This site discussion was sparked by a couple of posts on BlueSky by Mike Petriello and Céspedes Family BBQ. Mike pointed out that this year’s .206/.286/.341 hitting line in the playoffs is, while atrocious, somehow not the worst postseason hitting line by OPS in the divisional era – it’s 5th after some truly wretched seasons of hitting in the 70’s and 80’s.
CFBBQ posted some recent close historical comps to the this year’s postseason slash line, featuring none other than Your 2024 Mitch Garver (.172/.286/.341).
Is this good?
Lookout Landing staffers met to discuss whether this something that merits action from MLB, and what steps could be taken to remedy the balance of the modern game. -NV
Ezra: Maybe they should move the mound back a little bit.
John: I genuinely think so, and I think they should shrink the allowed glove sizes significantly. It’s a much less visible change, but is something they’ve done before on a couple occasions and has a positive impact without being quite as obvious from a viewing perspective.
Ezra: Interesting, I’ve never heard that before but I’d be intrigued to see that implemented.
John: For pitchers, I do think there’s merit to a slightly larger glove so they can’t have their pitches tipped, but also…I kinda think that’s fine.
Here’s an article on it being a big issue during the early 90s and the positive impact it had that kinda got washed out (or at least became impossible track) due to the rise of steroids. In 2016, MLB allowed an expansion in glove size from 12 to 13 inches, which is, as far as I know, still the rule. Going down to 11 or 12 incheas would be really beneficial and also allow truly elite athletes to shine even more in the field.
Ezra: Since I saw the rise and fall of Tim Anderson I’ve come around more on moving the mound back. Bat speed is so important to being a good hitter these days, and all it takes is a little bit of skill deprecation and your career could be over, whereas for pitchers, Tommy John isn’t the death sentence or crapshoot it used to be, throw as hard as you want, sit for a few months and potentially come back throwing harder. I know it’s not that simple, but I feel like ya’ll get what I’m saying.
Nick: In that vein, I’ve heard that moving the mound back actually made breaking stuff even harder to hit, with another foot to move.
John: I’ve heard people make that case, I remember Kyle Boddy saying it. I think there’s some logic to it, but I think the tradeoff is if that were the case, curveballs would be nastier than sliders, and we’ve just spent like 15 years seing sliders take over for big breaking curveballs. And firmer changeups taking over for bigger breaking ones. Now, there are sweepers and splitters that’ve come into some vogue and use, but to me that’s agian more just natural ebb and flow, and reduced effective velocity is ultimately a help for everything.
Nick: That’s a good point. But, counter-counterpoint, sliders taking over for curveballs may not indicate that less movement+more velocity is inherently better, but something else about pitch shape and arsenal construction strategy. Plus, with an extra foot to move, the hard slider gets the benefit of a more difficult-to-hit shape while also benefitting from the extra velo. I’ be curious to see if lowering the mound again isn’t more effective.
John: I could see it being the case, but I think more time to make the decision on the swing and to calibrate the flight path is going to always be easier for a hitter.
Note: The Atlantic League tested a 61’6” mound in 2021. Any effects were of little note.
Ezra: I don’t think MLB will change anything though, because it’s the home runs that sell tickets and as long as they got guys going 30-30, 20-40, 50-50, or hitting 60+ they’re probably not going to are.
John: I think that this doesn’t inherently damage homers. Teams aren’t gonna put the lid back on understanding homers are exponentially better than other hits mathematically, but making it more viable to have a high average is what makes the game more compelling (specifically the ball being interestingly in play more).
Nick: I agree, the surge in homers has way less to do with selling tickets and way more to do with MoneyBall.
Ezra: Yeah, I think the image of having multiple .300+ hitters on the All-Star Team could be really valuable in terms of raising interest among the more dedicated fans.
John: I honestly think beyond just highly dedicated fans, it’s a valuable showcase of the sport’s variety that draws people in. It’s fun to watch hits and steals, and correspondingly, great defense (or bad defense get exposed!).
Nick: I’ve seen more than enough of bad defense being exposed this year, personally.
