‘Just Come Out and Say It’: Players Want Answers on the Changing Ball

If you moved the pitcher back three feet and used a dead ball there would be fewer strike-outs (boring), fewer home runs (boring), many more in-the-park hits, long throws by outfielders, and more running, sliding, and stealing. A much more entertaining game to watch, and likely to play as well.

The wise and seasoned sage Casey Stengel taught us that “Good pitching will always stop good hitting and vice-versa.” Last night’s match-up of MLB’s best pitchers and hitters yielded a combined 2HR’s, 13 hits and 4 walks. You do the math.

So Brandon, in 2010 the Giants hit 162 home runs and this year they are projected to hit 160 home runs. Where is the Juice? This is all conspiratorial nonsense. It has been talked about endlessly for the last 40 years at least.

I think all this is a bit of conspiracy thinking. I think baseball needs more home runs or the sport will continue to decline.

Money, money, money. Anyone who knows anything about baseball knows that homers sell tickets. MLB did nothing about enhancement drug use until they were forced to by outside forces. Babe Ruth completely revolutionized the game a hundred years ago by hitting the ball out of the park and quadrupling ticket sales wherever his team played.

Two thoughts I heard on sports radio chatter yesterday made some sense to me. First, they go through an astounding number of balls today in a typical game. It seems like if the ball even brushes the ground, dirt or grass, it's tossed out. The host said they took a huge number of balls with them to the recent game in London - something like 85 boxes with a dozen in each box. The point is, if balls are to be mass-produced on that scale, (a) there will be variation, and (b) they have to exercise some economies of scale in the manufacturing and maybe even the materials. Another point was that the lacing on the balls tightens over time in storage and shipping from the manufacturer. The third point the sports host made was that maybe the way the ball was manufactured in, say, 1968, a pitcher's year, was better for the pitchers. Now, boo-hoo pitchers, the ball is being made in a way that is better for the hitters. Deal with it. I personally prefer real baseball games to home run derby games. Home runs are too quick a fix. Baseball is more interesting the more complicated things get on the field with base-runners, singles/doubles/triples, great defensive plays, etc. Just watching a player club the ball over the fence and kiss the sky as he crosses the plate gets old.

Does MLB know/care about the plummeting tv ratings for the All-Star Game? Are they aware that no one watches the "mid-summer classic" anyone?

As long as MLB prices their meaningless regular season games like the Superbowl, I'm not giving them my money. Taking my family to a Dodger game (with decent seats) shouldn't cost more than Disneyland! And I can't stand Disneyland:)

The players are choosing to swing for the fences. From this article it appears that the pitchers are the unhappy ones. Ichiro had plenty of power, but he preferred to play baseball instead. Would he make the grade in today’s game?

I am old, I am jaded, and I have long ago learned not to trust anyone in power as a spokesperson. The ball is juiced and the "facts", i.e., the number of home runs hit, show this.

How? Tighter winding. Why? Ratings and attendance!

"... the baseball used in the majors now seems to be filled with plutonium ..." What? The pitchers are getting radiation burns on their fingers?

Well I heard the Pacific Coast League is using the Major League baseball for the first time this season. Home runs are up 50%. Is that a fact? Home runs use to be special. Now they have become commonplace along with strikeouts. We need balls in play...That's when the action and excitement begins.

I’m no physicist, but something sticks in my head from grade school, along the lines of ‘for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.’ Pitchers are routinely throwing balls at the plate at somewhere near 100 mph. Hitters (and pitchers) are so amply muscled that their bodies are literally tearing themselves apart - see, e.g., the Yankees’ 2019 ‘Injured List.” Bat swung by Paul Bunyan hits ball shot from cannon equals ‘wham!’ There it goes.... see ya! With a few noteworthy exceptions, the guys wielding the bats aren’t looking to get base hits. Watch ‘em swing away, often twisting themselves into pretzels or tumbling onto the ground. Watch ‘em strike out, early and often. That’s no big deal anymore. They aren’t hitting for average, they aren’t trying to make contact, they’re being monitored (and rewarded) for ‘launch angle’ and ‘speed off the bat.’ Too many amble to first base on ground balls... why bother, it’s not a home run, and besides, I might pull a muscle. I don’t get paid for singles, I don’t get on “Baseball Tonight” with singles. Chicks dig the long ball. There are plenty of kids in Little League who can lay down bunts with more skill than most $10 million a year players in the majors. Brett Gardner is an anomaly, not a model of the modern major leaguer. Ichiro has left the building. And we’re wondering why balls are flying into the seats?

I watch a lot of baseball. This is probably more complicated than it appears. Pitchers unquestionably throw harder, for shorter periods. As a hitter you don't need to swing hard to hit those balls out. Just barrel it up. But they do swing hard. And you have hitters that are stronger, quicker, more fast twitch at the plate. They could hit a 60 mph pitch into orbit. Combine the faster itches with stronger hitters - more homers. Add in the new metrics. Harder to string hits together against these pitchers, teams have gravitated towards home runs as a way to score. Then you have balls being produced in a 3rd world country. No offence to Costa Rica but maybe some simple change in the process in the full supply chain has made a subtle difference. The way the leather is treated. The animals used and their feed (it's their skin after all). The wrapping inside the ball. How it is made. The way it is wrapped. The idiosyncrasies of making them by hand. A lot of variables there. Conspiracy theories are easy. But assuming that there is no conspiracy, there are enough variables in play to make this complicated.

This is probably most apparent in San Francisco, a notoriously difficult place to hit HR's. The Giants are projected to hit 30 more HR's this season, despite ranking 27th/30th in HR's this season, with an dreadful lineup who only have 4 players with 10+ HR's. Those 4.. have 10, 11, 12, and 12.. This year overall there will be a ~100 HR increase from the previous season. The ball has been JUICED. 2019: 88 (Giants) 124 (Opponents) Total: 212 Projected 2019: 160 (Giants) 225 (Opponents) Total: 385 2018: 133 (Giants) 156 (Opponents) Total: 289 2017:128 (Giants) 182 (Opponents) Total: 310 2016: 130 (Giants) 158 (Opponents) Total: 288 2015: 136 (Giants) 155 (Opponents) Total: 291 2014: 132 (Giants) 133 (Opponents) Total: 255 2013: 107 (Giants) 145 (Opponents) Total: 252 2012: 103 (Giants) 142 (Opponents) Total: 245 2011: 121 (Giants) 96 (Opponents) Total: 217 2010: 162 (Giants) 134 (Opponents) Total: 296

It's hard to appreciate the subtle strategy of baseball when many in the stands are distracted by smartphones, dot racing, heavy metal music, raffles, and endless tv commercials. To get them to look up, you have to get them to stand up, it seems. Baseball reflects its era, which is why it's still the greatest.

Supposing the ball is the same and it's the approach to the game that's changed. There are still ways to push the game back toward a focus on strategy. Move the fences out. Make sure the high strike is called. Limit the amount of armor that batters are allowed to wear. Maybe raise the mound—it's been higher. Consider suspending the Designated Hitter in the American League—though I doubt the Player's Union would agree to that one. It'd be hard to work on financial incentives without the owners being accused of collusion—but it would make sense to penalize batters for excessive strikeouts, and reward them for stolen bases, successful hit-and-runs, sacrifices, etc. Encourage pitchers to go deeper into games by putting the ball in play without it going over the fences. Strikeouts increase pitch counts. I know conventional wisdom is that batters learn what to swing at each time they face the starting pitcher—but doesn't it also stand to reason that the pitcher learns what to throw each time they face the batter? Great pitching performances—by one pitcher, not usually by a staff—are applauded just as much as great home run hitters; only there aren't nearly as many of them nowadays. That should change. A thirty-game winner might make fans sit up and take notice. So would a couple of .400 hitters, perhaps.

I've never been able to find the video, but one Mets' game when Tom Seaver was the color commentator, he took apart a ball from that game and one from his days as a pitcher. He said the ball was from his collection but couldn't remember why he saved it, so didn't feel bad about this. During the several innings he tore them apart, they showed his progress. It was fascinating. When he was done, the old ball had a pile, the new ball had a pile and there was a core. The core bounced much higher in the new ball, and the pile of fibers was 50% or more in size. Clearly not the same at all. I'd be curious to see what happened if someone took apart a ball from a decade ago and today. You know scientific experimentation is available.

I'd like to know MLB's explanation of why the minor league ball is different from the major's. I do find the game less interesting, the results always seem to be a walk, strikeout, or a homer, and I really hate that players can't bunt for a single when the shift makes it a given.

It’s a hard argument for MLB to sell that they haven’t manipulated the ball. Imagine the surprise of fans when MLB changed from the “dead ball” to “jack rabbit” ball 100 years ago. Before 1919, any player who could hit 10 HRs would be considered amazing. Babe Ruth hit 20 HRs in 1918, then 49 the following year! Baseball was a low scoring, strategy driven game that relied on hits and base stealing. After then, it was a hitters game.

Hah! First to their study. It’s easy to evaluate those, just see who paid for it. Guys who do studies strive to satisfy the customer, not come to any unwanted conclusions, whether they be true or not. Happens all the time and in places like your nation’s capitol, where these “firms” are cheek to jowl. Second, this is from the same outfit which encouraged steroid use and the resulting home run binge by players in the 1990’s forward to try to compensate for their disastrous handling of the baseball strike. I’ve always thought that if Barry Bonds went to the pen, his cell mate should be Bud Selig. At least they got rid of Selig’s inane “idea” of the all star game determining the World Series home advantage.

The same thing happened in Japan a few yearss ago. The press accused the league of juicing the ball. The league said no they didn't and guess what, someone opened up a ball and it was different.

Surely we can vivisect some foul balls caught over the years and get some insight here. I'm not sure I (nor players) would trust MLB's self-reporting on this.

Until this year, I was a season ticket holder for thirty five years with the Seattle Mariners. I finally got so sick of watching the 14-12 games with interminable home runs or strike outs I just gave it up. Boring as hell. I might as well watch the NFL. Sad!

It's changed the way hitters are instructed to swing the bat. Rather than the tried and true way taught for years, a swing designed to create backspin so the ball rises (like a golf ball), the new method is to teach hitters to swing up, creating top spin, which in the past would result in a long fly ball and an out, but now produces a home run. The problem with the new method is that it's an all or nothing swing: the old method produced lots of line drives as well as home runs, while the new method produces pop ups, long fly balls, and home runs.

Is this really such a hard mystery to resolve. Examine the baseballs from different eras. Mystery solved.

Couldn't a study be conducted that compares recently produced against balls that were made 3, 5, and 10 years ago? Balls that were collected over the years for players as milestones (500th hit, first hit, walk off grand slam, etc...), while not easy to part with, could be used as part of the comparison. Destructive testing for comparison, i.e. disassembling a ball to measure thread and hide thickness, weight, and other parameters, cold be considered as well. I'm sure there is a way to evaluate empirical evidence and data to understand what, if any, the differences are.

The Three True Outcomes will be the death of baseball. The Baltimore Orioles are on pace to shatter the all-time record for home runs allowed, and the Philadelphia Phillies will do the same for the National League; the Phillies are on pace to surrender 288 home runs in 2019, an astounding number. Plus, strikeouts will once again eclipse hits in both leagues.

The change in the ball occurred this year; home runs have been increasing for two or three seasons. Maybe pitching has gotten worse.

I think the pitchers would know if the ball’s been altered. Charlie Morton’s comment that his sinker became essentially ineffective is a good tell IMO, and there’s never been so many home runs. This controversy has been going on for a number of seasons, and it does puzzle me that there hasn’t been an independent study of the properties of the ball to determine what exactly has changed.

The beauty of baseball was its perfect balance. The mound was 60 feet 6 inches. Another 6 inches either way would destroy the symmetry. It was like that in every aspect of the game- a perfect balance between pitching, hitting and fielding. There were times when pitching dominate and times when hitting did, but it always came back to the middle. In one of the hitting lulls the owners decided to increase run production and they added the designated hitter, which destroyed that balance and fundamentally changed the game. It not only changed the balance, now favoring hitters it also changed basic strategy. Managers didn't have to decide whether to pinch hit for a pitcher in a critical situation etc. These changes cascaded throughout the game, at least in the American League. The current state of baseball- hit a home run or strike out, is a direct result of owners opening Pandora's Box by messing with what made baseball great- that perfect balance. Now I read that it's inevitable that the National League will adopt the DH. That will be the end of baseball's legitimate claim of being the greatest sport. Maybe baseball should change its name to Home Run Derby, as that's what it's become. That's what happens when you mess with perfection.

It the ball is different from last year or the year before, that would be measurable, the skin, the stitches, the weight,the core, the elasticity, the bounce. Somebody has certainly done all of that by now but I have not seen published results. Yet I'm convinced there are significant differences. It could be pitching faster, it could be swing modification. (It must be the shoes.) I'd bet on the ball. Seems like doing that, and keeping it a deniable secret, would require the conspiracy of many dozens of people, with no leaking and maybe no e-mails. Amazing "But at the end of the" game, it is runs that win or lose. And by the way, listen to the crowd noise. Most fans don't really seem to be disappointed by homers, and neither are the baseball fans in our house.

it's simple: when pitchers (and scouts) stopped focusing on movement and location and started becoming obsessed with velocity and strikeouts then major league hitters will hit more home runs. it doesn't take a master statistician to see a direct correlation between pitch speed (and elbow surgeries) and home runs. being a starter used to be about trying to find the next greg Maddux with the occasional Randy Johnson, but it seems being a ground ball pitcher now wont get you that massive contract.

Home run - strike out baseball is boring because there is no strategy to the game. It would be like football with only hail Mary passes or basketball with only mid-court shots. I read that it is a generational issue, and that might be the case. However, one learns to understand and appreciate the hit-and-run, squeeze, double steal etc. and it is baseball's job to education its next generation of fans. I don't see the current style of play sustaining interest after the sugar high of 450 ft homers (and many strike outs) wears off.

I'm still mourning the demise of "small ball." Bouncy balls, drugs, and tiny parks have ruined the game. There is no place for a Whitey Herzog in today's baseball. On the other hand, Earl Weaver would be in heaven if he were still with us and managing today.

Perhaps this is a result of a hotter climate. Air resistant drops as the air temperature increases. A warmer ball has more bounce than a cold ball. Someone should make a chart comparing home runs and strikes to game day temperature. As if fires, drought, flooding, more extreme weather of all kinds, mass extinctions, rising sea levels, and the flooding of coastal cities weren’t enough, maybe now we can add ruining baseball to the consequences of climate change.

One word: marketing. It's been an open secret since "Chicks dig the long ball." The MLB has sanctioned the manipulation of balls and bodies for decades to increase the market share of a sport that has been waning in popularity since the 1960s. The press's moral dudgeon toward the "cheaters" of the 1990s and early 2000s was always theater because the press played an active role both in boosting stars and in looking the other way right up until the moment it became inconvenient to do so. The "juiced" baseballs is merely the latest in a long line of tweaks to make more money. The rest is theater.

It is.sickening. Like everything else baseball has become a shill for the advertisers and is hyped up to the max. I still love the game but must watch with the sound muted to drown the frenzied shouting of the announcer and the cavalcade of sleazy advertisements that come on ever more frequently and with a loud barrage of hyped noise with no warning of a break in the action. The great American pastime indeed.

Put a 25 % tariff on imported baseballs. Find a company in the US that can make the darn things.

Has what's inside the ball changed? Or has what's inside the players changed? I for one am not wholly convinced that steroid use among players - with multi-million dollar deals waiting in the wings - has been eliminated. If a higher home run count is really not what the owners want as this article suggests, then you have to ask who would want that. Who would benefit directly from that? There is only one answer.

These players (pitchers) earn millions of dollars. They can't commission an independent study, I don't know, using perhaps x-ray or other testing to get to the bottom of this? It's a baseball. Take it apart and figure it out.