Chasing extremes on both sides. Power on hitters and power and spin from pitchers. Pitcher advantages are approaching high mound era, so at some point a more drastic rule change will be required to cut down the endless parade of 100mph relievers. Is that a rule requiring starters to go 6 innings or changes in mound or ball, likely in coming years as analytics change further the higher contact guy with some power but lower strikeouts will increase in value, that alone won’t fix things, it’ll take something reigning in pitchers also.
What happened in large part is analytics and matching an average of 3-4 relief pitchers who come in fresh against a batting order they match up well with.
Look what Oli does routinely. Starting pitcher about 5 innings then combination of relief pitchers with low ERA’s with an average of 1-2 innings like Lehey, Svansen, Romero, O’Neill. That’s after trading Matz, Maton, Helsley who was decent while he was with the Cardinals.
As bad as our stsrter’s are, this still keeps us in most games.
At the current rate of the juries they’ll run out of pitchers at some point. Look at the Dodgers and their bullpen.
The “all teams play everyone” I think is to blame a lot too. Batters are seeing way more different pitchers and it takes time to pick up on the way they pitch.
Analytics killed the sport. Mathematicians, who knew nothing about the intricacies of the sport thought they could use math to identify prospects that have a greater chance of succeeding in the majors. They have rid the sport of their best teachers and now you’re stuck with hitters who have no idea what they’re doing
Best I can do is .220 and a “THeyRe StIlL YoUnG” for 3 seasons. 🤷🏻♂️
I saw a statistic showing the number of pitchers Stan Musial saw in a year to the number they see now, and the difference was *staggering*. Between the balanced schedule, the constant churn of relievers from the minors, and then the number of relievers used per game, batters have to prep for so many pitchers. The actual stuff from each pitcher is insane as well.
Also, stats have shown that OPS wins more games that average. So that’s what gets guys paid, so that’s what they chase. We applaud guys like Burly for laying off pitches in the zone in favor of looking for damage, because it works. But it will lower his average, and he won’t put as many balls in play.
It’s boring baseball, IMO. But it wins, and wins matter more than entertainment in today’s game.
Hitting for a high average without many walks is only marginally better than getting to the same obp with a middling average and lots of walks. This wasn’t always assumed to be the case.
300ish avg and 340obp didn’t used to be an uncommon stat line. If you weren’t also hitting for power and played average defense that kind of line is replacement level.
The answer is always money. Chicks and agents love the long ball. No one pays attention to how many strike outs you have anymore.
Velocity can be increased easier than reaction time.
Advanced metrics has ruined statistics like BA…. Because believe me, I’d much rather have a Tony Gwynn in my lineup than a Dave Kingman. Rod Carew is better than Mark Reynolds in my mind. 80’s Wade Boggs over Kyle Schwarber…
He got traded to San Diego for a bunch of players back in ’24.
“He met bad development coaches in St. Louis.”
#fify
Hitters strike out 200+ times a season trying to hit HR. The basic teachings have changed, power is valued more than anything. Less entertaining to watch for sure.
People smartened up. .300 hitters more frequently brought little to nothing else to the table offensively (Luis Arraez being a prime, current day example).
The formula is out there, freely and readily available for any and everyone. They even made a movie about it. Get on base, how that happens is irrelevant, and hit dingers.
Launch angles.
Honestly, with the balanced schedules, I would have expected the number to quadruple, since we play 29 teams, instead of 7.
20 comments
Kyle Schwarber
Data/math nerds is what happened
Whatever happened to us being over .500?
Chasing extremes on both sides. Power on hitters and power and spin from pitchers. Pitcher advantages are approaching high mound era, so at some point a more drastic rule change will be required to cut down the endless parade of 100mph relievers. Is that a rule requiring starters to go 6 innings or changes in mound or ball, likely in coming years as analytics change further the higher contact guy with some power but lower strikeouts will increase in value, that alone won’t fix things, it’ll take something reigning in pitchers also.
What happened in large part is analytics and matching an average of 3-4 relief pitchers who come in fresh against a batting order they match up well with.
Look what Oli does routinely. Starting pitcher about 5 innings then combination of relief pitchers with low ERA’s with an average of 1-2 innings like Lehey, Svansen, Romero, O’Neill. That’s after trading Matz, Maton, Helsley who was decent while he was with the Cardinals.
As bad as our stsrter’s are, this still keeps us in most games.
At the current rate of the juries they’ll run out of pitchers at some point. Look at the Dodgers and their bullpen.
The “all teams play everyone” I think is to blame a lot too. Batters are seeing way more different pitchers and it takes time to pick up on the way they pitch.
Analytics killed the sport. Mathematicians, who knew nothing about the intricacies of the sport thought they could use math to identify prospects that have a greater chance of succeeding in the majors. They have rid the sport of their best teachers and now you’re stuck with hitters who have no idea what they’re doing
Best I can do is .220 and a “THeyRe StIlL YoUnG” for 3 seasons. 🤷🏻♂️
I saw a statistic showing the number of pitchers Stan Musial saw in a year to the number they see now, and the difference was *staggering*. Between the balanced schedule, the constant churn of relievers from the minors, and then the number of relievers used per game, batters have to prep for so many pitchers. The actual stuff from each pitcher is insane as well.
Also, stats have shown that OPS wins more games that average. So that’s what gets guys paid, so that’s what they chase. We applaud guys like Burly for laying off pitches in the zone in favor of looking for damage, because it works. But it will lower his average, and he won’t put as many balls in play.
It’s boring baseball, IMO. But it wins, and wins matter more than entertainment in today’s game.
Hitting for a high average without many walks is only marginally better than getting to the same obp with a middling average and lots of walks. This wasn’t always assumed to be the case.
300ish avg and 340obp didn’t used to be an uncommon stat line. If you weren’t also hitting for power and played average defense that kind of line is replacement level.
The answer is always money. Chicks and agents love the long ball. No one pays attention to how many strike outs you have anymore.
Velocity can be increased easier than reaction time.
Advanced metrics has ruined statistics like BA…. Because believe me, I’d much rather have a Tony Gwynn in my lineup than a Dave Kingman. Rod Carew is better than Mark Reynolds in my mind. 80’s Wade Boggs over Kyle Schwarber…
He got traded to San Diego for a bunch of players back in ’24.
“He met bad development coaches in St. Louis.”
#fify
Hitters strike out 200+ times a season trying to hit HR. The basic teachings have changed, power is valued more than anything. Less entertaining to watch for sure.
People smartened up. .300 hitters more frequently brought little to nothing else to the table offensively (Luis Arraez being a prime, current day example).
The formula is out there, freely and readily available for any and everyone. They even made a movie about it. Get on base, how that happens is irrelevant, and hit dingers.
Launch angles.
Honestly, with the balanced schedules, I would have expected the number to quadruple, since we play 29 teams, instead of 7.