Baseball: An Offensive Game or a Defensive Game

One of the oldest sayings in baseball is that good pitching will stop good hitting.

A very good offense can score runs without hits, but it isn't easy.

The rules are slanted towards the offense, one of the proschool owners estimates, by 20%.

Before anyone asks, although I agree with the general assessment, I don't know how it was quantified.

quote:

Originally posted by Quincy:
One of the oldest sayings in baseball is that good pitching will stop good hitting.

A very good offense can score runs without hits, but it isn't easy.

A team can give up many runs and and still win.

A team cannot win without scoring a run.

It depends on the coach. If your coach was a pitcher when he played, he'll say it's defensive. If your coach was a position player, he'll more often say it's offense. But they will all agree it's not mutually exclusive.

Defensive oriented;

9 men in the field defending against one offensive player at bat whom is trying just to get into position to score. All the odds are WITH the defense.

Pitching
Defense
Hitting

There is a reason hitting is last.

I cast my vote for Defensive-oriented as well:

-- Baseball is the only major sport where the Defense starts with the ball, and the Offense has to react.

-- At any given time there are 9 guys playing defense, and a maximum of 4 guys playing on offense.

-- The defense has 4 opportunities to get each offensive player out before he can score 1 run.

-- The Pitcher can secure an out with 3 strikes, but the batter needs to get 4 balls to secure a free base.

-- Baseball does not have a clock, both teams get 18/21/27 outs. The team that wins is the team that secures 18/21/27 outs while scoring more runs than they allow ... but they only have to score 1 run to win.

I love offense ... but it seems to me that the game is tilted in the favor of the defense.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy03:

A team can give up many runs and and still win.

A team cannot win without scoring a run.

What Jimmy said!

defense. Otherwise the saying would be that fielders who miss 70% of the balls hit their way are in the Hall of Fame.

When we travel to Australia with our coach [pro scouts] and our teams each play 12 games in 15 days
our focus is DEFENSE.

Catchers, middle infielders and the center fielder
are the "core" of this defense. Our coaches can teach a "motion" offense in the 2 weeks, however the inner-defense is developed in the first 24 hours. We select four SS each team and then rotate
to 2b and CF if needed.

Pitchers only throw 3 innings in each game, each 3 days. We have professional pitching coaches for each team to set the rotation. No pitcher is overused.

Bob Williams

Defensive...
Generally, the offense is successful only about one third of the time, and even then, the result is usually not a run or runs scored.

Official Rules of Baseball, Rule 1.02:

The objective of each team is to win by scoring more runs than the opponent.

QED

quote:

Originally posted by cabbagedad:
Defensive...
Generally, the offense is successful only about one third of the time, and even then, the result is usually not a run or runs scored.

Let's see, the offense, in your example, controls the outcome by being succesful only one third of the time. Hmmmmmmmm.

quote:

Originally posted by playfair:
Pitching
Defense
Hitting

There is a reason hitting is last.

Exactly the right order.

If I had to rank things, it would be pitching, pitching, pitching, defense, and offense. Did I forget to mention that pitching is important?

Baseball is the only game where the defense initiates the action. Don't get me wrong, I love the offensive side of the ball but imho, it is impossible to win without pitching.

quote:

Originally posted by ClevelandDad:
but imho, it is impossible to win without pitching.

It is possible to win without pitching, it is impossible to win without scoring.

Consenus would appear to be that pitching is considered defensive. IMO it's OFFENSIVE. One warrior at the plate attacking a ball another on the mound attacking the hitter

quote:

Originally posted by dswann:
Consenus would appear to be that pitching is considered defensive. IMO it's OFFENSIVE. One warrior at the plate attacking a ball another on the mound attacking the hitter

But, it is the Pitchers job to prevent or limit scoring! He can't score, especially if he's in the
American League where the DH is employed!

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:

quote:

Originally posted by dswann:
Consenus would appear to be that pitching is considered defensive. IMO it's OFFENSIVE. One warrior at the plate attacking a ball another on the mound attacking the hitter

But, it is the Pitchers job to prevent or limit scoring! He can't score, especially if he's in the
American League where the DH is employed!

Again we have an example of the defense working to prevent the offense from WINNING the game.

A pitcher can throw a no hitter and lose the game. Nobody has won a game in which their offense didn't score. Ever.

Y'all should run for office so you can argue about whether reducing the rate of increase is really a spending cut or a spending increase.

quote:

Originally posted by Tx-Husker:
Y'all should run for office so you can argue about whether reducing the rate of increase is really a spending cut or a spending increase.

It's not even that hard....

By definition it takes scoring to win a game. Who scores? Offense.

The confusion comes from the misnomer of a pitcher having a W-L record. In truth, the pitcher, at best, can only keep the other team from winning. It requires his offense to do their job for his team to win.

I know things are different at the professional level to some degree but here is what we did one year with our all-star team selections-

There wasn't a lot of steller pitching in our league. My son and his friend were about it. We also didn't have the best defensive players either. But, we had loads of offense in the league that year. So, we assembled a team around offensive superiority. We practiced every day with the main focus on hitting and baserunning, bunts, steals, etc. Then we went on the road and entered 4 tournaments with that all-star team. We averaged giving up about 6-8 runs per game, which by 5 inning or one and a half hours, whichever came first, was the makeup to lose a lot of games. But, we averaged beating teams by 10 running them. At one point (about 18 games into the allstar season), we were averaging over 20 points per game with most games also averaging multiple home runs. In one game we hit 5 consecutive home runs before the coach decided to go out and relieve his best pitcher. Only one HR had been hit on that field in their own league season all year. Needless to say, we started getting a reputation for our feared offensive power. Every kid on the team was hitting above .400 except for one kid. Yeah, we had errors defensively and even gave some teams hope, but eventually we would come out on top with the lopsided score. We finished that all-star season going 21-3 and placed 3rd, 1st, 2nd, 2nd in the 4 tournaments. The two 2nd place finishes were against strictly travel teams in the championship games.

So whereas I agree that once you approach the higher levels that defense and pitching is most important, at the younger levels offensive domination is how games are usually won.

Overall the teams winning the world series each year are because of dominating pitching staffs.

I think we can stipulate that EVERY sport -- including Baseball -- requires offense to win. As J03 points out, you cannot win without scoring.

The question on the table is whether the game is more Offensively or Defensively oriented.

Examples: I think Basketball is more Offensively oriented. A team with 1 or 2 superstars can keep feeding those stars; where in Baseball, the entire line-up has to hit before a superstar comes to the plate again. In Football, they keep changing the rules to make it more difficult for the defensive backs to cover the receivers, giving an advantage to the offense.

The question posed here is whether the nature of the game is such that the game is tilted more in the favor of the offensive side of the game or the defensive side of the game?

quote:

The question on the table is whether the game is more Offensively or Defensively oriented.

correctomente! astutely construed .... or whatever.

It seems hard to get answers here sometimes that pertain to the question asked. Thanks for the clarification..

Yes, and in a typical game (reasonable competence level), the defense succeeds more frequently than the offense.
You can look at it play by play, inning by inning (whether a run was scored or not), batting average, OBP, etc. It all adds up to defense usually coming out on top.

This is a game played by two teams, one out the other in. The one that's in, sends players out one at a time, to see if they can get in before they get out. If they get out before they get in, they come in, but it doesn't count. If they get in before they get out it does count.

When the ones out get three outs from the ones in before they get in without being out, the team that's out comes in and the team in goes out to get those going in out before they get in without being out.

When both teams have been in and out nine times the game is over. The team with the most in without being out before coming in wins unless the ones in are equal. In which case, the last ones in go out to get the ones in out before they get in without being out.

The game will end when each team has the same number of ins out but one team has more in without being out before coming in.

FF -- I for one bow to the clarity of your argument. Bravo

quote:

Originally posted by southpaw_dad:
I think we can stipulate that EVERY sport -- including Baseball -- requires offense to win. As J03 points out, you cannot win without scoring.

The question on the table is whether the game is more Offensively or Defensively oriented...


The question posed here is whether the nature of the game is such that the game is tilted more in the favor of the offensive side of the game or the defensive side of the game?

Easy. By rule, it is the offense.

The rules are tilted in favor of the offense and they state the purpose of the game is for the offense to score.

How can that be confusing?

Yes, defense is needed, but their job is to attempt to keep the other team from scoring. The game is won by one offense scoring more than the other.

Reason #47 why i like the game. 2 teams can play each other and the score is 1-0. The next time it's 14-1 or 12-11....

Now if you want offense or defense... I'll tell you what; you give me the best pitching and 8 guys that can flat catch it and I'll play your bash brothers and I like my chances.

You can devise a number of scenarios by which a team may win a game. Some could include weapons.

But the question was: "would you consider Baseball to be an Offensive oriented game, or a Defensive oriented game?"

And, despite how one may choose to approach strategy, the GAME was created, and it's rules were and are written for an offense oriented sport.

No matter how good your best pitcher is, and how wonderful the other eight defenders are, they won't win unless their OFFENSE scores.

9 guys are playing defense at once.
1-4 guys are playing offense.

Do you see socker and ice hockey as offensive oriented games? That's why I like baseball, it shifts at unpredictable times.

THE UMPIRES OF TODAY DO NOT RECOGNIZE DEFENSE AS A WORTHY COMMODITY

Very interesting perspectives. Thinking about some of the comments here it occurs to me that:

-- If an Offense can consistently succeed 30% of the time (Team BA of .300) they have a chance to become a dynasty; 40% of the time, and they will be historic.

-- A Defense must succeed 80-90% of the time (Team Fielding %, Opp Batting Avg) if the team is to expect to win consistently.

The object of the game is to score more runs than the other team within your alloted number of out. On the other hand, the object of the game is to also allow the fewest number of runs while securing the designated number of outs.

Or it could be to count up the number of innies vs. outies on each team. The team with the most innies wins (did I get that right FF?)

quote:

Originally posted by trojan-skipper:
9 guys are playing defense at once.
1-4 guys are playing offense.

Do you see socker and ice hockey as offensive oriented games? That's why I like baseball, it shifts at unpredictable times.

THE UMPIRES OF TODAY DO NOT RECOGNIZE DEFENSE AS A WORTHY COMMODITY

1. Again, I defer to the founders and rulesmakers of the GAME of baseball...not to shifting strategists. Must be the umpire in me that causes me to respect the authorities and tradition.

2. I have never seen more than 5 minutes of a hockey game at any one time. Don't plan to.

3. What is socker?

4. Never said defense was not important. I recognize its purpose. I love a good defensive battle prior to one offense or another scoring the runs required to win the game.

I've just been staying on track and answering the original question posed by consulting the writings that define the sport of baseball and not inserting my personal opinion of strategy.

quote:

And, despite how one may choose to approach strategy, the GAME was created, and it's rules were and are written for an offense oriented sport.

You are an Umpire so you must know this to be, but you need to help me with that statement. Are you saying that by number, there are more written rules applicable to the offensive pieces of the game than defense? Or are you implying something else?

The teams have equal opportunity on both Offense and Defense. Sounds as if it could go either way to me. The team ahead by one run after 27 outs, wins. The game can't end in a tie. Are you saying that a 1-0, extra-inning game qualifies, in your mind, as an Offensive oriented sport and that's what the rule makers had in mind?

1. Current and past rules experts in the majors and at the proschools agree that the rules are slanted in favor of the offense. Some have quantified that somehow and have come up with a fiugre of by 15 to 20%.

2. The rules, in part define the games inent as one offense scoring more than the other.

3. The founders and the rulesmakers throughout the time of the game emphasize offense. Most rule changes and modifications are made to benefit the offense....balk rules, lowering of the mound, changes in the strike zone, DH, etc.

4. Most experiments over time either were conducted to be beneift the offense or control the lenght of game.

5. Most equipment and facility changes have been to benefit offense: Live ball, shorter fences, less live ball territory (thus fewer caught fouls) and in HS and College, metal bats.

6. The owners have stated time and again that they believe offense is more exciting than defense and is what sells tickets.

My point is that the correct answer to the actual question posed in the OP is that the game is intended to be offense oriented. Unlike some other sports, the defense cannot score. Only the offense can score and decide the winner.

Defense is extemely important in that it attempts to keep the other team from scoring, however without its offense scoring, the defense cannot win a game.

Thus, by rule, founders', rulesmakers' and owners' intent and efforts, baseball is offense oriented.

It all depends on the guy in blue. Big zone? Defense, Tiny zone? Offense. At every level it doesn't matter a whole lot who is on the mound. Ask any pitcher.

quote:

Originally posted by trojan-skipper:
Do you see socker and ice hockey as offensive oriented games?

As a matter of fact, I think socker IS an offensive game.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy03:
1. Current and past rules experts in the majors and at the proschools agree that the rules are slanted in favor of the offense. Some have quantified that somehow and have come up with a fiugre of by 15 to 20%.

Then why is the defense consistently more successful? As stated before, see any hitting/OBP or ERA stat. Look at any MLB or college season by half inning and you will see far more zeros than crooked numbers.

quote:

2. The rules, in part define the games inent as one offense scoring more than the other.

The OP question was not about "intent" of the game, it was about whether the game IS offensive or defensive oriented.

quote:

My point is that the correct answer to the actual question posed in the OP is that the game is intended to be offense oriented.

Wasn't the actual question... see above.

quote:

Unlike some other sports, the defense cannot score. Only the offense can score and decide the winner.

The defense can absolutely decide the winner and usually does by allowing fewer runs than the opponent's defense allows.

quote:

the defense cannot win a game.

Yes, it can... see above.

Everything always points towards pitching and defense IMO. You may receive 3-5 AB's a game, but depending on what position you're playing on defense, you could receive many more defensive chances? After a rough AB, what does your coach tell you? Don't take that AB out to the field with you! With all that said, it's hard to argue with J03! In 2008, the Angels threw a No-Hitter at the Dodgers and still lost 1-0. Harvey Haddix threw a Perfect Game for 12 innings for the Pirates against the Milwaukee Braves in 1959 and Lost in the 13th inning...again 1-0. In both games there was great pitching and defense, but they lost because the other team scored and they didn't.

I'd still build my team around pitching and defense...JMO!