Doesn't matter as much for others.

    I said before last year that Corey Seager would have been the biggest beneficiary to the shift ban.

    Overall the shift ban helps offense.

    Just because there is an increase in runs from one year to the next, it could mean nothing other than just chance. If nothing changes in the league, then runs scored from year to year will still fluctuate for no reason other than chance. We do know that things certainly changed last year that are indeed having an effect.

    We do know that certain things do influence it greatly though, especially things like mound height changes, fences being brought in, etc.. The rule changes last year. So it does take a few years of results to get a little better idea.

    Teams will adapt to the new rules and start taking advantage of them more. There is a gradual adaptation because contracts prevent sudden personnel change. Could take two or three years before teams league wide can fully employ players that will take advantage of any new rule. Most likely longer as some amateur players will become more attractive with the new rules in mind for the future.

    Pitch clock is mixed somewhere in there too...and will probably be impossible to know how much it helps or hurts offense.

    The shift ban mostly helps guys that cant really hit. You never saw the shift as much in college as you did in MLB because you didnt see those Gallo I can only be a dead pull hitter types see much playing time. I really dislike the fact that players like him are what some of the analytics wanted promoted and we are seeing these major rule changes to try and blame the rules for why they cant hit instead of valuing ones that actually can.

    The big problem with trying to judge what impact what had was that so many major changes came all at once and its been a few years now since we havent seen some sort of significant change to the rules. The base paths was an easy one. The shift more complicated, the pitch clocks are pretty easy to see velocity trends with the pitchers that had to speed up by 8 seconds or more seeing drops across the board. Some of them will probably adjust to it particularly the guys that had the clock in college or the minors.

    Theres other things to that dont really get mentioned like more turf fields that play faster and things like that. Without question theres year to year differences and its certainly to early this year to be drawing conclusions. I do think we will probably see some drop mid season to make the overall numbers look better and then an increase before a drop for the playoff races and playoffs again which would suggest some ball manipulation.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 31, 2024 2:48PM

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:
    It is very hard to draw conclusions so early, but if looking at the early stats, home runs are actually down per game compared to last year.

    Last year ushered in two new major rules, the banning of the shift and the stolen base rules, both of which we don't know the full effect of their impact based on just one season(last year).

    The stolen base rate this year remains the same as last year(and up significantly compared to previous years), and the other area that is up are singles(and batting average) compared to last year. Both of which are directly related to the shift ban and stolen base rules that were adopted last year.

    Doubles and Home runs are down. Triples the same. So not the pitching. The pitchers are the same as last year.

    Base on Balls up this year too(so that is pitching too). I think that will settle down.

    We know for sure that the shorter base paths have and will increase offense. We dont need multiple years of data for that especially combined with the oven mitts. The real surprise was that no one swiped 100+

    What we dont know is what impact the shift banning has actually had because it came at the same time as the pitch clock. The pitch clock has impacted a number of pitchers stuff and then they shortened it again this year. Even for the guys that played with the clock in college the MLB clock is significantly shorter.

    All the models basically showed the shift banning should add a hit a game but that didnt account for a decline in pitcher stuff. Not everyone has been impacted by it, but a lot have and some have been significantly.

    Agree that the base stealing efficiency(and stealing more at a higher efficiency) certainly leads to an increase in runs scored. I too am surprised they aren't running even more.

    The shift ban certainly leads to more singles for certain hitters. Doesn't matter as much for others.

    I said before last year that Corey Seager would have been the biggest beneficiary to the shift ban.

    Overall the shift ban helps offense.

    Just because there is an increase in runs from one year to the next, it could mean nothing other than just chance. If nothing changes in the league, then runs scored from year to year will still fluctuate for no reason other than chance. We do know that things certainly changed last year that are indeed having an effect.

    We do know that certain things do influence it greatly though, especially things like mound height changes, fences being brought in, etc.. The rule changes last year. So it does take a few years of results to get a little better idea.

    Teams will adapt to the new rules and start taking advantage of them more. There is a gradual adaptation because contracts prevent sudden personnel change. Could take two or three years before teams league wide can fully employ players that will take advantage of any new rule. Most likely longer as some amateur players will become more attractive with the new rules in mind for the future.

    Pitch clock is mixed somewhere in there too...and will probably be impossible to know how much it helps or hurts offense.

    The shift ban mostly helps guys that cant really hit. You never saw the shift as much in college as you did in MLB because you didnt see those Gallo I can only be a dead pull hitter types see much playing time. I really dislike the fact that players like him are what some of the analytics wanted promoted and we are seeing these major rule changes to try and blame the rules for why they cant hit instead of valuing ones that actually can.

    The big problem with trying to judge what impact what had was that so many major changes came all at once and its been a few years now since we havent seen some sort of significant change to the rules. The base paths was an easy one. The shift more complicated, the pitch clocks are pretty easy to see velocity trends with the pitchers that had to speed up by 8 seconds or more seeing drops across the board. Some of them will probably adjust to it particularly the guys that had the clock in college or the minors.

    Theres other things to that dont really get mentioned like more turf fields that play faster and things like that. Without question theres year to year differences and its certainly to early this year to be drawing conclusions. I do think we will probably see some drop mid season to make the overall numbers look better and then an increase before a drop for the playoff races and playoffs again which would suggest some ball manipulation.

    The shift ban helps anyone who pulls the ball a lot. As much as Gallo stinks now it still helps him when he hits a line drive to right field that was once an out and is now a single. It just doesn't happen much for him since he stinks now and barely plays. It helped Seager more because he hits it there more.

    They didn't promote it to help Gallo. Gallos has never been a goal for a MLB organization. They promoted it because the defense got too good at taking what has been a single for 100 years and turning them into outs, and because the pitchers got too filthy and hitting home runs really was the only way to get to them effectively. Gallo did serve that purpose well, but the Gallo types have never been a goal for MLB. He was a useful offenisve player in his prime of 2,248 plate appearances where he had an OPS+ of 117 , which is useful, but no way in hell is that the goal of a MLB organization.

    Ichiro's OPS+ was 119 for his first MLB seasons...to put Gallo's into perspective. A hair better than Gallo's prime but that tells you what they both meant for run production in their respective leagues and that isn't an opinion based on what guys 'like to see', but real run production.

    Gallo only had three season of over 500 plate appearances so why you think he was some goal for a MLB team is crazy.

    Corey Seager was helped by the shift and he is a goal of a mlb organization. He is the guy you should be trying to use your personal bias against. Your bias against not recognizing the value of a base on balls is at the heart of that(of which Gallo actually did well in addition to his 40 HR power which was really excellent).

    You do realize that in 2017 Gallo had a .333 OB% and he hit 41 Home Runs in 532 plate appearances? That is why he got more chances to play. That is not bad at all.

    Joe Carter had one season in his career higher than a .333 OB% and never hit 40 home runs in a season to put that into perspective.

    You do realize that Ted Williams was shift on right? And that Gallo types have been in MLB since a long time, like Steve Balbonia, Rob Deer, Kingman(although they hit a little higher in BA but didn't walk as much).

    PS Home runs are down so how is that ball manipulation??

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21

    I would like you to find me a human that can face MLB pitching in the last ten years and reach base safely 33% of the time and hit 41 home runs like Gallo did in 2017.

    90% of those college hitters you referenced(that weren't good enough to bother to be shifted on) who never got drafted could not even do either one(reach base safely 33% of the time in MLB and certainly not hit 41 home runs) or they would have been drafted.

    It isn't about Gallo.

    Your 'anger' at the changes stems from your bias about what you think is the 'right way to play'.

    It is about you not understanding the value of OB% and overvaluing batting average and grounding out to second base(which is still an out but ok with you since it isn't a strikeout even though they are the same 99% of the time).

    You should understand the value of 40 home runs.

    Even last year when Gallo was 'bad'. He still got on base 30% of the time safely and hit 21 home runs in 332 plate appearances. Find me someone on the street who can do that vs MLB pitching.

    Maybe you should stop picking on Gallo and understand why he had value.

    He is better than you realize. Certainly better than the guys who never got drafted but maybe they could ground out to second better than Gallo, and then they get mad because Gallo isn't hitting enough weak ground balls like they did at the amateur level because they were more manly and made contact their goal.

    Although, 40 home runs is pretty 'manly'. Funny how that is skipped by.

    Again, the shift isn't about Gallo. The shift is more about the Seager types. Gallo was NOT a goal of MLB. He had a useful skill set that provided enough offense to make him a viable MLB hitter.

    Remember, if you don't want changes, then MLB should go back to the pitchers throwing underhand because that is how they used to pitch. Then they changed it.

    Underhand pitching is the pure game of baseball...so maybe we should go back to that to keep the purity of the game everyone is craving, lol.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 164 ✭✭✭

    Yelich hit 44 in 2019 and had OBP over .400.

    Bellinger hit 47 and I’m sure was over .333 OBP

    Judge in 2017 and 2022

    Those examples aside I agree with your argument almost completely.

    I was initially against the shift rule changes but I admit I prefer the less dramatic shifts we’re seeing now.

    As far as changes in general. Change has been the only thing that has stayed the same. It’s part of baseball.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:

    Yelich hit 44 in 2019 and had OBP over .400.

    Bellinger hit 47 and I’m sure was over .333 OBP

    Judge in 2017 and 2022

    Those examples aside I agree with your argument almost completely.

    I was initially against the shift rule changes but I admit I prefer the less dramatic shifts we’re seeing now.

    As far as changes in general. Change has been the only thing that has stayed the same. It’s part of baseball.

    Those are MLB players....I asked to find someone outside of MLB that could do that as an example why Gallo was paid well to do what he did.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:
    It is very hard to draw conclusions so early, but if looking at the early stats, home runs are actually down per game compared to last year.

    Last year ushered in two new major rules, the banning of the shift and the stolen base rules, both of which we don't know the full effect of their impact based on just one season(last year).

    The stolen base rate this year remains the same as last year(and up significantly compared to previous years), and the other area that is up are singles(and batting average) compared to last year. Both of which are directly related to the shift ban and stolen base rules that were adopted last year.

    Doubles and Home runs are down. Triples the same. So not the pitching. The pitchers are the same as last year.

    Base on Balls up this year too(so that is pitching too). I think that will settle down.

    We know for sure that the shorter base paths have and will increase offense. We dont need multiple years of data for that especially combined with the oven mitts. The real surprise was that no one swiped 100+

    What we dont know is what impact the shift banning has actually had because it came at the same time as the pitch clock. The pitch clock has impacted a number of pitchers stuff and then they shortened it again this year. Even for the guys that played with the clock in college the MLB clock is significantly shorter.

    All the models basically showed the shift banning should add a hit a game but that didnt account for a decline in pitcher stuff. Not everyone has been impacted by it, but a lot have and some have been significantly.

    Agree that the base stealing efficiency(and stealing more at a higher efficiency) certainly leads to an increase in runs scored. I too am surprised they aren't running even more.

    The shift ban certainly leads to more singles for certain hitters. Doesn't matter as much for others.

    I said before last year that Corey Seager would have been the biggest beneficiary to the shift ban.

    Overall the shift ban helps offense.

    Just because there is an increase in runs from one year to the next, it could mean nothing other than just chance. If nothing changes in the league, then runs scored from year to year will still fluctuate for no reason other than chance. We do know that things certainly changed last year that are indeed having an effect.

    We do know that certain things do influence it greatly though, especially things like mound height changes, fences being brought in, etc.. The rule changes last year. So it does take a few years of results to get a little better idea.

    Teams will adapt to the new rules and start taking advantage of them more. There is a gradual adaptation because contracts prevent sudden personnel change. Could take two or three years before teams league wide can fully employ players that will take advantage of any new rule. Most likely longer as some amateur players will become more attractive with the new rules in mind for the future.

    Pitch clock is mixed somewhere in there too...and will probably be impossible to know how much it helps or hurts offense.

    The shift ban mostly helps guys that cant really hit. You never saw the shift as much in college as you did in MLB because you didnt see those Gallo I can only be a dead pull hitter types see much playing time. I really dislike the fact that players like him are what some of the analytics wanted promoted and we are seeing these major rule changes to try and blame the rules for why they cant hit instead of valuing ones that actually can.

    The big problem with trying to judge what impact what had was that so many major changes came all at once and its been a few years now since we havent seen some sort of significant change to the rules. The base paths was an easy one. The shift more complicated, the pitch clocks are pretty easy to see velocity trends with the pitchers that had to speed up by 8 seconds or more seeing drops across the board. Some of them will probably adjust to it particularly the guys that had the clock in college or the minors.

    Theres other things to that dont really get mentioned like more turf fields that play faster and things like that. Without question theres year to year differences and its certainly to early this year to be drawing conclusions. I do think we will probably see some drop mid season to make the overall numbers look better and then an increase before a drop for the playoff races and playoffs again which would suggest some ball manipulation.

    The shift ban helps anyone who pulls the ball a lot. As much as Gallo stinks now it still helps him when he hits a line drive to right field that was once an out and is now a single. It just doesn't happen much for him since he stinks now and barely plays. It helped Seager more because he hits it there more.

    They didn't promote it to help Gallo. Gallos has never been a goal for a MLB organization. They promoted it because the defense got too good at taking what has been a single for 100 years and turning them into outs, and because the pitchers got too filthy and hitting home runs really was the only way to get to them effectively. Gallo did serve that purpose well, but the Gallo types have never been a goal for MLB. He was a useful offenisve player in his prime of 2,248 plate appearances where he had an OPS+ of 117 , which is useful, but no way in hell is that the goal of a MLB organization.

    Ichiro's OPS+ was 119 for his first MLB seasons...to put Gallo's into perspective. A hair better than Gallo's prime but that tells you what they both meant for run production in their respective leagues and that isn't an opinion based on what guys 'like to see', but real run production.

    Gallo only had three season of over 500 plate appearances so why you think he was some goal for a MLB team is crazy.

    Corey Seager was helped by the shift and he is a goal of a mlb organization. He is the guy you should be trying to use your personal bias against. Your bias against not recognizing the value of a base on balls is at the heart of that(of which Gallo actually did well in addition to his 40 HR power which was really excellent).

    You do realize that in 2017 Gallo had a .333 OB% and he hit 41 Home Runs in 532 plate appearances? That is why he got more chances to play. That is not bad at all.

    Joe Carter had one season in his career higher than a .333 OB% and never hit 40 home runs in a season to put that into perspective.

    You do realize that Ted Williams was shift on right? And that Gallo types have been in MLB since a long time, like Steve Balbonia, Rob Deer, Kingman(although they hit a little higher in BA but didn't walk as much).

    PS Home runs are down so how is that ball manipulation??

    At what point do we change the Mendoza line to the Gallo line?

    Gallo and players like him should have been out of the league years ago. The rules were never the problem, it was the type of players that were getting valued. If someone wants to leave 50 percent of the field with no one there and the the player struggles to get hits thats a player problem not a rule problem. Personally I think the shift is stupid as you leave so much of the field open but other than Pitchers and Catchers you should be allowed to position players wherever you want and deal with the consequences of doing so.

    Gallo is just the poster child for why it happened not the single reason it happened. Players like him that are just dead pull because of the theory that pulling is the best chance at a HR and the HR is the best chance of scoring runs.

    Theres plenty of players that had a good year or two and then the league adjusted too, in the past they would fade out now as long as they can hit a long homerun sometimes they have stuck around. While MLB is the top league in the world with the best players they are also the only league that has felt the need to drastically change rules. Japan, South Korea, Mexico, the WBC, Dominican winter league etc havent had the issue of just valuing dead pull one trick pony hitters. Williams didnt have any problem with the shift

    As far as ball manipulation its happened before and players have spoken about it. When multiple homeruns travel significantly farther than average for their launch angle and exit velocity thats about as good of evidence as you can get.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    I know I will hear from basebal21, "MLB didn't want guys who can spray the ball and hit for average." So I will pre-empt that.

    First and foremost, eliminate 100% of college NON DRAFTED examples because when you exchange an alloy bat for a wood bat, that eliminates almost all of spray hits right there...and that is aside from the talent being exposed going to a higher level, let alone to the MLB level.

    So that leaves you with a lot of guys making weak contact just for the sake of making contact and now walking around saying, "they don't play the game right. They strikeout too much. They try to hit too many home runs."

    MLB would certainly employ those guys if they could use a wood bat and hit MLB pitching by spraying singles and hitting .315-.340. Those guys would be very employable, so if there were guys walking around saying, "I made contact and could spray the ball," then they simply weren't good enough to do it at the highest level with a wooden bat otherwise they would be where Luis Arraez is at.

    MLB does not want guys who can. hit .250 with no on base ability and no power even if they didn't strike out a single time ALL YEAR because those guys are out machines and are bad for an offense. They might get a job if they play the best SS in the world or the best catcher in the world though.

    What many fans don't realize is that someone like Kyle Schwarber can be far better hitting .190 than a guy hitting even .270(with no BB or HR).

    Fans still don't understand the limitations of batting average, they certainly don't understand the difference between strikeout out and contact out(which is negligible), and they don't understand the value of getting on base without making an out. That is why a guy like Gallo is employed(that and hitting 40 home runs), and why Schwarber is desired and bats leadoff for the a championship caliber team, despite hitting .197.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @bgr said:

    Yelich hit 44 in 2019 and had OBP over .400.

    Bellinger hit 47 and I’m sure was over .333 OBP

    Judge in 2017 and 2022

    Those examples aside I agree with your argument almost completely.

    I was initially against the shift rule changes but I admit I prefer the less dramatic shifts we’re seeing now.

    As far as changes in general. Change has been the only thing that has stayed the same. It’s part of baseball.

    Those are MLB players....I asked to find someone outside of MLB that could do that as an example why Gallo was paid well to do what he did.

    Should Angel Berroa still be in the league because he was once rookie of the year? Gallo did that one time and one time only. Hes only had more than 80 RBIs once in his career is a career .196 hitter in thousands of at bats, only scored more than 80 runs three times in his career and never more than 90 so his OBP really didnt mean much and a career slug under .470. He would be great on a slow pitch softball team he has no business still being in MLB

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:
    It is very hard to draw conclusions so early, but if looking at the early stats, home runs are actually down per game compared to last year.

    Last year ushered in two new major rules, the banning of the shift and the stolen base rules, both of which we don't know the full effect of their impact based on just one season(last year).

    The stolen base rate this year remains the same as last year(and up significantly compared to previous years), and the other area that is up are singles(and batting average) compared to last year. Both of which are directly related to the shift ban and stolen base rules that were adopted last year.

    Doubles and Home runs are down. Triples the same. So not the pitching. The pitchers are the same as last year.

    Base on Balls up this year too(so that is pitching too). I think that will settle down.

    We know for sure that the shorter base paths have and will increase offense. We dont need multiple years of data for that especially combined with the oven mitts. The real surprise was that no one swiped 100+

    What we dont know is what impact the shift banning has actually had because it came at the same time as the pitch clock. The pitch clock has impacted a number of pitchers stuff and then they shortened it again this year. Even for the guys that played with the clock in college the MLB clock is significantly shorter.

    All the models basically showed the shift banning should add a hit a game but that didnt account for a decline in pitcher stuff. Not everyone has been impacted by it, but a lot have and some have been significantly.

    Agree that the base stealing efficiency(and stealing more at a higher efficiency) certainly leads to an increase in runs scored. I too am surprised they aren't running even more.

    The shift ban certainly leads to more singles for certain hitters. Doesn't matter as much for others.

    I said before last year that Corey Seager would have been the biggest beneficiary to the shift ban.

    Overall the shift ban helps offense.

    Just because there is an increase in runs from one year to the next, it could mean nothing other than just chance. If nothing changes in the league, then runs scored from year to year will still fluctuate for no reason other than chance. We do know that things certainly changed last year that are indeed having an effect.

    We do know that certain things do influence it greatly though, especially things like mound height changes, fences being brought in, etc.. The rule changes last year. So it does take a few years of results to get a little better idea.

    Teams will adapt to the new rules and start taking advantage of them more. There is a gradual adaptation because contracts prevent sudden personnel change. Could take two or three years before teams league wide can fully employ players that will take advantage of any new rule. Most likely longer as some amateur players will become more attractive with the new rules in mind for the future.

    Pitch clock is mixed somewhere in there too...and will probably be impossible to know how much it helps or hurts offense.

    The shift ban mostly helps guys that cant really hit. You never saw the shift as much in college as you did in MLB because you didnt see those Gallo I can only be a dead pull hitter types see much playing time. I really dislike the fact that players like him are what some of the analytics wanted promoted and we are seeing these major rule changes to try and blame the rules for why they cant hit instead of valuing ones that actually can.

    The big problem with trying to judge what impact what had was that so many major changes came all at once and its been a few years now since we havent seen some sort of significant change to the rules. The base paths was an easy one. The shift more complicated, the pitch clocks are pretty easy to see velocity trends with the pitchers that had to speed up by 8 seconds or more seeing drops across the board. Some of them will probably adjust to it particularly the guys that had the clock in college or the minors.

    Theres other things to that dont really get mentioned like more turf fields that play faster and things like that. Without question theres year to year differences and its certainly to early this year to be drawing conclusions. I do think we will probably see some drop mid season to make the overall numbers look better and then an increase before a drop for the playoff races and playoffs again which would suggest some ball manipulation.

    The shift ban helps anyone who pulls the ball a lot. As much as Gallo stinks now it still helps him when he hits a line drive to right field that was once an out and is now a single. It just doesn't happen much for him since he stinks now and barely plays. It helped Seager more because he hits it there more.

    They didn't promote it to help Gallo. Gallos has never been a goal for a MLB organization. They promoted it because the defense got too good at taking what has been a single for 100 years and turning them into outs, and because the pitchers got too filthy and hitting home runs really was the only way to get to them effectively. Gallo did serve that purpose well, but the Gallo types have never been a goal for MLB. He was a useful offenisve player in his prime of 2,248 plate appearances where he had an OPS+ of 117 , which is useful, but no way in hell is that the goal of a MLB organization.

    Ichiro's OPS+ was 119 for his first MLB seasons...to put Gallo's into perspective. A hair better than Gallo's prime but that tells you what they both meant for run production in their respective leagues and that isn't an opinion based on what guys 'like to see', but real run production.

    Gallo only had three season of over 500 plate appearances so why you think he was some goal for a MLB team is crazy.

    Corey Seager was helped by the shift and he is a goal of a mlb organization. He is the guy you should be trying to use your personal bias against. Your bias against not recognizing the value of a base on balls is at the heart of that(of which Gallo actually did well in addition to his 40 HR power which was really excellent).

    You do realize that in 2017 Gallo had a .333 OB% and he hit 41 Home Runs in 532 plate appearances? That is why he got more chances to play. That is not bad at all.

    Joe Carter had one season in his career higher than a .333 OB% and never hit 40 home runs in a season to put that into perspective.

    You do realize that Ted Williams was shift on right? And that Gallo types have been in MLB since a long time, like Steve Balbonia, Rob Deer, Kingman(although they hit a little higher in BA but didn't walk as much).

    PS Home runs are down so how is that ball manipulation??

    At what point do we change the Mendoza line to the Gallo line?

    Gallo and players like him should have been out of the league years ago. The rules were never the problem, it was the type of players that were getting valued. If someone wants to leave 50 percent of the field with no one there and the the player struggles to get hits thats a player problem not a rule problem. Personally I think the shift is stupid as you leave so much of the field open but other than Pitchers and Catchers you should be allowed to position players wherever you want and deal with the consequences of doing so.

    Gallo is just the poster child for why it happened not the single reason it happened. Players like him that are just dead pull because of the theory that pulling is the best chance at a HR and the HR is the best chance of scoring runs.

    Theres plenty of players that had a good year or two and then the league adjusted too, in the past they would fade out now as long as they can hit a long homerun sometimes they have stuck around. While MLB is the top league in the world with the best players they are also the only league that has felt the need to drastically change rules. Japan, South Korea, Mexico, the WBC, Dominican winter league etc havent had the issue of just valuing dead pull one trick pony hitters. Williams didnt have any problem with the shift

    As far as ball manipulation its happened before and players have spoken about it. When multiple homeruns travel significantly farther than average for their launch angle and exit velocity thats about as good of evidence as you can get.

    The type of players getting valued are Seager, Soto, Judge....not Gallo. Gallo is a player that had a skill set good enough to start for a MLB team. Just because you don't unerstand why a base on balls is balls has value and why striking out and grounding out are basically interchangeable, that doesn't change the fact that Gallo was a viable MLB hitter.

    As for the Mendoza line, Joey Gallo's lifetime OB% is .322 with a single season high of .389 so if you do not understnad why he was playing, then you have no clue what you are saying. When you add that he averaged 37 HR per 162 games and still don't understand why he is playing, then you may be beyond help.

    Mendoza's lifetime OB% was .244 and his SLG% was .262.
    Gallo's lifetime OB% is .322 and his SLG% is .465.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 31, 2024 4:52PM

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @bgr said:

    Yelich hit 44 in 2019 and had OBP over .400.

    Bellinger hit 47 and I’m sure was over .333 OBP

    Judge in 2017 and 2022

    Those examples aside I agree with your argument almost completely.

    I was initially against the shift rule changes but I admit I prefer the less dramatic shifts we’re seeing now.

    As far as changes in general. Change has been the only thing that has stayed the same. It’s part of baseball.

    Those are MLB players....I asked to find someone outside of MLB that could do that as an example why Gallo was paid well to do what he did.

    Should Angel Berroa still be in the league because he was once rookie of the year? Gallo did that one time and one time only. Hes only had more than 80 RBIs once in his career is a career .196 hitter in thousands of at bats, only scored more than 80 runs three times in his career and never more than 90 so his OBP really didnt mean much and a career slug under .470. He would be great on a slow pitch softball team he has no business still being in MLB

    Berroa lifetine OPS is .677.

    Per your criteria:

    Gallo scored 90 runs in 626 plate appearances.
    Gallo scored 85 runs in 449 plate appearances
    Gallo scored 82 runs in 577 plate appearances.

    Those rates are all better than Bill Buckner.

    So as you can see, it is OB% and SLG% that matter, not batting average...and you are showing your complete lack of understanding of baseball.

    His career run scoring rate is 82 per 162 games. Where do you think that would rank in all of MLB??? If he isn't last, then your claim has zero merit. I could see if he was dead last, then maybe you could say there is a reserve that could take his job.

    Nico Hoerner averageds 82 runs scored per 162 games. Luis Arraez averages 87.

    So how does that equate to Gallo not being in baseball and him playing softball??

    How.many guys do you think can even score 70 runs in a season in MLB and also drive in 70? Gallo is above that. He doesn't play full time any more he is a role player.

    Even now, how many guys in the world can hit 21 HR and get on base 30% of the time in MLB? like Gallo did last year?? Where are all these guys?

    BIll BUckner in his prime age 23-32 averaged 76 runs per 162 games. He never struck out and hit for a high avearge ;)

    You should start a team and gather them all up and compete then, lol. Since you think someone like what Gallo did was so easily replaced.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:
    It is very hard to draw conclusions so early, but if looking at the early stats, home runs are actually down per game compared to last year.

    Last year ushered in two new major rules, the banning of the shift and the stolen base rules, both of which we don't know the full effect of their impact based on just one season(last year).

    The stolen base rate this year remains the same as last year(and up significantly compared to previous years), and the other area that is up are singles(and batting average) compared to last year. Both of which are directly related to the shift ban and stolen base rules that were adopted last year.

    Doubles and Home runs are down. Triples the same. So not the pitching. The pitchers are the same as last year.

    Base on Balls up this year too(so that is pitching too). I think that will settle down.

    We know for sure that the shorter base paths have and will increase offense. We dont need multiple years of data for that especially combined with the oven mitts. The real surprise was that no one swiped 100+

    What we dont know is what impact the shift banning has actually had because it came at the same time as the pitch clock. The pitch clock has impacted a number of pitchers stuff and then they shortened it again this year. Even for the guys that played with the clock in college the MLB clock is significantly shorter.

    All the models basically showed the shift banning should add a hit a game but that didnt account for a decline in pitcher stuff. Not everyone has been impacted by it, but a lot have and some have been significantly.

    Agree that the base stealing efficiency(and stealing more at a higher efficiency) certainly leads to an increase in runs scored. I too am surprised they aren't running even more.

    The shift ban certainly leads to more singles for certain hitters. Doesn't matter as much for others.

    I said before last year that Corey Seager would have been the biggest beneficiary to the shift ban.

    Overall the shift ban helps offense.

    Just because there is an increase in runs from one year to the next, it could mean nothing other than just chance. If nothing changes in the league, then runs scored from year to year will still fluctuate for no reason other than chance. We do know that things certainly changed last year that are indeed having an effect.

    We do know that certain things do influence it greatly though, especially things like mound height changes, fences being brought in, etc.. The rule changes last year. So it does take a few years of results to get a little better idea.

    Teams will adapt to the new rules and start taking advantage of them more. There is a gradual adaptation because contracts prevent sudden personnel change. Could take two or three years before teams league wide can fully employ players that will take advantage of any new rule. Most likely longer as some amateur players will become more attractive with the new rules in mind for the future.

    Pitch clock is mixed somewhere in there too...and will probably be impossible to know how much it helps or hurts offense.

    The shift ban mostly helps guys that cant really hit. You never saw the shift as much in college as you did in MLB because you didnt see those Gallo I can only be a dead pull hitter types see much playing time. I really dislike the fact that players like him are what some of the analytics wanted promoted and we are seeing these major rule changes to try and blame the rules for why they cant hit instead of valuing ones that actually can.

    The big problem with trying to judge what impact what had was that so many major changes came all at once and its been a few years now since we havent seen some sort of significant change to the rules. The base paths was an easy one. The shift more complicated, the pitch clocks are pretty easy to see velocity trends with the pitchers that had to speed up by 8 seconds or more seeing drops across the board. Some of them will probably adjust to it particularly the guys that had the clock in college or the minors.

    Theres other things to that dont really get mentioned like more turf fields that play faster and things like that. Without question theres year to year differences and its certainly to early this year to be drawing conclusions. I do think we will probably see some drop mid season to make the overall numbers look better and then an increase before a drop for the playoff races and playoffs again which would suggest some ball manipulation.

    The shift ban helps anyone who pulls the ball a lot. As much as Gallo stinks now it still helps him when he hits a line drive to right field that was once an out and is now a single. It just doesn't happen much for him since he stinks now and barely plays. It helped Seager more because he hits it there more.

    They didn't promote it to help Gallo. Gallos has never been a goal for a MLB organization. They promoted it because the defense got too good at taking what has been a single for 100 years and turning them into outs, and because the pitchers got too filthy and hitting home runs really was the only way to get to them effectively. Gallo did serve that purpose well, but the Gallo types have never been a goal for MLB. He was a useful offenisve player in his prime of 2,248 plate appearances where he had an OPS+ of 117 , which is useful, but no way in hell is that the goal of a MLB organization.

    Ichiro's OPS+ was 119 for his first MLB seasons...to put Gallo's into perspective. A hair better than Gallo's prime but that tells you what they both meant for run production in their respective leagues and that isn't an opinion based on what guys 'like to see', but real run production.

    Gallo only had three season of over 500 plate appearances so why you think he was some goal for a MLB team is crazy.

    Corey Seager was helped by the shift and he is a goal of a mlb organization. He is the guy you should be trying to use your personal bias against. Your bias against not recognizing the value of a base on balls is at the heart of that(of which Gallo actually did well in addition to his 40 HR power which was really excellent).

    You do realize that in 2017 Gallo had a .333 OB% and he hit 41 Home Runs in 532 plate appearances? That is why he got more chances to play. That is not bad at all.

    Joe Carter had one season in his career higher than a .333 OB% and never hit 40 home runs in a season to put that into perspective.

    You do realize that Ted Williams was shift on right? And that Gallo types have been in MLB since a long time, like Steve Balbonia, Rob Deer, Kingman(although they hit a little higher in BA but didn't walk as much).

    PS Home runs are down so how is that ball manipulation??

    At what point do we change the Mendoza line to the Gallo line?

    Gallo and players like him should have been out of the league years ago. The rules were never the problem, it was the type of players that were getting valued..

    Valued? What types of players are/were getting valued? Not that hard to tell. You think that the Gallo type of player is what MLB valued most and catered the rules toward?? lol. You are flat out wrong.

    Ok, so lets see exactly how they valued Gallo's skill set:

    Gallo was paid a 2.5 million contract for 2024 and he has an 8 million contract for next year(2 million buyout), yet they "valued Gallo's skill set so much" that they changed the rules for his type of player according to you?? lol

    So according to you MLB catered the rules toward a guy that got a near league minimum contract with the new rules and made him a platoon player under the new rules. LOL. This is great. This is good entertainment for me.

    The type of players getting valued are Seager, Soto, Judge....not Gallo. How do we know? Look at what they are getting paid and that will tell you what they are valued. Look how many games they start when healthy and that will tell you how they are valued.

    Gallo was never a star or benchmark. He is a player that had a skill set good enough to start for a MLB team. Just because you don't understand why a base on balls is balls has value and why striking out and grounding out are basically interchangeable, that doesn't change the fact that Gallo was a viable MLB hitter.

    As for the Mendoza line, Joey Gallo's lifetime OB% is .322 with a single season high of .389 so if you do not understnad why he was playing, then you have no clue what you are saying. When you add that he averaged 37 HR per 162 games and still don't understand why he is playing, then you may be beyond help.

    As for your claim that Gallo should not even have a job:
    His career run scoring rate is 82 per 162 games. Where do you think that would rank in all of MLB??? If he isn't last, then your claim has zero merit. I could see if he was dead last, then maybe you could say there is a reserve that could take his job.

    Nico Horner averageds 82 runs scored per 162 games. Luis Arraez averages 87.

    BIll BUckner in his prime age 23-32 averaged 76 runs per 162 games. He never struck out and hit for a high avearge ;)

    So how does that equate to Gallo not being in baseball and him playing softball??

    How.many guys do you think can even score 70 runs in a season in MLB and also drive in 70? Gallo is above that. He doesn't play full time any more he is a role player.

    Even now, how many guys in the world can hit 21 HR and get on base 30% of the time in MLB like Gallo did last year?? Where are all these guys?

    You should start a team and gather them all up and compete then, lol. Since you think someone like what Gallo did was so easily replaced.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    What Gallo has done is easily replaced, theres a reason why only the Nationals had interest in him. Plenty of guys can hit 30 solo homruns if youre fine with them hitting below .200

    Gallo hasnt had even a good season in years and only had 2 good seasons

    And yes groundouts are more valuable than striking out every at bat for a number of reasons but if someone just wants to believe that a .196 hitter that strikes out half the time, rarely drives in runs, doesnt score many runs is valuable because they can get some walks even though they clog the bases thats certainly their choice

  • bgrbgr Posts: 164 ✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @bgr said:

    Yelich hit 44 in 2019 and had OBP over .400.

    Bellinger hit 47 and I’m sure was over .333 OBP

    Judge in 2017 and 2022

    Those examples aside I agree with your argument almost completely.

    I was initially against the shift rule changes but I admit I prefer the less dramatic shifts we’re seeing now.

    As far as changes in general. Change has been the only thing that has stayed the same. It’s part of baseball.

    Those are MLB players....I asked to find someone outside of MLB that could do that as an example why Gallo was paid well to do what he did.

    Apologies. I didn’t parse that correctly then. Hard to come up with an example that would be meaningful here because I think your point withstands even a few examples, but, and because, it’s more fun….

    Martin Crowe perhaps had a skill set that would translate to baseball. And he could put up those kind of numbers perhaps. Hard to say.

    Assuming outside of MLB entirely so not including minor league players.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 31, 2024 5:56PM

    @Basebal21 said:
    W

    Gallo hasnt had even a good season in years and only had 2 good seasons

    And yes groundouts are more valuable than striking out every at bat for a number of reasons but if someone just wants to believe that a .196 hitter that strikes out half the time, rarely drives in runs, doesnt score many runs is valuable because they can get some walks even though they clog the bases thats certainly their choice

    In Gallo's prime he scored runs at 95 per162 games and he only hit .208, so you are wayy off. Way off and wrong.

    Gallo drove in 92 per 162 games for his career hititng .208. So again, not accurate.

    Play by play data shows exactly how value all of that is and ironically Gallo himself is proving your exact stance wrong.

    He hit .208 and had juicy runs scored and RBI, lololol.

    Same with strikeouts and contact outs. We know exactly how many extra runs each leads to. The difference is negligible.

    Groundouts are only better when less than two outs and man on third(which doesn't happen as often as you think). Most of that postiive gains is wiped out with the added GIDP that occur. In the end, they are about 99% equal.

    Again, Gallo himself proved you wrong. He hit .208 and struck out more than a young Danny Devito yet he scored 95 runs per 162 and drove in 92 per 162.

    So again, in the end, MLB DID NOT make those rules for Gallo and Gallo's skill set is NOT what they valued to make the new rules. He was a one time starter and then a role player....which is exactly what his skill set deemed once he declined from his three year peak(which actually was not bad at all)

    Think Corey Seager and then you are starting to get on the right track ;)

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:
    W

    Gallo hasnt had even a good season in years and only had 2 good seasons

    And yes groundouts are more valuable than striking out every at bat for a number of reasons but if someone just wants to believe that a .196 hitter that strikes out half the time, rarely drives in runs, doesnt score many runs is valuable because they can get some walks even though they clog the bases thats certainly their choice

    In Gallo's prime he scored runs at 95 per162 games and he only hit .208, so you are wayy off. Way off and wrong.

    Gallo drove in 92 per 162 games for his career hititng .208. So again, not accurate.

    Play by play data shows exactly how value all of that is and ironically Gallo himself is proving your exact stance wrong.

    He hit .208 and had juicy runs scored and RBI, lololol.

    Same with strikeouts and contact outs. We know exactly how many extra runs each leads to. The difference is negligible.

    Groundouts are only better when less than two outs and man on third(which doesn't happen as often as you think). Most of that postiive gains is wiped out with the added GIDP that occur. In the end, they are about 99% equal.

    Again, Gallo himself proved you wrong. He hit .208 and struck out more than a young Danny Devito yet he scored 95 runs per 162 and drove in 92 per 162.

    So again, in the end, MLB DID NOT make those rules for Gallo and Gallo's skill set is NOT what they valued to make the new rules. He was a one time starter and then a role player....which is exactly what his skill set deemed once he declined from his three year peak(which actually was not bad at all)

    Think Corey Seager and then you are starting to get on the right track ;)

    Goey Gallo has driven in 92 runs once with 40 homeruns. His second highest season is 80 then 77 then he never got higher than 55. He has 30 stolen bases in is 9 year career, he clogs the bases

    He had 1200 strike outs in 2650 at bats.

    Runner on third less than two outs fly ball to the outfield or middle infield thats a run. Thats 10 different situations alone. Runner on second ground ball right side or fly ball to deep left center to to center and right the runner gets moved over.

    Over 2500 errors have been every year and often over 3000 since 1960, Those dont happen on strike outs. Striking out every time trying to be dead pull

    Yes his inability to adjust to situations and strikeouts is everything that was wrong with baseball that they are trying to blame the rules for.

    You need to get off the whole "they made those rules for Gallo stuff". Thats just an excuse for the rule changes. As I said again Gallo is the poster child for the TYPE OF PLAYER these rules have been made for

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:
    W

    Gallo hasnt had even a good season in years and only had 2 good seasons

    And yes groundouts are more valuable than striking out every at bat for a number of reasons but if someone just wants to believe that a .196 hitter that strikes out half the time, rarely drives in runs, doesnt score many runs is valuable because they can get some walks even though they clog the bases thats certainly their choice

    In Gallo's prime he scored runs at 95 per162 games and he only hit .208, so you are wayy off. Way off and wrong.

    Gallo drove in 92 per 162 games for his career hititng .208. So again, not accurate.

    Play by play data shows exactly how value all of that is and ironically Gallo himself is proving your exact stance wrong.

    He hit .208 and had juicy runs scored and RBI, lololol.

    Same with strikeouts and contact outs. We know exactly how many extra runs each leads to. The difference is negligible.

    Groundouts are only better when less than two outs and man on third(which doesn't happen as often as you think). Most of that postiive gains is wiped out with the added GIDP that occur. In the end, they are about 99% equal.

    Again, Gallo himself proved you wrong. He hit .208 and struck out more than a young Danny Devito yet he scored 95 runs per 162 and drove in 92 per 162.

    So again, in the end, MLB DID NOT make those rules for Gallo and Gallo's skill set is NOT what they valued to make the new rules. He was a one time starter and then a role player....which is exactly what his skill set deemed once he declined from his three year peak(which actually was not bad at all)

    Think Corey Seager and then you are starting to get on the right track ;)

    Goey Gallo has driven in 92 runs once with 40 homeruns. His second highest season is 80 then 77 then he never got higher than 55. He has 30 stolen bases in is 9 year career, he clogs the bases

    He had 1200 strike outs in 2650 at bats.

    Runner on third less than two outs fly ball to the outfield or middle infield thats a run. Thats 10 different situations alone. Runner on second ground ball right side or fly ball to deep left center to to center and right the runner gets moved over.

    Over 2500 errors have been every year and often over 3000 since 1960, Those dont happen on strike outs. Striking out every time trying to be dead pull

    Yes his inability to adjust to situations and strikeouts is everything that was wrong with baseball that they are trying to blame the rules for.

    You need to get off the whole "they made those rules for Gallo stuff". Thats just an excuse for the rule changes. As I said again Gallo is the poster child for the TYPE OF PLAYER these rules have been made for

    Yet he scored 82 runs per 162 games, the same as Nico Horner who has a much higher average, showing that you are wrong in thinking his skill set doesn't lead to runs. You are looking at the small things he doesn't do and stuck on him hitting .200 and completely ignoring that his OB% is over .300 and he hits a ton of home runs. In total he has a 108 OPS+ and is a better hitter than Nico Horner who has a much higher average.

    Had Gallo hit .280 like you wanted to in addition to what he did then he would have been a super star. He didn't, so as such he was just a good player for three years and a platoon player, certainly worthy of a MLB job and showing you are completely wrong thinking he should be in a softball league.

    Reached on Error can be looked at and I showed you before how Reggie Jackson actually reach on error more than Tony Gwynn despite the vast difference in strikeouts.

    There is no "could' because we already "KNOW" what each and every event leads to and it isn't a matter or your opinion or favoritie style of play. It is a matter of what leads to runs and what doesn't, It is a matter of accurately knowing the value of a strikeout and a ground out. You don't know the true value. You know there is a difference, but it is so small. Yet you think it is so big that you just use it to erase 37 Home Runs per 162 games and completely ignore the on base ability that dwarfs that factor.

    You are stuck on Gallo type of hitter being the reason, because who else hits like him and gets paid and plays 162 games a year?

    They made the change for the Seager types.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 in addition to being wrong about what I said above...your notion that Gallo clogs the bases, well, you are wrong again.

    Gallo took the extra base 45% of the opportunities while on base....while the league average was 41%.

    His SB% was 77% compared to league averaged of 74%.

    In totality, despite having a career batting average of .196 and striking out as many times as you have in this thread....

    He averaged 82 runs scored per 162 games. For comparison, the guy that did all those things you get all wet over(not striking out, hitting for average, and tapping out to the pitcher), Bill Buckner, he only scored 76 runs per 162 games in his prime age 23-32 seasons.

    Gallo drove in 82 runs per 162 games.
    Tony Gwynn drove in 76 runs per 162 games and he never struck out and hit for a very higher average.

    So why does Gallo belong on a softball team if he drove in more runs per game than Gwynn did?

    Seems Gallo was better than average at either scoring or driving them in....just like his 108 OPS+ says he was.

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:
    W

    Gallo hasnt had even a good season in years and only had 2 good seasons

    And yes groundouts are more valuable than striking out every at bat for a number of reasons but if someone just wants to believe that a .196 hitter that strikes out half the time, rarely drives in runs, doesnt score many runs is valuable because they can get some walks even though they clog the bases thats certainly their choice

    In Gallo's prime he scored runs at 95 per162 games and he only hit .208, so you are wayy off. Way off and wrong.

    Gallo drove in 92 per 162 games for his career hititng .208. So again, not accurate.

    Play by play data shows exactly how value all of that is and ironically Gallo himself is proving your exact stance wrong.

    He hit .208 and had juicy runs scored and RBI, lololol.

    Same with strikeouts and contact outs. We know exactly how many extra runs each leads to. The difference is negligible.

    Groundouts are only better when less than two outs and man on third(which doesn't happen as often as you think). Most of that postiive gains is wiped out with the added GIDP that occur. In the end, they are about 99% equal.

    Again, Gallo himself proved you wrong. He hit .208 and struck out more than a young Danny Devito yet he scored 95 runs per 162 and drove in 92 per 162.

    So again, in the end, MLB DID NOT make those rules for Gallo and Gallo's skill set is NOT what they valued to make the new rules. He was a one time starter and then a role player....which is exactly what his skill set deemed once he declined from his three year peak(which actually was not bad at all)

    Think Corey Seager and then you are starting to get on the right track ;)

    Goey Gallo has driven in 92 runs once with 40 homeruns. His second highest season is 80 then 77 then he never got higher than 55. He has 30 stolen bases in is 9 year career, he clogs the bases

    He had 1200 strike outs in 2650 at bats.

    Runner on third less than two outs fly ball to the outfield or middle infield thats a run. Thats 10 different situations alone. Runner on second ground ball right side or fly ball to deep left center to to center and right the runner gets moved over.

    Over 2500 errors have been every year and often over 3000 since 1960, Those dont happen on strike outs. Striking out every time trying to be dead pull

    Yes his inability to adjust to situations and strikeouts is everything that was wrong with baseball that they are trying to blame the rules for.

    You need to get off the whole "they made those rules for Gallo stuff". Thats just an excuse for the rule changes. As I said again Gallo is the poster child for the TYPE OF PLAYER these rules have been made for

    Yet he scored 82 runs per 162 games, the same as Nico Horner who has a much higher average, showing that you are wrong in thinking his skill set doesn't lead to runs. You are looking at the small things he doesn't do and stuck on him hitting .200 and completely ignoring that his OB% is over .300 and he hits a ton of home runs. In total he has a 108 OPS+ and is a better hitter than Nico Horner who has a much higher average.

    Had Gallo hit .280 like you wanted to in addition to what he did then he would have been a super star. He didn't, so as such he was just a good player for three years and a platoon player, certainly worthy of a MLB job and showing you are completely wrong thinking he should be in a softball league.

    Reached on Error can be looked at and I showed you before how Reggie Jackson actually reach on error more than Tony Gwynn despite the vast difference in strikeouts.

    There is no "could' because we already "KNOW" what each and every event leads to and it isn't a matter or your opinion or favoritie style of play. It is a matter of what leads to runs and what doesn't, It is a matter of accurately knowing the value of a strikeout and a ground out. You don't know the true value. You know there is a difference, but it is so small. Yet you think it is so big that you just use it to erase 37 Home Runs per 162 games and completely ignore the on base ability that dwarfs that factor.

    You are stuck on Gallo type of hitter being the reason, because who else hits like him and gets paid and plays 162 games a year?

    They made the change for the Seager types.

    So Gallos played 3 full seasons in which hes hit .209, .206, .199 and I wont keep repeating the stats above but somehow hes a great player? His last close to full season is 2022 where he hit .160

    Youre right its not a matter of my favorite style of play, its a fact of what creates runs. Its a fact that the only time a strike out is better than a ball in play is a double play. Its a fact that more balls in play mean more base runners if thats what you want to focus on. Its a fact that you cannot drive in a run with a strike out.

    Turning every ball in play into a ground ball out and ignoring every situation is boxing that into what makes the OBP thing look better.

    I'm not interested in seeing slap hitting players every AB nor do I value that, but at the same time I also can see and know when BP hitters are doing more harm then good

    Its extremely hard to hit 41 HRs and only have 80 RBIs but Gallo found a way in his best season

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:

    @Basebal21 said:
    W

    Gallo hasnt had even a good season in years and only had 2 good seasons

    And yes groundouts are more valuable than striking out every at bat for a number of reasons but if someone just wants to believe that a .196 hitter that strikes out half the time, rarely drives in runs, doesnt score many runs is valuable because they can get some walks even though they clog the bases thats certainly their choice

    In Gallo's prime he scored runs at 95 per162 games and he only hit .208, so you are wayy off. Way off and wrong.

    Gallo drove in 92 per 162 games for his career hititng .208. So again, not accurate.

    Play by play data shows exactly how value all of that is and ironically Gallo himself is proving your exact stance wrong.

    He hit .208 and had juicy runs scored and RBI, lololol.

    Same with strikeouts and contact outs. We know exactly how many extra runs each leads to. The difference is negligible.

    Groundouts are only better when less than two outs and man on third(which doesn't happen as often as you think). Most of that postiive gains is wiped out with the added GIDP that occur. In the end, they are about 99% equal.

    Again, Gallo himself proved you wrong. He hit .208 and struck out more than a young Danny Devito yet he scored 95 runs per 162 and drove in 92 per 162.

    So again, in the end, MLB DID NOT make those rules for Gallo and Gallo's skill set is NOT what they valued to make the new rules. He was a one time starter and then a role player....which is exactly what his skill set deemed once he declined from his three year peak(which actually was not bad at all)

    Think Corey Seager and then you are starting to get on the right track ;)

    Goey Gallo has driven in 92 runs once with 40 homeruns. His second highest season is 80 then 77 then he never got higher than 55. He has 30 stolen bases in is 9 year career, he clogs the bases

    He had 1200 strike outs in 2650 at bats.

    Runner on third less than two outs fly ball to the outfield or middle infield thats a run. Thats 10 different situations alone. Runner on second ground ball right side or fly ball to deep left center to to center and right the runner gets moved over.

    Over 2500 errors have been every year and often over 3000 since 1960, Those dont happen on strike outs. Striking out every time trying to be dead pull

    Yes his inability to adjust to situations and strikeouts is everything that was wrong with baseball that they are trying to blame the rules for.

    You need to get off the whole "they made those rules for Gallo stuff". Thats just an excuse for the rule changes. As I said again Gallo is the poster child for the TYPE OF PLAYER these rules have been made for

    Yet he scored 82 runs per 162 games, the same as Nico Horner who has a much higher average, showing that you are wrong in thinking his skill set doesn't lead to runs. You are looking at the small things he doesn't do and stuck on him hitting .200 and completely ignoring that his OB% is over .300 and he hits a ton of home runs. In total he has a 108 OPS+ and is a better hitter than Nico Horner who has a much higher average.

    Had Gallo hit .280 like you wanted to in addition to what he did then he would have been a super star. He didn't, so as such he was just a good player for three years and a platoon player, certainly worthy of a MLB job and showing you are completely wrong thinking he should be in a softball league.

    Reached on Error can be looked at and I showed you before how Reggie Jackson actually reach on error more than Tony Gwynn despite the vast difference in strikeouts.

    There is no "could' because we already "KNOW" what each and every event leads to and it isn't a matter or your opinion or favoritie style of play. It is a matter of what leads to runs and what doesn't, It is a matter of accurately knowing the value of a strikeout and a ground out. You don't know the true value. You know there is a difference, but it is so small. Yet you think it is so big that you just use it to erase 37 Home Runs per 162 games and completely ignore the on base ability that dwarfs that factor.

    You are stuck on Gallo type of hitter being the reason, because who else hits like him and gets paid and plays 162 games a year?

    They made the change for the Seager types.

    So Gallos played 3 full seasons in which hes hit .209, .206, .199 and I wont keep repeating the stats above but somehow hes a great player? His last close to full season is 2022 where he hit .160

    Youre right its not a matter of my favorite style of play, its a fact of what creates runs. Its a fact that the only time a strike out is better than a ball in play is a double play. Its a fact that more balls in play mean more base runners if thats what you want to focus on. Its a fact that you cannot drive in a run with a strike out.

    Turning every ball in play into a ground ball out and ignoring every situation is boxing that into what makes the OBP thing look better.

    I'm not interested in seeing slap hitting players every AB nor do I value that, but at the same time I also can see and know when BP hitters are doing more harm then good

    Its extremely hard to hit 41 HRs and only have 80 RBIs but Gallo found a way in his best season

    Gallo is not a super star and never was! Why do you think people believe he was? Had he hit .280 and maintained his walk and home run rate then he would have.

    Since he only hit .197, with a high walk rate and elite HR power, he was just a decent player for three years and then a platoon player who fell off badly one of the years.

    In the end:

    Despite having a career batting average of .196 and striking out for eternity..

    He averaged 82 runs scored per 162 games. For comparison, the guy that did all those things (not striking out, hitting for average, and tapping out to the pitcher), Bill Buckner, he only scored 76 runs per 162 games in his prime age 23-32 seasons.

    Gallo drove in 82 runs per 162 games.
    Tony Gwynn drove in 76 runs per 162 games and he never struck out and hit for a very higher average.

    So why does Gallo belong on a softball team if he drove in more runs per game than Gwynn did?

    Seems Gallo was better than average at either scoring or driving them in....just like his 108 OPS+ says he was.

    Gallo wasn't a star, but he was a well deserved mostly full time player for four years. Sucked badly a couple, and then actually rebounded last year for a strict part time platoon player.

    He could be a softball player any year now...but his MLB career has not been as one, despite his low average and high strikeout rate because he got on base well, ran well, and had elite power. That is why he was employed.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 31, 2024 8:28PM

    "Its extremely hard to hit 41 HRs and only have 80 RBIs but Gallo found a way in his best season"

    @Basebal21

    To answer your question,

    In 2017 Gallo had 41 home runs and 80 RBI.

    If you look at the number of runners on base you will see that the average MLB hitter with his amount of plate appearances and his amount of runners on base that year, would drive in 62 runs.

    Gallo drove in 80. So you are mad because he just did it more efficiently by hitting a home run and getting a guaranteed run, instead of hoping for two guys to get on in front of him and then hitting a single to drive them in?

    Or are you mad that with his 41 home runs that he also didn't hit .315 so he could have 140 RBI?

    In the end he drove in more runs per game than Tony Gwynn did and Gwynn had a higher percentage of runners on base in his plate appearances than Gallo had.

    Stop focusing on Gallo. His types have never been the goal of MLB.

    Forcus on Freeman or Acuna, or Matt Olson, or Seager. Or Betts. They are doing what you want.

    Olson struck out 167 times last year but he drove in 139 runs.

    Are you mad that Gallo isn't Olson?

    If it was that easy to just say, "Hey, Im Joey Gallo, I think I'm going to stop striking out, hit for a higher average, but still maintain my power and be the MVP candidate like Matt Olson," then every would do that.

    Gallo is a three year starter who batted mostly 5th through 9th. He was a role player.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    @Basebal21 I know where a lot of your frustration is coming from. You and your college buddies are watching Gallo in 2017 and saying, "what is he swinging at!?" "Just choke up with two strikes and make contact to drive that runner in from third like we did against Podunk U with our Composite bat!"

    Then you point out how Gallo "only" had 80 RBI that year despite hitting 41 home runs and thinking how much better you 'played the game right' in college.

    Now ask yourself, how many hitters in the entire NCAA in 2017 went on to drive in 80 runs in a single MLB season? How many of them even had a 50 RBI season?

    Then ask yourself this next question, how many times did Tony Gwynn drive in 80 runs in a MLB season by doing all those things you are saying Gallo types should do more of?

    I will answer that one for you. Tony Gwynn put the ball in play better than anyone and he hit.338 for his career.

    How many 80 RBI seasons did that produce for him?

    Two.

    Yes. Just two,

    How many times did Gwynn reach base on error per year?? About six times per year. Six.

    Even if Gwynn drove in a run every time he reached base on error and didn't get credited with an RBI, then how many 80 RBI seasons would he have had??

    Still just two.

    Two.

    Now tell me again that Gallo should have been playing softball with your college buddies who 'did it right.'

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

    The Padres got 12 runs yesterday in the first three innings.
    The Royals got 9 in the first two.
    The DBacks got 14 in one inning.
    The Braves got 7 in one inning in cold Philadelphia and you guys are talking about stolen bases lol.

    That’s like Gordie Howe getting 9 goals a game instead of 3 and you guys are talking about the new Zambonis lol.

    We did get some decent pitchers yesterday or perhaps the bats cooled off a bit.

    It’s April. It’s cold. Should not be this much scoring already.

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

    Even with yesterday’s decent pitching we are still rather high for April. Updated data.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 164 ✭✭✭

    You have about 40 games to go before that data says anything with significance.

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

    @bgr said:
    You have about 40 games to go before that data says anything with significance.

    Rockies 1st seven games on the road.
    Looking forward to see how things go when they play at home this weekend.

  • GrooGroo Posts: 79 ✭✭
    edited April 1, 2024 1:39PM

    The Yankees AA/AAA rag arms figured out how to limit the Cheat-stro's the 1st 4 games. Was there a garbage strike in Houston?

  • Basebal21Basebal21 Posts: 2,201 ✭✭✭✭

    @bgr said:
    You have about 40 games to go before that data says anything with significance.

    True but unless they mess with the balls runs will go up as the weather warms up and pitchers are getting fatigued as the season goes on

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    Ronel Blanco just won the Cy Young award.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2, 2024 6:23AM

    To help you guys formulate your hypothesis here are the monthly ERA splits from last season:
    .
    .

  • 4Boston4Boston Posts: 241 ✭✭✭

    @1948_Swell_Robinson said:
    To help you guys formulate your hypothesis here are the monthly ERA splits from last season:
    .
    .

    Now there’s some useful data.
    Pitching perhaps just got off to a slow start this year. Time will tell.
    It’s still advantage hitter until the numbers improve though.

  • 1948_Swell_Robinson1948_Swell_Robinson Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭✭

    As a side note...if the ball is juiced, then someone tell Jerry Reinsdorf to get some for his team.

  • bgrbgr Posts: 164 ✭✭✭

    What amazes me the most is the parity in the league month by month. An equal number of winners as there are losers! Incredible.

Sign In or Register to comment.