Is the crack in the metal bat monopoly finally here?

quote:

Write your congress person.

I agree. Write them and demand they focus on the job they were elected to do and stay out of things like baseball...college football playoffs...expanding the field of the NCAA basketball tournament...etc etc.

You continue to subtly bring forth your views in very impressive ways.
I am just amazed at how you can so quickly provide links to articles and references in support of the view that wood bats and metal present equal risk. How do you have so many articles and references so readily available and continue to assert you have no affiliation with the metal bat industry? Just amazing.
And subtle: on the UNC article you argued how wood bats caused serious injury while metal just produced bumps and bruises. Of course, to my reading you never did acknowledge the bumps/bruises caused loss of time on the field.
More importantly, you never did acknowledge the difference between studying the best college hitters with wood and comparing them to those studied with metal which included only 18% DI players. Fascinating.
And now you link references to major league players, the best hitters of all and contrast injuries at that level with a college player with metal. You are really, really good. The metal bat industry probably could not do this better. Hmmmmmm.
On the "plea" to keep government out of baseball, was in not just a few years ago that their hearings on steroids and other PED's in baseball finally led to reforms that seem to be making some difference in leveling the competition between body types?
Does not MLB baseball operate with an anti-trust exemptions provided by government?
Of course government has a very legitimate interest in making determinations of the type you advocate does not exist, i.e., that metal is just as safe as wood. As shown with PED's, if those involved in the game, including the metal bat industry and NCAA don't act, government involvement can promote those actions, even if government doesn't.

infielddad, let me try to address some of the comments you made.

First, as I have said several times before, I have no dog in this fight other than the fact that my son plays the game and is working his tail off to play as long as he can.

I explained it before and I will do so again. I have zero affiliation with ANYTHING related to baseball or anything manufactured for baseball (or softball, just to ensure I don't leave that door open for you or anyone else). I have no family or friends that have ANYTHING to do with baseball or softball gear. I don't own a store that sells gear for baseball or softball nor do I have friends or family that do. I have absolutely NOTHING to do with bats or the manufacturing or selling or promoting of them be they wood or metal. I don't own stock in any company that makes bats or the material that is used to make bats.

That is about as plain and direct as I can get concerning that point. I can also tell you there are people who post here that know that to be a fact.

Second, as to my ability to quickly produce articles to back up my stance. Well, it's called Google. I already told you what I do for a living. I am in the technology business. I have been for my entire adult life. I am extremely proficient with Google by necessity. My line of work forces me to have a deep understanding of my competitions solutions, not just my own. That forces me to do lots of research so yes, Google, Bing, Yahoo, etc. are my friends and I know how to use them well.

That brings me to another point. I can post those articles so fast because they are there for everyone to see, if you want to see them. That is the point. There are two sides to this discussion (or more).

As for me pointing to the pros using wood and injuries they sustain, well, they are the only ones who use wood so what else would you have me do? I pointed to the Illinois HS study done over the course of a season and I was promptly told that it didn't include enough games to be a good representation. So much for trying to point to something other than the pro's.

Now to the study that showed there to be more bumps and bruises from metal but the most severe injuries to have occurred from wood. I will go back and look again but I do not believe the majority of those lesser injuries caused players to miss time on the field but again, I have read so much about this subject in such a short amount of time, I will need to double check. The point is, this discussion and several others just like it, started out to be about how metal is supposedly so much more dangerous than wood and invariable, the story of a kid getting nailed on the mound is the proof that is held up and the catalyst to hash it all out again. A bruise on the arm isn't exactly what this discussion is about, right?

As for the government intervention into steroids, that was a complete joke and I would argue that public pressure finally enabled baseball to address the steroid issue but that is a completly different discussion. I also said before that I had come to the conclusion that if baseball is unwilling to address a KNOWN issue, then perhaps the THREAT of government getting involved could be a good stick to get them moving and do something. I am a reasonable person.

As for anti trust? Apples and oranges. You are talking about eliminating owners from setting artificially low pay and keeping the free market from working, not setting the specifications of what material a bat can be made of. Do you really want OSHA coming in and regulating the game of baseball? See here for a hint:

http://www.safetynewsalert.com...professional-sports/

Yea, I Googled it...

Finally, I have an ability to do something concerning this discussion that you and several others will never have. I have the ability to approach it from a complete emotionless basis because I have not had any personal experience slant my views (than goodness). I have no bias one way or the other. Play with wood? Great. Play with metal? Great. Play with some sort of combination? Great. Just let the bodies continue to police themselves and make reasonable changes when necessary (see BESR to BBCOR as an example). Don't cling to every tragic accident as a plea to "fix" something that will not fix anything (safety related) it at all and could potentially INCREASE the injury risk factor (the law of unintended consequences). Baseball, like every sport has inherent dangers. Fortunately, in baseball, it is a rarity that these accidents happen but they are tragic when they do occur. It's just as tragic when someone gets severely injured by wood or metal. Period.

You know, the ironic thing is that I was beaten about the head and face when I started to dig into the issue and use or look for statistics that proved metal was more dangerous or safer than wood. I was told by posters "I don't need statistics". "I don't need some lab technician that doesn't know a darned thing about the game"...and I was told worse. Then, you guys turn around and want to use statistics to prove to me that metal is more dangerous than wood.

Yeah, pretty ironic, especially considering there is nothing out there to prove your theory correct, even after 30+ years of using metal. I am also beginning to believe that there are those (not the people who have personally been involved with one of these injuries) that are willing to exploit "safety" as a means to the end of a philosophical ideology concerning the use of wood. That makes me sick to my stomach.

I believe I'm going to regret this, but the following points that have been made...

* Because of the weight distribution of metal bats, they can be swung faster and produce faster ball exit speeds, giving the pitcher (or infielder) less time to react, and...

* The kinetic energy (or put another way, the "work" exerted by the ball) delivered to the fielder's head (or other body part) is related to the velocity squared (thus magnifying the effect significantly)...therefore the increase in potential damage is not just a 'little' more but a 'lot' more, and...

* Statistics are useful if the data is taken with equal or similar participants and the database is expansive...as best as I can tell none of the databases cited (by either side) satisfy either of these necessities, therefore, not too useful. The only 'relatively equal' database I could currently imagine would be to compare college in-season events to college summer wood bat events...but some could argue that college players have already crossed the danger threshold and it doesn't apply to HS (which I don't buy).

You say you're "open," but why ignore these facts in your defense of metal? If you want to argue that risks posed are still small enough to ignore them, then we disagree because the solution is simple (use a different product) and we both know that daddy will pay the extra few bucks a season for junior to use wood...daddy just won't be as happy when junior's HR total goes down. If you want to argue we shouldn't go to wood because the government may mandate it and you don't like government mandates...while we share philosophies on government intervention...I will just say that I think thats a very stubborn reason to not do what is best.

As for the emotion I may feel since my son was involved in a wood bat accident...and how this may cloud my ability to judge this...I will assert that more than anything it has focused my desire to understand it.

1Baseballdad you have been very respectful even while under attack.
I hate to say this but " I told you so "

quote:

You say you're "open," but why ignore these facts in your defense of metal?

I am not defending metal per se, I am just saying banning it on the grounds of "safety" doesn't make sense. A theory is just that until it can be proven. So far, there is no proof that metal is indeed more dangerous. That is the only point I am making. You do have a unique perspective in this discussion from the standpoint that you are very aware of the dangers. It's human nature to want to do something to help a loved one when an accident happens. I totally understand your desire to make the sport safer, no matter what. I get that completely and can and do respect it.

BHD...yes...yes you did.

All anyone needs do is ask my wife...she will be happy to tell you just how hard headed I am.

Please don't compare injuries of MLB to HS and NCAA players. The power of pros make up the difference form the kids. Thats why the stats could say more serious injuries with wood when comparing data from two levels. The national classic has been a great tournament with wood, having many great players participating. The game becomes much more about the players and not the bats, makes for great games. Look at the results of the games. How many 1 run games? Its supposed to be about the PLAYERS!

Great comment CELTDAD - funny, we were in that tournament just last year...and just last year it was sponsored by a metal bat company. And just last year the scores were off the charts. Home runs every blink of the eye, it seemed.

Time are a changin'!

quote:

Please don't compare injuries of MLB to HS and NCAA players. The power of pros make up the difference form the kids. That's why the stats could say more serious injuries with wood when comparing data from two levels. The national classic has been a great tournament with wood, having many great players participating. The game becomes much more about the players and not the bats, makes for great games. Look at the results of the games. How many 1 run games? Its supposed to be about the PLAYERS!

I graduated HS in the early 80's. The biggest kid on our football team was about 250 pounds and he was darned good. Went on to play D1 ACC football for a then powerhouse school. Now, it isn't a big deal for HS football teams to have an O-line that averages 300+ pounds.

I went to watch UVA play Clemson in baseball a few weeks ago. It looked like Clemson screwed up and sent the football team instead of the baseball team. These guys were big strong powerful athletes. BP was impressive, to say the least.

I don't think the power argument is nearly as dramatic as it once was, especially from college to pro. Yes, it's still there but the chasm isn't as wide now, especially as MLB is finally getting a grip on steroids.

Again, no one doubts that at these levels (HS and college), the games aren't better with wood vs. metal. Sure, everyone loves to see a HR hit 400+ feet but from a purity standpoint, wood is the ticket. No doubt. I have said over and over again that I fall into that camp as well.

One argument has nothing to do with the other and there are MANY who are willing to use safety as a reason to ban metal and see their philosophical views implemented. I'm just saying you don't want to go there.

Personally, I don't mind asking tough questions or asking someone to back up something they feel so strongly about. If metal can be shown to cause more injuries than wood then by all means, we MUST do something about that. Period.

Until then, the knee jerk reaction of rushing out to insist we ban metal bats when one of these tragic accidents occur does nothing to remedy a problem that as it appears now, doesn't exist. What that knee jerk reaction accomplishes is making people feel good about a situation they have absolutely no control over what so ever in the first place. That is human nature.

You feel strongly enough about going to all wood? Great, do something about it. Form a group...a coalition, pool your resources and make your case. Make the RIGHT argument and don't embellish or bring a red herring into it such as safety. All that will do is turn people off. You form that group and I will be more than happy to go so far as to contribute monetarily to help you with your efforts.

I can promise you one thing. I may be one of the few willing to actually speak up in a forum such as this but there are many many others who are privately asking the same questions as I have been but unwilling to take the lumps for asking them publicly.

I am finding this discussions very interesting.

Without resorting to scientific stats - anyone can use stats to prove any position - I think baseball should return to wood bats (or bamboo/composite) by the high school level. Why? Because that is the way men play the game.

That is the RIGHT argument for me. :-)

You are right 55mom, yours is one of the better "RIGHT" arguments.

But physics (thats not stats!) cannot be bent to defend one's favorite position. Forces, velocities and energy follow the laws (and facts) of physics...and there's no changing or fudging that.

quote:

Originally posted by 30bombs:

Metal bats are hollow, wood bats are solid. Case closed!!

Why do you think that a metal bat has to be solid in order to match the salient physical properties of a wood bat ? That just makes it more difficult. What you have to do is tune the material props, wall thickness, and mass distribution to match the BESR and (note the AND here, justBB) MOI of wood. And it doesn't have to be a single homogeneous metal. The wall thickness doesn't have to be constant, either. It can be done. You don't have to jump to a lathed-out piece of solid stainless steel to de-tune a metal bat. (In fact, that wouldn't work.)

My point is that there can exist an engineered solution that would provide the durability of metal/composites, and would prevent the one safety downside of wood (splintered wood flying), but that would be de-tuned to match the performance of a wooden bat.

I don't think the composite golf club analogy is quite the same. The PGA has successfully constrained performance to the level they wanted. They didn't have a safety issue to deal with like baseball, they just didn't want run-away performance due to technology. So the result is better clubs, just not the dead clubs that wood provided.

Just to be clear, I'm against the elevated performance that is currently being produced by engineered bats. I don't think being against metal bats in and of themselves really attacks the true issue.

Using wood bats is merely the best-known way of solving the problem.

quote:

I can promise you one thing. I may be one of the few willing to actually speak up in a forum such as this but there are many many others who are privately asking the same questions as I have been but unwilling to take the lumps for asking them publicly

1baseballdad,
I wonder about the transition I am reading in your posts that you are "now" taking lumps or are the victim under attack as BHD would advocate.
As I has posted before, you are very smart, you are very persuasive and you know how to debate, articulate and present your views. No arguments from me on any of that.
The words you use and the way and when you choose to use them is proof positive.
I think that, if you truly are a silent majority or with a silent minority, no one is getting the better of you and no one will.
Do we differ? Yup! Do we differ on many, many items? Yup! Did you just introduce another? Yup! To suggest that their isn't much difference in college and Milb players/game is that new point. When you ask any minor league player in their first ST what is different than college, even college with metal, they tell you it is the speed of the game, the speed of the players and the strength of the player. The game at Milb, where drug testing has been in effect long before MLB,is warp speed compared to college. Stand in the center of a ST minor league facility and watch. You won't miss it.
Where we also differ is your view there is "NO" safety issue and how we are "permitted to express our views and opinions about whether there is or isn't.
Where we differ is your view that NO one should even attempt to suggest there is a risk or safety issue or that there may be an issue that should be looked at further.
While being under "attack and taking lumps," you post that those who differ from you are either doing so for "political" reasons(of course you are not political), for emotional reasons(of course you are not emotional, (from a knee jerk response) and of course yours are thought rational and the only ones that are right and correct. Each is a very subtle dig and I think you know it. As justbaseball did, I almost started thinking I needed to explain I am not emotional and justify why, but I think you knew that when you posted. That is what you intended.
Not only that, you really use wonderful descriptions that you have been "beaten about the head and face for digging into the issue..." Really, you get "beaten" but the pitcher who was hit with the ball of the metal bat gets a bump/bruise??????
Personally, I have no problem with your advocating there is NO risk, none, zilch!!
Where we differ is when you say because that is your view, everyone else who differs is motivated by emotions, politics, knee jerk.
Where we differ is that those who feel the issue needs to be fully investigated are "embellishing" and the like.
Folks on this board are all baseball people talking about baseball topics. Those topics that are not go into unusually unusual.
Folks on this board, by and large want the best for baseball. More importantly, they want the best for those who play the game at a young age and that is true whether it is you, justbaseball, Coach May, BHD, 55mom or any of the others who posted in this thread.
I don't choose to paint them in a certain way because they disagree. If you are not associated with the metal bat industry, then we are all baseball fans posting about a topic of which there is considerable interest, and even more PM/underground interest based on your comments.

The argument you make that no study positively proving the increased risk for 30 years proves something might be right. However, the tobacco, asbestos and other manufacturers historically made the exact same arguments, some while having the information in their possession that proved they were wrong.
I am not saying that is true with the metal bat industry. I am not saying it is not true.
I fully understand the OSHA angle as I represent employers everyday on safety and health issues. Many, many employers do things right.
However, too many don't, while saying they do. I see that all to frequently.
Right now we have a mining disaster with the company saying they are safe while being cited for safety violations on the day of the tragedy. Is there a connection? That will come over time. Are you supportive of that Company president and would advocate that OSHA does not belong at that site investigating?
I have repeatedly asked the question as to whether the industry needs to prove no increased risk and no additional safety issue.
The reason I ask is some companies and industries do step up when the questions get asked.
Right now the Semi-Conductor industry has commissioned an epidemiologic study being done at Vanderbilt to assess issues of cancer and the relationship, if any, to the manufacturing process.
Are they doing it because a link has been proven? No.
They are doing it because, in part, it is morally the right thing to do.
They could take the strident position, as you do here, and other industries have done done for years and say there is NO evidence and until there is, there is no issue. They could look to undermine those who feel differently by painting them as political, emotional, knee jerk and paint the picture of themselves as under attack, victims, and they are getting "beaten about the head and face."
Instead, they have people running their businesses who want to look in the mirror and be able to say, with the best science that science has to offer, that the work process does not cause cancer, if that is true. The issue of safety is equally compelling and important with money and profits.
I will say that the more discussion this thread continues to get from all of us the better in my view. One reason is the more and longer the issue is discussed here and elsewhere, the better the chances it will indeed get the analysis and study the issue deserves and we can get answers to the questions and views that in my judgment are all fair game on this message board.

Bottom Line…

We do not need to know the statistics. Anyone can plainly see that more balls are hit hard with metal bats. There are “more” hits, “more” runs and “more” balls hit hard up the middle. Don’t have the exact stats, but know it’s true just the same. I’m fairly sure that everyone that follows this stuff very closely, knows it!

Besides what were the statistics regarding number of deaths by base coaches before a line drive ended Mike Coolbaugh’s life while coaching first base? That is what it took (Mike Coolbaugh’s life) to make a rule that base coaches had to wear helmets.

Not a lot of statistical evidence showing a large number of deaths before hitters used helmets. Insurance companies, probably would have had trouble coming up with a statistical formula showing the obvious danger. Yet, Aren’t we all glad that hitters now use helmets? Doesn’t that seem much safer? BTW, I believe it did take a death before they made protection mandatory.

So rather than wait for the statistics to pile up, why not be proactive based on probability? What was that old saying about an ounce of prevention?

Even though the statistical data looks good… Let’s replace those O- Rings before we blast off!

And safety is only “one” of the worthwhile reasons to go with wood, but it’s an important reason.

PGStaff: Very well done!

This one was particularly poignant for me.

quote:

Even though the statistical data looks good… Let’s replace those O- Rings before we blast off!

Infielddad - This (below) was exactly what I was thinking too...but was too weary to say it...

quote:

To suggest that their isn't much difference in college and Milb players/game is that new point. When you ask any minor league player in their first ST what is different than college, even college with metal, they tell you it is the speed of the game, the speed of the players and the strength of the player. The game at Milb, where drug testing has been in effect long before MLB,is warp speed compared to college. Stand in the center of a ST minor league facility and watch. You won't miss it.

One of the great joys of talking to my son these days...is I now get to LEARN an awful lot from him. He see things in players I cannot see...he knows things about the game that I cannot know. About baseball, he is way smarter than me.

1BBDad,

You remind me of the tobacco executives sitting in front of congress swearing there is no connection to smoking and lung cancer. They had all the answers...just like you... with study after study...your interest in this matter to prove wooden bats just as dangerous as metal seems odd to me...but hey, you got a right to your opinion...I'm just not buying it..

Infield Dad and JB;
http://www.ysn365.com/

As you are aware in 1987 when I founded the Area Code games, we used wood and on our Goodwill Series teams to Australia we use wood.

Last week, I watched SSU play Chico State and participated in a discussion with my friend a pro scout. We discussed a SSU player who has already hit 11 HR. The pro scouts deduct 40-50 feet on HR hit with metal.

Yesterday while I viewed the Easter tournament in Petaluma. They used wood bats and I was interview
regarding wood bats.

Goodwill Series will name the Memorial Day tournament "Gunnar Sandberg" Invitational.

We will have 10 teams using wood bats. Need two more '18' and under teams.

As always, we keep a record of the broken bats
for cost comparison.

As I have previously communicated the"change is coming one step at a time".

Bob
PS: 1 baseballdad- have you ever pitched to a Major hitter using a metal bat?

quote:

One of the great joys of talking to my son these days...is I now get to LEARN an awful lot from him. He see things in players I cannot see...he knows things about the game that I cannot know. About baseball, he is way smarter than me. Wink

Boy, is that right, it is a great joy. Now that our son is coaching, he sees, describes and explains the game, what happened and how it happened so clearly and crisply.
What he is seeing, describing and explaining, however, is a game played at a different level than the ones I am watching.

Bob, thank you for all of your efforts. You have, but more importantly do and will continue to be a leader is making the game right, for the players. What a wonderful gesture to name the tournament in honor of Gunnar.
Your question reminded me of the 2002 NECBL All Star game where they actually did throw BP from behind the L Screen to a former MLB hitter who used metal bat. I need to find his name.
One of those balls went over the top of light tower in right center(the 385 mark on the fence), and was still climbing.

what many forget here is the "freedom of choice"

Nobody makes you buy tobacco!
Nobody makes you drink booze!
Nobody makes you get married!
Nobody makes you have kids!

Yet people do and still *****--I recal my Dads words--"I can teach you all I want but when you walk out the door you will do what you want and hopefully you will hear my voice"

Our country has gotten into a "we have to save everyone" complex but those wanting to save have the same skeletons in their closets

But back to the bat debate--we use wood in all the tournament events that we take part in even if they are not required--- enough teams an organizations do this and soon we have what we want--wood bat baseball-- don't all kids get their own bats be they wood or metal? so they all get wood and they can buy at least three of them for the price of one metal bat--the question of safety be ****ed--go to wood

quote:

So rather than wait for the statistics to pile up, why not be proactive based on probability? What was that old saying about an ounce of prevention?

OK pgstaff, taking that line of thinking into account, what do you propose we do to the ball to make it safer? What do you propose we do to wood bats to make them safer when that is all anyone hits with?

I would suggest everyone read this if safety truly is your end goal.


_________

Hit in the Head

Though deaths caused by thrown or batted balls are rare, frequent close calls, including one last week, keep the issue of ballpark safety in play

By S.L. Price

From the forthcoming book HEART OF THE GAME: LIFE, DEATH AND MERCY IN MINOR LEAGUE AMERICA, by S.L. Price. Copyright © 2009 by S.L. Price. To be published on May 12, 2009 by Ecco, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers.

This story appears in the April 20, 2009, issue of Sports Illustrated.

Now, after more than 50 years lost, Ray Chapman's memorial was found. Because of the decay, you couldn't see the two-foot-long bat with the glove dangling from it, or the eulogy embossed along the bottom: HE LIVES IN THE HEARTS OF ALL WHO KNEW HIM. In the ensuing weeks, as the plaque's lettering was sandblasted and polished, all those involved in its restoration took pride in rescuing a vital piece of baseball's past. It didn't matter that it marked one of the game's darkest moments.

Chapman, after all, was the most famous example of the damage a thrown or batted baseball can do. On Aug. 16, 1920, the popular ballplayer -- 29 years old, newly married, mulling retirement -- was hit in the left temple by a fastball fired by Yankees pitcher Carl Mays. He was carried off the field at New York's Polo Grounds and died the next morning, the first and last player ever killed on a major league diamond.

The Indians would honor the man they called Chappie by winning their first World Series that year, and some good would come to the sport in response to his death: Because Mays was suspected of having doctored the ball, professional baseball banned the spitball and began requiring umpires to monitor balls and replace dirty ones. Chapman's name was invoked over the ensuing decades whenever baseball suffered other scares.

And they weren't rare. According to researcher Bob Gorman -- who this year published, along with his colleague David Weeks, the definitive account of baseball fatalities, Death at the Ballpark -- nine minor leaguers and 111 amateur baseball players as young as eight years old have died as a result of beanings since 1887. More than 90 other players were killed either by pitches that hit other parts of their bodies, usually the chest, or by balls thrown by other fielders.



Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c...x.html#ixzz0kbnM3GLZ
Get a free NFL Team Jacket and Tee with SI Subscription

______

So, what are we waiting for? We aren't going to use statistics since they don't help the argument but we are going to use probability to ban something from the sport? Help me understand that one.

probability: a logical relation between statements such that evidence confirming one confirms the other to some degree.

Back to the evidence thing. You can't have a valid "probability" argument with no evidence to back it up.

There is a far greater probability of getting seriously injured by a pitcher hitting the batter than a pitcher getting hit by a line drive off a metal bat.

Do we ban pitchers? Pitchers who throw over 70 mph?

If it's for the safety, how do ignore these scenarios that are far more likely to injure someone on the field?

I am just asking the questions...

quote:

1baseballdad,
I wonder about the transition I am reading in your posts that you are "now" taking lumps or are the victim under attack as BHD would advocate.

quote:

1BBDad,

You remind me of the tobacco executives sitting in front of congress swearing there is no connection to smoking and lung cancer. They had all the answers...just like you... with study after study...your interest in this matter to prove wooden bats just as dangerous as metal seems odd to me...

quote:

Bob
PS: 1 baseballdad- have you ever pitched to a Major hitter using a metal bat?

infield dad, you were saying?

BTW coach waltrip. I am not trying to prove wood is just as dangerous as metal. I am trying to understand why people want to jump on "safety" in order to ban something from the game that most likely will not change the safety aspect on bit.

Seems a bit disingenuous to use safety in this case when the facts aren't there.

It also bothers me a great deal when precedents like this are set. You are fine banning metal. What part of the game will get you riled up when "they" go after it in the name of "the kids".

You guys keep reading things into my posts. All I am doing is asking the questions that you too should be asking, if indeed safety is the issue here. I find it odd that these questions make you uncomfortable...if safety IS the issue.

Let me put it to you this way. Are you going to be happy when all infielders and pitchers are required to wear helmets and full face masks? How about when it is mandated the ball be manufactured to the standard of a stiff nurf ball?

You want to open Pandora's box by banning metal bats on the grounds of safety, you go right ahead and charge full steam ahead.

Just remember these questions I asked when the game gets destroyed by people and politicians who just want to "help" make the game safer.

Is this really where you want to go?

quote:

Just remember these questions I asked when the game gets destroyed by people and politicians who just want to "help" make the game safer.

Talk about trying to inflame emotions! WHOA!

quote:

Talk about trying to inflame emotions! WHOA!

Wow...really? When I have been accused of being blind, stupid, emotionless and worst of all, a bat manufacturer!

So now explaining myself is inflaming emotions?

Whoda thunk it.

BTW, did you look at that link I provided at all? Any comments on what I am talking about?

Do you even realize I am on your side as it pertains to getting wood back into baseball? Does that even matter to you? Are you able to muster up a response to ANY of the questions I am asking? What are you willing to ban when a kid gets nailed and severely injured by a ball hit off a wood bat because the one thing we can all take to the bank is that it WILL happen.

Then what?

How dare he make such a statement...

Go ahead, burn him at the stake. God forbid we should take a common sense practical approach to this. So tell me again who this is for. Us or the kids?

"Little League baseball in particular, and amateur baseball in general, is one of the safest sports children can play. Football players endure high-speed collisions. Cheerleaders perform daredevil stunts and acrobatics. Basketball players throw elbows, leap into crowds, and push for position. Ice hockey, wrestling . . . pick any sport and you will find risky behavior.

Little League has worked diligently to identify and eliminate many of the risks involved in playing youth baseball. It's hard for everybody to have fun if even one person gets hurt.

We welcome the concern of anyone who wants to join us in this effort, including our elected representatives. Little League baseball in particular, and amateur baseball in general, is one of the safest sports children can play. Football players endure high-speed collisions. Cheerleaders perform daredevil stunts and acrobatics. Basketball players throw elbows, leap into crowds, and push for position. Ice hockey, wrestling . . . pick any sport and you will find risky behavior. We also hope government leaders trust those of us closest to the game and those who play it to continue making sure baseball is safe, while also keeping it fun.


----------------


Stephen D. Keener is president and chief executive officer of Little League International (www.littleleague.org), based in Williamsport , Pa.

http://www.dtmba.com/news-dontknock.htm

quote:

Originally posted by 1baseballdad:
Wow...really? When I have been accused of being blind, stupid, emotionless and worst of all, a bat manufacturer!

So now explaining myself is inflaming emotions?

Whoda thunk it.

BTW, did you look at that link I provided at all? Any comments on what I am talking about?

Do you even realize I am on your side as it pertains to getting wood back into baseball? Does that even matter to you? Are you able to muster up a response to ANY of the questions I am asking? What are you willing to ban when a kid gets nailed and severely injured by a ball hit off a wood bat because the one thing we can all take to the bank is that it WILL happen.

Then what?

I'm not going back to read all of yours and my posts to make sure I didn't leave that impression...but I don't think you're stupid or emotionless (actually I think you're becoming more and more 'emotional' about this...given what you've told us about yourself and your thought process, why?).

Stubborn? Yes. Because physics tells us all we need to know. I am being stubborn too, because I believe the change should happen...and while, like you, I am not a fan of government intervention in my life I do feel there are times where its appropriate...i.e., when the playing field is not level and trust me when I tell you that the bat manufacturers are spending a lot of money to keep this off the legislative agenda. I have a friend who I've told you about who spends a good part of his job flying around the country to testify to city councils and state legislatures and defend metal bats.

Kind of interesting...thinking a little about it after writing that paragraph above and since you're a fan of Google, I "googled" a few key words about metal bats and legislature, etc..., and voila! Up comes my friend's name...actually, his name comes up a WHOLE lot of times and among them include a quote about the Marin incident with words almost identical to yours! I am not hinting that you're him (although a week or so ago, I did wonder ), just understand why the question has been asked. You are a good and articulate (and far from "stupid") spokesman for metal bats.

Some other stuff came up too on my Google search...that further validates my stance from a science point of view....and comes darn close to validating that the manufacturers know exactly what they've got. I'll leave it to you to find it.

I don't believe you're on the side I am on...you've spent more time than anyone here arguing your viewpoint. Obviously it matters to me what you (or any good baseball fan) thinks or I wouldn't spend my time reading more and writing this. I'm not responding to every question you ask because you aren't responding to every question we have asked. I also don't have the time. You wear me out...occasionally I get some energy back to write more about it, but I don't have the energy to respond to everything. I try and respond to your most pertinent points. I may have missed some?

My kid DID get nailed and severely injured by a ball hit off a wood bat...and I am an opponent of government regulation (in most cases)...yet you will NOT find a more ardent supporter than me of bans on metal bats that don't behave EXACTLY like wood. As best as I can tell, that bat isn't on the market (yet).

quote:

Then what?

So for me, I'm well past the "what?"

quote:

(actually I think you're becoming more and more 'emotional' about this...given what you've told us about yourself and your thought process, why?).

Could be because after 10 pages of posts, over 4000 views just in this thread alone, you still refuse to listen to what I am saying or acknowledge the questions I am asking and understand I am on your side.

All I am doing is asking you to look beyond today (banning metal for safety reasons) and look to the future of what will happen to the sport if you get your way. It will NOT end with wood bats, I can bet my next year’s pay on that. It will NOT end with wood bats because banning metal bats will not keep players from crushing line drives up the gut and bounce off pitchers when using wood.

Emotional? Not exactly. Frustrated? Well, yeah, understandably so.

You want metal out of baseball? Do it the right way. It isn't a safety issue and by making it one, you will NOT like what happens after metal is gone.

So you still haven't answered. What will be next when metal is gone and kids keep getting injured by balls coming off wood bats? You better be able to answer this one if you keep going down the path you are taking and you better be willing to step up and accept the ban, whatever it may be. Remember, not just accept it but accept it with no questions asked.

How about this?

No more baseball

No more football

There are many injuries and deaths in s o c c e r

Do we ban that as well?
Do we ban boxing?

Lets get real folks--all sports are inherently dangerous--so is driving a car--so is taking a plane flight--so is a swimming pool in your yard

Bottom line is simple---LIFE is a risk--you need to live with it---there are no semantics, politics etc involved

TR - I completely agree with you. We're talking about something more or less equivalent to putting helmets on batters. We're not talking about making risk equal to zero.

quote:

Posted April 09, 2010 10:55 AM Hide Post

quote:
Talk about trying to inflame emotions! WHOA!



Wow...really? When I have been accused of being blind, stupid, emotionless and worst of all, a bat manufacturer!

If anyone called you stupid they made a very big mistake in my judgment. Also, I don't think anyone "accused" you of being a bat manufacturer. The question/issue was asked.

This has also been said about you:
"As I has posted before, you are very smart, you are very persuasive and you know how to debate, articulate and present your views. No arguments from me on any of that.
The words you use and the way and when you choose to use them is proof positive.
I think that, if you truly are a silent majority or with a silent minority, no one is getting the better of you and no one will."

quote:

So you still haven't answered. What will be next when metal is gone and kids keep getting injured by balls coming off wood bats? You better be able to answer this one if you keep going down the path you are taking and you better be willing to step up and accept the ban, whatever it may be. Remember, not just accept it but accept it with no questions asked.

Maybe I am completely misreading all the posts on this thread.
What I understand to be the issue is what level of risk of being struck by a batted ball is okay. The issue has never been the game must be played with no risk or there is not risk with wood.
Every time a hitter goes to bat, there is the risk he can be hit by a pitch and injured. Over the past 30 years, or even longer, that risk has not changed appreciably(except LL with the 13 year now pitching) because pitchers throw the same velocity at every level of progression.
Hitters and baseball and parents do acknowledge the risk and take action. Helmets are required. Face masks in some LL. Helmet design is improving with changes just in the last year of a significant nature. More than a few now wear elbow guards. Not sure what you might call that thing Bonds wore but we sure know why he did.
While the risk of being HBP has not changed in 30 years(and perhaps is even less with warnings on HBP issues), and velocities have not changed, the equipment to protect the hitter and lessen/mitigate the risk has evolved and improved. The risk is not eliminated and no one is advocating it needs to be.
It is different with metal bats and pitchers.
Over the past 30 years, nothing has changed for the pitcher. He wears no protection and throws from the same distance.
As everyone in the thread acknowledges, including you, metal bats are creating a larger sweet spot and greater velocities of ball speed.
Everyone is acknowledging there was and is a risk of injury to pitchers when wood was/is used.
Where the difference in opinion exists is many feel the increase in velocity of ball speed of 4-8 mph off a metal bat and those implications to the pitcher at 60'6" increases the risk beyond wood and increases it in unacceptable ways. Whether it is the risk there will be more injuries or the risk the injuries will be more serious, or both, that is the contention of most posters, I believe.
You are of the view that until there are studies, there is no change in risk and no safety need to change from metal.
Bottom line is everyone acknowledges there has been and is and will continue to be risk. No one is advocating the game be played by hitters and pitchers with no risk.

The fear argument you suggest of what happens when injuries continue after metal is eliminated is a red herring in my view and I think you probably know that.
Every sport inherently involves risk of injury.
None on this board will advocate you cannot play the game unless risk is removed.
The issue has never been the elimination of risk.
The issue is what level of risk is acceptable and what actions can be taken to afford an acceptable level of risk for a pitcher in light of the way the metal bat has changed the game and ball speed/velocities.
Does it not seem odd to you that the controlled and static, but recognized risk, for the hitter has resulted in increased protection but the increased velocities of a baseball at 60'6" have resulted in nothing, not even an acknowledgment that the risk to the pitcher might be different?

1baseballdad,
I’m not smart enough to figure all of this stuff out. I have to say that you bring up some valid points. Hate to get involved in a debate when the opponents appear much more intelligent than me.

But how does one destroy the game by simply wanting to play it the same way that they do in professional baseball?

I’m on that safety bandwagon based on what I have seen. Sooner or later, things become crystal clear. Not sure if anyone could call these “facts”, but I believe if you took a thousand people and had them watch the same hitters take BP with wood and then metal… All 1,000 would say the ball comes off the metal bat faster and faster more often. Now if we shouldn't care or don't care, lets get back to designing bats that will double the exit speed off the bat. Who knows, maybe the statistics will still look OK.

Our organization has been using wood bats in nearly every event for the past 17 years. We started an organization called WWBA, World Wood Bat Association. This organization has been responsible for over 300,000 players using wood bats. In fact, every new wood bat manufacturer contacts us for business. For those who don’t know, at one time there were only a few manufacturers of wood bats. Since the WWBA has started there have been close to a hundred new wood bat manufacturers.

We formed a league for 9-10 year olds about 15 years ago. We actually had a company make us small wood bats. The level of talent had a wide range. I was at a game where I saw Ryan Sweeney (Now an OF with the A’s) hit a line drive with the small wood bat. Sweeney was really good as a young kid. The first baseman was a chubby little guy that didn’t have much athletic ability. He just barely got out of the way of that line drive, in fact. It actually nipped his ear. Same ball with a metal bat could have changed several lives that day, including mine! Everyone there that day should of thanked that wood bat.

In all this time, thousands and thousands of games, hundreds of thousands of players, many of them the best players in the country… We have not seen a serious injury from a batted ball with wood. Of course we know it is always possible, but we see many pitchers getting hurt with metal bats. Most of these injuries are to the legs and arms, but that is only because that is where the ball happened to hit them.

My eye sight is not as good as it used to be. However, we see many games played both with wood and with metal. I do not need statistics to see the obvious difference. At the PG National at the Metrodome in 2008 we used wood bats, just like all other PG events except for the BCS where we do use metal. Our BCS (metal) games last longer and almost double in the amount of scoring. BTW, it’s pretty much the same teams that play in both. It’s not only because the exit speed of the ball, it’s because that “extra big” sweet spot allows for more balls to be hit hard.

Due to our relationship with Rawlings, we actually held a metal bat homerun contest with the PG National Showcase players. All these players took BP with wood and used wood in the games, but hit with metal in the HR Contest. During BP there were maybe a dozen balls hit out with a couple long ones. Then during the metal bat HR contest it looked like an all together different game with different players. Those same guys were hitting shots into the upper deck at the Metrodome.

We could change the baseball or look at other dangerous aspects of the game, but for the most part, everything is based on what is used at the highest level. I think it’s pretty much that way in all sports once a certain level is reached the equipment is the same. I do believe if metal bats are being used then we need softer baseballs. But why make two things different than what they use at the highest levels when one change makes it all the same.

Professional baseball does change things once safety becomes an issue. Rawlings recently came out with a new helmet that withstands 100 mph impact. All the old helmets were something like 65 mph impact. The “Maple” bat issue didn’t take forever to be addressed. Unfortunately, it usually takes something very serious, like a death, for changes to be made. Guess that is common practice even for big companies like Toyota.

College basketball and football players use basically the same equipment that professional players use. High school athletes use the same equipment also. Professional baseball (thank God) uses wood bats, so why not use wood bats in HS and College?

Rather than finding reasons to switch “back” to wood, it seems like a better question would be, why should we continue to hit with metal? Is it because that is just the way things are?

Think about these questions…

Is metal safer?

Is metal more cost effective?

Does metal make the game better?

Does metal help hitters and pitchers develop better?

How was the game meant to be played?

Why are we using metal?

IMO, the only thing metal does is allow for more offense. That means more hitting, and more balls being hit harder.

quote:

Could be because after 10 pages of posts, over 4000 views just in this thread alone, you still refuse to listen to what I am saying or acknowledge the questions I am asking and understand I am on your side.

I believe I've listened (read) nearly all of the words you've written. I can guarantee I've thought about all of what I've read. As to the questions...there are too many...and you often answer questions I/we ask with two or three more questions of your own. Its effective. However, I won't own up to (purposely) not answering any of your questions. Just not enough time or energy for me. And no, I don't at all believe you're on my side of this debate.

quote:

All I am doing is asking you to look beyond today (banning metal for safety reasons) and look to the future of what will happen to the sport if you get your way. It will NOT end with wood bats, I can bet my next year’s pay on that. It will NOT end with wood bats because banning metal bats will not keep players from crushing line drives up the gut and bounce off pitchers when using wood.

Are you a conspiracy theorist? I'm not. I don't believe the future of baseball is at risk if metal bats are banned nor that this is the first step taken by a devious group of legislators that have a much longer (or any longer) agenda about how the game will be played. I do think it will end with wood bats. But hey, I'm not them and so anything is possible I guess? I am pretty sure that some type of helmet or head protection will become required within 10 years for kids anyways. Thats a different debate and I don't know yet how I feel about it.

quote:

Emotional? Not exactly. Frustrated? Well, yeah, understandably so.

OK, I'll take you at your word. I am frustrated too.

quote:

You want metal out of baseball? Do it the right way. It isn't a safety issue and by making it one, you will NOT like what happens after metal is gone.

By "right way," do you mean through the governing bodies of the organizations? I'm ok with that...unless they refuse to do their job...which so far (for the most part) they are not. That makes me ok with my legislator doing it for them. What is it that we won't like after metal is gone? I think I will quite enjoy a better baseball game at the local college/HS/LL field. And I think those young people will be playing at lower risk to themselves. We disagree, it IS a safety issue.

quote:

So you still haven't answered. What will be next when metal is gone and kids keep getting injured by balls coming off wood bats? You better be able to answer this one if you keep going down the path you are taking and you better be willing to step up and accept the ban, whatever it may be. Remember, not just accept it but accept it with no questions asked.

I don't think anything will be next. My kid had his face crushed by a wood bat and I have not thought once about banning wood bats.

There, I've answered your questions in this post at least...which is all I have energy for right now. How about this...why do you ignore the physics?

1baseballdad,

Think I understand where you're coming from. Just don't agree that changing "back" to wood bats will cause wholesale changes in everything else. The biggest change in amateur baseball that I know of was when they switched from wood and went to metal.

They actually have made some changes over the years. Mound height being one. MLB lowered the mound in the 60s because pitching was dominating too much. They didn't go with metal bats, they lowered the mound and it worked, hitting and scoring stats went up.

Oddly enough, the new MLB official mound height is used in high school and college baseball... Plus adding the metal bat. Kind of a double whammy for pitchers!

Anyway, I'm glad that you and so many others prefer the wood bat over the metal bat.

1baseballdad posted an excerpt above from "Heart of the Game," by S. L. Price.

For anyone who has not read this book, I highly recommend it. It is about the life and death of Mike Coolbaugh, the coach who was struck and killed by a line drive while coaching first base in a AA minor league game 2-3 years ago.

The book is about much more than the accident. It is about a life in baseball including his journey through the minor leagues as a player, husband and father.

Parts of the book literally had me in tears. I really don't think it adds nor subtracts from this discussion...nor does it advocate any position in this discussion.

Its just a really, REALLY good book.

Folk's, unfortunately, I haven't done the best job at explaining my evolving position concerning this topic. For that, I apologize. I don't want people walking away thinking I am defending metal over wood and I don't want people thinking I am willing to sacrifice safety for the sake of hitting stats. That couldn't be further from the truth.

This hasn't been an easy topic to discuss and I probably could have picked a less controversial discussion to cut my teeth here since I am still very much a newbie.

Hopefully, in the end, we all are on the same page...wanting what is best for our kids while making sure we continue to enjoy the game we love all the while protecting it for our future generations.

No problems here 1baseballdad. Stick around!

1baseballdad,

Opinions might differ, but you have brought up some good things for people to think about. I'll admit that my thinking on the subject is one sided.

Even though one of our major sponsors makes metal bats, I can't think of a single "good" reason for using them.

I agree with justbaseball, stick around. I enjoy reading your posts. Respect and agreement are two different things.

1bbdad,
Your post bring lots of thought to differing views without being condescending which most people can respect. I also don't want the government involved with this process. But I do strongly believe that wood is better for the game and players. After just watching the national classic tournament for 4 days and viewing 10-12 games. I see no benefit except for the parents who want to even the hitting with a bat, not a workout. No one here believes that there won't be injuries with wood, but do believe that the injuries will be less severe. My sons will be out of HS before this issue is resolved even if its within the next year or so, but lets think of others children's safety. Yes one of my sons pitch and he throws in the 90mph range and it can get crazy when a great hitter faces him. He knows of the potential risk but just plays without worry or distraction. I'm sure pg staff knows who he is and can confirm what Im saying. He also pitched at the area code games vs some studs, and I was glad they were using wood!

I don't anyone who advocates eliminating sport for "safety sake."

There is a middle road known as "reasonable". That is the type of changes those who I know are advocating for...no different than batter's helmets and cups. Is there anyone who would get rid of those?

Others are advocating change that brings us closer to how baseball is played at the ultimate level: with wood bats.

I can't argue with either direction.

Wow, I see this debate is still on....

I just have one question...

If our sports professional's use wood to swing with on the pros... Why do we train our amateurs swinging metal?

quote:

If our sports professional's use wood to swing with on the pros... Why do we train our amateurs swinging metal?

Since mpst most of todays ML players while growing up, used metal I guess it didn't stunt their development.