Hitting in today's game

[papalawrence]

Some recent thoughts percolating amidst the cobwebs of my mind (was that a Glen Campbell song?):

I heard an interview by Mike Trout a couple years ago where he compared pitching when he entered the league, and pitching now. He said it used to be very difficult, now it's close to impossible to hit.

Most every team experienced significant losing streaks this season. Most batters experienced slumps. In the NL Trea Turner won the batting title with a .304 average.

I know there are still a lot of home runs. But also continued increased strike outs. It's more difficult to put the bat on the ball. Maybe a batters swing has to he mechanically more precise. Slumps more prevalent. And then it gets in one’s mind and a slump can prolong. Ohtani was 1-19 in the NLDS. Harper and Schwarber both slumped in the NLDS. Players have always slumped, but I don't recall the losing streaks happening to most every team. 

Per BA, 192 pitchers hit 100 MPH this past season. With most of them being in MiBL. 

And now batters face most starters 2 at-bats, then different pitchers subsequent at-bats.

It just seems much more difficult to hit today. We see the slumps and strikeouts. And the toll this takes on pitchers with the exploding number of TJ.

Harris' approach seems in line with this thinking. Control the strike zone. Value bat to ball skills. 

The game is more difficult. With guys like McGonigle coming up, I remain positive about Detroit's future

BA article

How Many Professional Pitchers Throw 100 MPH? https://share.google/JWnEniII0WczuqNXX

[Tigermojo]

I like how Harris was talking about "earning" better pitches. Some pitches are just unhittable but with better approaches, the hitters will see better pitches to hit. That could be a big reason why the offense struggled at the end. Their approach was not as good and that had a cascading effect. If they know the cause, they can find a solution.

[Tigermojo]

One example would be Baez swinging at sliders down and out of the zone. If he lays off those, pitchers have to pitch in the zone which leads to more hittable pitches and mistakes.

[papalawrence]

With velo and spin so improved it's more difficult to lay off those pitches because they often start in the same spacial slot. 

I was impressed with how Tork showed more patience this year. Baez did in stretches. 

The game evolves and adjustments will be made. 

[Shinzaki]

Old bromide...It's a round ball and a round bat but you gotta hit it square

[tiger2022]

They'll have to look at some rule to give the hitters a better chance.  

These guys playing now are the best hitters ever.  It's just that the pitchers are so much better now.  

In the 80s and 90s a lot of the pitchers playing back then wouldn't be in the league now.  And the same is with most position players.

I like it when people say stuff like imagine how valuable Tony Gwynn would be today.  He would probably be a .275 hitter with no power... translation, he wouldn't be in the majors 

[Tiger337]

If Tony Gwynn played today, he would have benefitted from all the training, analysis and technology that is in play today.   His BA would be lower, but he probably would have hit more home runs.  He would have been just fine.  Same thing with the pitchers.  

Edited October 14 by Tiger337

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, tiger2022 said:

They'll have to look at some rule to give the hitters a better chance.  

These guys playing now are the best hitters ever.  It's just that the pitchers are so much better now.  

In the 80s and 90s a lot of the pitchers playing back then wouldn't be in the league now.  And the same is with most position players.

I like it when people say stuff like imagine how valuable Tony Gwynn would be today.  He would probably be a .275 hitter with no power... translation, he wouldn't be in the majors 

They've talked about it many times, but won't pull the trigger. The obvious thing to do is move the mound back maybe 18". That would give the hitter about 10-12 milliseconds more. Really everything in terms of the shifts in hitting stems from the fact that pitchers are more athletic and throw harder. Talk all you want about spin but it's the need to be ready for the FB that makes the spin effective. The only direct way to compensate for the increase in velo is to give the batter a little more time and the only sensible way to do that is a little more distance.

If they really are dead set against changing the diamond for legacy reasons, then at least lower the stitching on the ball to reduce the available break.

Edited October 14 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

On 10/13/2025 at 7:52 PM, Tigermojo said:

One example would be Baez swinging at sliders down and out of the zone. If he lays off those, pitchers have to pitch in the zone which leads to more hittable pitches and mistakes.

I think Javy knows that, but he may simply be poor at differentiating sliders from fastballs, or he may be poor at reading pitchers moves while in the box. It might be a physical thing. I think he'd like to be able to lay off those if he could, I mean, who wouldn't, but maybe he just can't because there's some physical shortcoming he has that can't be fixed. If this is the case, it might be a vision issue.

[chasfh]

23 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

If Tony Gwynn played today, he would have benefitted from all the training, analysis and technology that is in play today.   His BA would be lower, but he probably would have hit more home runs.  He would have been just fine.  Same thing with the pitchers.  

Well, Tony Gwynn would be 65 years old, so I kind of doubt he would hit more home runs ... 😉

[chasfh]

Baseball has always tinkered with the mechanics of the game to equalize pitching and hitting so one doesn't over-dominate the other. I don't think they'll do anything as radical as move the mound back—I can't imagine the chaos of them suddenly having to completely overhaul their mechanics during the course of a winter and successfully compete at the highest level in mere months—but I do think they need to consider changes to the ball.

One idea I thought of many years ago that might help hitting is to make the ball heavier. My idea was to reduce ball movement on the way to the plate to make it cross the plate on a truer trajectory and hitters could square it up more often. And bonus, the ball won't get hit as far, which would reduce homers, keep more balls in the ballpark, and create more fielding and baserunning action which is more fun for fans.

Turns out there's a recent study that indicates that a heavier ball (i.e., six ounces vs five) might also reduce UCL injury in pitchers, because elbow varus torque would be reduced naturally, putting less pressure on the ligament and thus reducing exposure to rupture risk.

Whatever the answer is, I think it's better for the integrity of the game if it comes from changes in equipment over changes in dimensions.

[gehringer_2]

18 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I think Javy knows that, but he may simply be poor at differentiating sliders from fastballs, or he may be poor at reading pitchers moves while in the box. It might be a physical thing. I think he'd like to be able to lay off those if he could, I mean, who wouldn't, but maybe he just can't because there's some physical shortcoming he has that can't be fixed. If this is the case, it might be a vision issue.

Every batter has trouble with the slider from the same sided pitcher because when it leaves the hand it looks like it is going to be a FB in the zone. If the batter can't pick up the spin or see the break start before he has to commit to his swing, it's a swing and miss. Every single batter has the same problem and every single batter at least occasionally falls victim to the slider away, it's only a matter of degree. Javy is simply worse at that aspect of hitting than most guys - he doesn't have the ability to see it. So he has to make up his player value somewhere else. He can work on situational awareness and study particular pitchers and get better at deciding when to commit to taking a pitch, but he's never going to be any better at recognizing that slider - it's not in his skillset.

[gehringer_2]

8 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Baseball has always tinkered with the mechanics of the game to equalize pitching and hitting so one doesn't over-dominate the other. I don't think they'll do anything as radical as move the mound back—I can't imagine the chaos of them suddenly having to completely overhaul their mechanics during the course of a winter and successfully compete at the highest level in mere months—but I do think they need to consider changes to the ball.

IDK - I guess I would disagree with the underlying assumption here. I don't the pitcher changes anything he is doing at all if the plate is a foot further away.  He already throwing the ball into the same target box as hard as he can - what is he going to change about that? the change in his angle to the plate is far smaller than the size of the zone he is throwing into.  It's really no different than the umps deciding to call the zone an inch tighter one day - they deal with that all the time. It would be a much smaller change to pitching geometry than changing the height of the mound, which has been done without any major upset.

Edited October 15 by gehringer_2

[4hzglory]

Just now, gehringer_2 said:

IDK - I guess I would disagree with the underlying assumption here. I don't the pitcher changes anything he is doing at all if the plate is a foot further away.  He already throwing the ball into the same box as hard as he can - what is he going to change about that?

You don’t think moving back a 18” would change where a pitch ends up?  A sinking FB, or a curve/slider?  I think it would have a significant effect.  This isn’t a SS throwing to 1st, it’s a pitcher hitting a specific spot which they’ve trained all their life for.  Could it be done?  Sure, but it would be a significant change.

[gehringer_2]

5 minutes ago, 4hzglory said:

You don’t think moving back a 18” would change where a pitch ends up?  A sinking FB, or a curve/slider?  I think it would have a significant effect.  This isn’t a SS throwing to 1st, it’s a pitcher hitting a specific spot which they’ve trained all their life for.  Could it be done?  Sure, but it would be a significant change.

the difference is still much smaller than the range they already pitch through. Any pitcher than can throw a pitch a few inches higher in the zone can throw the pitch for a strike a few inches further away.

Even a 'slow' major league pitch ~80mph, is moving horizontally a lot faster than it is moving vertically.

Besides, even if is harder - which i'm not conceding, isn't that the whole idea? To make it a little harder for the pitchers? 

Edited October 15 by gehringer_2

[monkeytargets39]

There were about 2,000 less strikeouts league wide than there was in 2019.  Granted, there’s over 10k more per year now than there was 30 years ago. 
 

Pitchers definitely throw harder and put a lot more spin on the ball than they used to—but they’re also a lot more fragile and don’t throw as many pitches.

 

I think you’d see change once teams stop giving huge contracts to pitchers—it would incentivize pitchers themselves to back down a little bit to stay healthier collectively.  I think the long term trend will be to have a roster full of pitchers who still throw hard, but only pitch 2-3 innings per appearance.  Starters will go the way of the dinosaur in another decade if things stay as they are IMO.

[gehringer_2]

15 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

the difference is still much smaller than the range they already pitch through. Any pitcher than can throw a pitch a few inches higher in the zone can throw the pitch for a strike a few inches further away.

Even a 'slow' major league pitch ~80mph, is moving horizontally a lot faster than it is moving vertically.

Besides, even if is harder - which i'm not conceding, isn't that the whole idea? To make it a little harder for the pitchers? 

another aspect to add to the argument is that a longer throw does mean less leeway for a breaking ball, and again - I would argue that is the whole point. If it's harder to control max spin with the added distance, that devalues max spin. That helps the batter but probably also helps pitcher's health long term.

[Tiger337]

10 hours ago, chasfh said:

Well, Tony Gwynn would be 65 years old, so I kind of doubt he would hit more home runs ... 😉

This, of course, brings to mind the famous Ty Cobb story.  He was asked by a reporter what he would hit in the modern game under more challenging conditions.  Cobb replied that he'd probably hit about .300.  The reported expressed surprise that he would admit that.  Cobb replied:"You have to remember that I'm 70 years old".  

[Arlington]

Here's a summary of the strike zone throughout the years 

~Pre-1950

Top: shoulders; Bottom: knees (various wording)

1950	Top: armpits; Bottom: top of knees

1963	Top: top of shoulders; Bottom: knees

1969	Top: armpits; Bottom: top of knees

1988	Top: midpoint between shoulders & pants line; Bottom: top of knees

1996	Top: midpoint between shoulders & pants line; Bottom: hollow beneath kneecap MLB.com

[Screwball]

Sounds like if, and when, they go to the electronic zone it will be a percentage of height (top & bottom) as the batter is measured while standing. 

This includes any part of the ball? IOW, the entire ball does not need to be inside the rectangle?

Not sure, been away for awhile.

[gehringer_2]

31 minutes ago, Screwball said:

This includes any part of the ball? IOW, the entire ball does not need to be inside the rectangle?

that is the way umpires call it today so I assume that is what the computer will be set to. But the umps usually give away even more than that to the outside, which is why I'm going to be happy to see it get automated. Too many umps call a zone so wide the batters really have no fair chance.

[romad1]

robot K zone effect on hitting?  Thoughts? 

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, romad1 said:

robot K zone effect on hitting?  Thoughts? 

Depends on the robot K zone effect on pitching. If Baseball went to 100% ABS that would dramatically change the way pitchers approach the zone, which would change hitting. With the challenge system I would guess that would change pitching approach a little, but it really depends on how aggressive hitters are calling for challenges, which I’m not sure they would be so much. I suspect the majority of challenges will be catchers looking for strike three, versus hitters looking for ball four.

Edited October 23 by chasfh

[4hzglory]

47 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Depends on the robot K zone effect on pitching. If Baseball went to 100% ABS that would dramatically change the way pitchers approach the zone, which would change hitting. With the challenge system I would guess that would change pitching approach a little, but it really depends on how aggressive hitters are calling for challenges, which I’m not sure they would be so much. I suspect the majority of challenges will be catchers looking for strike three, versus hitters looking for ball four.

In the minors I think there’s been a pretty large amount of both.  For hitters it’s probably more avoiding strike 3 than getting ball 4 though.

[Tiger337]

I imagine that trying to get ball 4 would generally be considered unmanly