Is BBCOR good for the game?

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy03: My opinion is not that specific. My opinio is that the closer we get to the results that we'd have with wood bats, the better.

I don't beleive that, over time, the end of cheap off-the-handle doubles and fewer home runs will be the demise of kids interest in baseball. I played in wood bat days and we acceoted our abilities and our results just fine.

Hitting with hot metal bats introduced an artificial element into the game and everyone knew it. Reality will set in with the BBCOR bats and in just a few years, no one will be left playing college or high school that had any experience with the phony results of metal.

I think that will be good for the game. Hitters will still hit. Results will be more skill based.

I understand what you’re saying because I too played in the days a decade prior to non-wood, but to me there’s more to it than simply wanting the game to be played with wood because it would be a “better” game, which I agree it would be.

To me the issue was never wood vs non-wood. It was wood, which is basically a material that gives little benefit from model to model or year to year. Wood is wood. But when non-wood entered the area, things changed. If you had the means, it was possible to literally buy help for you game by doing nothing more than changing your bat. No skill improvement was necessary. Just the mere fact that you used a hot bat improved you.

I never really bought into all the supposed check swing HRs, the off the handle or off the end hits because those things happen with wood too. And I for sure never believed that ALL players used the hottest models that gave them the most bang with the least amount of skills.

The main problem with trying to come up with what the right amount of influence a bat should have in the game, and top me there’s only one measurement of that. HRs, or rather the number of HRs per measurement of time. And since in baseball, the basic measurement of time is by a game, or perhaps by outs, it should be pretty easy match any and all levels of the game to the same standard.

The standard everyone knows, is the standard of MLB. The reason for that is simple. Its been around forever, is the highest level of the game there is, and there’s scads of data to test just about any hypothesis anyone could come up with.

So in the end, if the number of HRs per game in MLB is say 5 total for both teams combined on average, why shouldn’t the total per game in LL, HS, or college be the same? Of course one reason is, they play a different number of innings per game in different venues, but that’s not a big deal either. Just computing the # of HRs per 3 or 6 outs would get a good number to work with quite easily.

In the end, what you’re saying is, you want wood to be the standard, and I’m saying if using wood means a HR every 9 outs, that would be how to match all levels. That’s basically what the hot bats did. All they did was increase the number of HRs to make it closer to the MLB game, but it came with a price. In order to get that number, it made the game more dangerous, and that got people hot and bothered.

They wanted the HRs and the rest of the offense, but the price was too high. Now that there’s gonna be only one standard in college and HS, the HRs can be adjusted, but this time by the fence distance rather than the bat composition. All I’m asking is, what’s the correct # of HRs?

Our field is 325’ in L, 385 in LC, 370’ in dead center, 365’ in RC, and 320’ in right. In 49 games there over 5 seasons, there’s been a total of 32 HRs. That’s less than 1 HR per game. Now is that enough? I say NO, and its only gonna get worse once all the waived bats are done away with. I say, if a school can afford it, they should move the fences in or the plate out by at least 10%, and see what happens!

Yes, I do understand that it’s something that will never happen in a million years because of $$$$$ constraints, but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be a fantastic idea and make for a much more entertaining game.

There is a well written editorial about the return to wooden bats in collegiate baseball written by Bob Howdeshell on the editorials link of this website.

Read it Here

BBCOR is good for the game because it will facilitate a smooth transition from the artificial power game back to the traditional situational game assisted by the gradual return to the wood bat. Amen.

quote:

Originally posted by PA Dino:
BBCOR is good for the game because it will facilitate a smooth transition from the artificial power game back to the traditional situational game assisted by the gradual return to the wood bat. Amen.

Why is it so important that the bat be wood, rather than perform for all intents and purposes like wood? Heck, I’m a wood guy from way back, but to tell the truth, I wouldn’t care one whit if they were using bats made out of gold, plastic, or horse manure, as long as they didn’t perform significantly better than wood.

I agree that wood performance should be the standard for a baseball bat. But what if a blight should kill all hardwood trees? Should the game of baseball then cease to exist?

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats
So in the end, if the number of HRs per game in MLB is say 5 total for both teams combined on average, why shouldn’t the total per game in LL, HS, or college be the same? Of course one reason is, they play a different number of innings per game in different venues, but that’s not a big deal either. Just computing the # of HRs per 3 or 6 outs would get a good number to work with quite easily.

So far for the 2011 season the average HR's per game in the MLB is 1.79. Even during the steroid era the average per game was never more than around 2.2. I would think 1 per game for high school would be high.

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:
I never really bought into all the supposed check swing HRs, the off the handle or off the end hits because those things happen with wood too. And I for sure never believed that ALL players used the hottest models that gave them the most bang with the least amount of skills.

Let's see....hits are down, HR's are down, scoring is down.

I saw the cheap hits off the handle and even checked swings, so I believed. I don't see them this year.

Regarding the use of the best and hotest. What I saw kids whose parents could afford them, had them. Kids whose parents could not afford them, borrowed them. I've had games in which just two or three bats were used.

quote:

Originally posted by il2008:
So far for the 2011 season the average HR's per game in the MLB is 1.79. Even during the steroid era the average per game was never more than around 2.2. I would think 1 per game for high school would be high.

Is that for both teams?

I don’t quite understand why if its 1.79 for MLB, 1 would be deemed high, unless you believe that because most HS fields are very close to the same size as most ML fields.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy03:
Let's see....hits are down, HR's are down, scoring is down.

I saw the cheap hits off the handle and even checked swings, so I believed. I don't see them this year.

Regarding the use of the best and hotest. What I saw kids whose parents could afford them, had them. Kids whose parents could not afford them, borrowed them. I've had games in which just two or three bats were used.

If you are trying to say that the only hits in any venue that uses wood only are sharp line drives, I have to take issue with you. Heck I scored a game last night that had at least 6 hits that were either a Duck ****, a nubber, a bleeder, or a swinging bunt, and one was a pop up that dropped over the pitcher’s head and short of the 2b and SS on the grass that went for an easy infield hit.

The number of cheap hits may be down, but they happen all the time. I suspect your PERCEPTION is that they no longer happen, rather than they don’t happen anymore. ac

Also, if you’re saying that all players at every level only used the hottest bats, again, I have to take issue with that statement as well. There are literally millions of players out there, and its ludicrous to assume that most were using nothing but the leading edge bats. If that were true, who the heck bought all the bats that weren’t leading edge?

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:

quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy03:
Let's see....hits are down, HR's are down, scoring is down.

I saw the cheap hits off the handle and even checked swings, so I believed. I don't see them this year.

Regarding the use of the best and hotest. What I saw kids whose parents could afford them, had them. Kids whose parents could not afford them, borrowed them. I've had games in which just two or three bats were used.

If you are trying to say that the only hits in any venue that uses wood only are sharp line drives, I have to take issue with you. Heck I scored a game last night that had at least 6 hits that were either a Duck ****, a nubber, a bleeder, or a swinging bunt, and one was a pop up that dropped over the pitcher’s head and short of the 2b and SS on the grass that went for an easy infield hit.

The number of cheap hits may be down, but they happen all the time. I suspect your PERCEPTION is that they no longer happen, rather than they don’t happen anymore.

Also, if you’re saying that all players at every level only used the hottest bats, again, I have to take issue with that statement as well. There are literally millions of players out there, and its ludicrous to assume that most were using nothing but the leading edge bats. If that were true, who the heck bought all the bats that weren’t leading edge?

quote:

I agree that wood performance should be the standard for a baseball bat. But what if a blight should kill all hardwood trees? Should the game of baseball then cease to exist?

Short of providing you an entire treatise on tree blight per hardwood species and a lesson in what a tremendous renewable resource trees are, I don't think I can address this hypothesis in a baseball forum. Although, trust me I could. My favorite course in college was "Bee Keeping", that should provide a hint as to my major. By the way, that dang book was over $120 back in 1977........

Anyway, aside from the fact that metal, aluminum and composite bats all offend me by "pinging" instead of "cracking", which is in my mind reason enough, wood bats are not subject to tampering period. Corking a bat has been scientifically proven to be of no value for enhancing performance of the bat. You provide me a metal, aluminum or composite bat and I will return it to you with thinning walls, weight redistribution, a greater trampoline effect, rolled both directions and perhaps a new paint job saying it complies with BBCOR. Absent any planned program for investigating bats involved in injury to players for tampering, it amounts to a license to cheat. That's why wood is good.

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats
Is that for both teams?

I don’t quite understand why if its 1.79 for MLB, 1 would be deemed high, unless you believe that because most HS fields are very close to the same size as most ML fields.

Yes, that is for both teams. I say 1 per game for high school would be high because high school players skill level is way below MLB players. They also play 2 less innings.

Four months ago I would have been with you Stats but I have done a complete 180 on this issue. I thought the new bats would hurt the college game but it's made it more enjoyable to watch. A HR has to be earned. The sooner they go to wood the better.

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:

So in the end, if the number of HRs per game in MLB is say 5 total for both teams combined on average, why shouldn’t the total per game in LL, HS, or college be the same? Of course one reason is, they play a different number of innings per game in different venues, but that’s not a big deal either. Just computing the # of HRs per 3 or 6 outs would get a good number to work with quite easily.

This makes very little sense. MLB players are the most highly graded, sorted, and therefore homogeneous group of skilled hitters possible. By contrast, high school players' hitting skills range from being barely able to make the team to being nearly ready for pro ball. If bats and fields were designed to produce average stats equaling those of MLB, we'd have multi-walled titanium rocket launchers and teeny tiny fields. Forget it.

We need to get over the idea of the homerun being so "important" to the game. In fact, if you want to get traditional about it, the homerun was something of an oddity until the 1930's.

quote:

Originally posted by PA Dino:
Short of providing you an entire treatise on tree blight per hardwood species and a lesson in what a tremendous renewable resource trees are, I don't think I can address this hypothesis in a baseball forum. Although, trust me I could. My favorite course in college was "Bee Keeping", that should provide a hint as to my major. By the way, that dang book was over $120 back in 1977........

I assure you, with a degree in Horticulture, I understand that the chances for such a blight is slim to none, but that wasn’t the point. The point is, if by some wild chance it did happen, does that mean baseball would cease to exist? HECK NO IT WOULDN’T!

That’s because the game isn’t based on the material a bat is made from, but rather how that bat performs. If there were no more hardwood, its very likely woody plants like Bamboo, or synthetic materials would replace hardwood. And that’s getting pretty much to what BBCOR is. Its definitely not a perfect substitute for wood as far as performance goes, but its far closer than anything else so far.

quote:

Anyway, aside from the fact that metal, aluminum and composite bats all offend me by "pinging" instead of "cracking", which is in my mind reason enough, wood bats are not subject to tampering period. Corking a bat has been scientifically proven to be of no value for enhancing performance of the bat. You provide me a metal, aluminum or composite bat and I will return it to you with thinning walls, weight redistribution, a greater trampoline effect, rolled both directions and perhaps a new paint job saying it complies with BBCOR. Absent any planned program for investigating bats involved in injury to players for tampering, it amounts to a license to cheat. That's why wood is good.

You should be happy with the BBCOR bats because most of them don’t ping, and the ABI certification has made great leaps in mitigating tampering.

I think you’re wrong about corking a bat having NO value. Because it makes a bat lighter, it increases the ability of the player to increase the velocity with which its swung. But we could argue that all day and it wouldn’t’ make any difference. Of course people are going to find ways to cheat, but its getting more and more difficult. But if you want to spend the money on a bat, then spend the time and resources to cheat for your kid, or to make money cheating for someone else’s, there’s no way to stop you if you’re 100% determined to do it. But how prevalent are cheater like you going to be, and how likely is it that they’d never get caught?

You’re a cynic, but that’s ok because I’m a cynic myself. But I don’t believe a program has to be put into place that tests every piece of equipment every time a player gets injured. Evidently you believe doing something like that across the country at all levels is free.

But ask yourself this. Assume someone has been injured by a ball hit by a bat, and its proven that that bat was tampered with and illegal. How difficult would it be to determine how much injury was caused over and above what would have happened if the bat weren’t tampered with? IOW, what percentage of an injury would be due to a 100 mph ball rather than a 97mph ball?

Why not just argue that you don’t like to see the game played with any bats other than wood? I’d respect that because I feel the same way. The difference is, I understand that my opinion about it isn’t shared by everyone.

quote:

Originally posted by il2008:
Yes, that is for both teams. I say 1 per game for high school would be high because high school players skill level is way below MLB players. They also play 2 less innings.

I understand that, but given the size of HS fields don’t generally match the physical abilities of the players the way the size of MLB fields match them, I believe if they did, the HS game would be much better to watch.

quote:

Four months ago I would have been with you Stats but I have done a complete 180 on this issue. I thought the new bats would hurt the college game but it's made it more enjoyable to watch. A HR has to be earned. The sooner they go to wood the better.

I completely understand. I got involved in this issue way back when the NCAA decided it had to doo doo or get off the pot with bats. Since then, I’ve read more than I should have, communicated with more people actually working on both the standard and how its applied, and in all honesty I never once thought BBCOR bats would hurt the game. In fact, where I used to violently hate non-wood bats, once I understood what the goal of BBCOR was, I actually became a fan!

Now, living in Ca where BBCOR plus a few waived bats is now the HS standard, and scoring for a HS team, I get to see what’s happening literally almost every day, and I can tell you that no matter what anyone says, the game has not changed that much! It has changed, but as far as I know, there’s no way to measure it accurately because so few people keep accurate records. I can tell you what our team has done this season compare the last 4. If you’re interested, you can see that here. http://www.infosports.com/scor...r/images/compare.pdf

But as far as I know, no one else has tried to do that for HS, and even in college, as far as I know, no one’s done it across the board, yet.

But as far as my original hypothesis goes, I still believe that no matter what the material of the equipment, if it were possible to adjust HS field size to match HR output with the ML, it would make the game much more enjoyable, at least for me.

Yes they are good for the game.