The Game is Evolving

On a number of occasions Mark has advised that the game is evolving and we should get used to it. It is difficult to argue with either point. The game has evolved out of necessity to offer a sense of fairness in competition and to, as they say, level the playing field with a standard set of enforceable rules.

Actually, if you Google it, there are ample sources following the evolution of the game. All aspects have a history, even the bat.

This from “The Evolution of the Baseball Bat” by Bernie Mussill:

“Bill Deane, Senior Research Associate at the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, New York has on record a well-documented account of a baseball game played on June 19, 1846, at Elysian Field in Hoboken, New Jersey. This game was the first played under the Alexander Cartwright rules, which included a 9 inning game, 9 players on each team and 3 outs per side. However baseball players made their own bats and as a result, many different sizes and shapes were used.
 
During this particular time in history, players experimented with different kinds of wood for their bats in order to improve their hitting ability. They soon realized that wagon tongue wood was the best for making baseball bats. While the transition to wagon tongue wood was taking place, players also realized they could hit a ball much more solidly with a round bat. While some players continued to make their own bats, others had their bats made by a wood maker. Within the next four to five years, the round bat became very popular. All ballplayers were using a round wagon tongue bat and the only flat surface bat on any team was used strictly for bunting. The round bat had definitely taken over.
 
Before the year 1869, there were no existing limitations on the length of the baseball bat. Then in 1869, the rule governing bat length was adopted and stated “Length limit on bats, maximum 42 inches long.” Surprisingly, this particular rule has not changed. It is in today’s rule book under Division 1.00 Rule 1.10A, ‘The bat shall be…not more than 42 inches in length’.”

Every aspect of the game has evolved from how to record an out other than hitting an opponent with the ball and having players play bare-handed. Obviously the evolution of rules of play, improvements and standardization in equipment were necessary evolutions and good for the game as well as player safety.

During my lifetime the game has continued to evolve especially in 1947 with our beloved Jackie Robinson.  We have had the birth of the draft, the implementation of the  DH, the  changing of the height of the mound, free agency, multi-million annual contracts, a suspected juiced ball era, a see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil period of steroids and HGH’s. Catching equipment has changed as a result of the Steve Yeager incident. Not to be forgotten is TJ surgery which back in the fifties would have rescued the career of Karl Spooner. The list goes on.

Evolution in all aspects of life is inevitable so it is not surprising that baseball has evolved and is still ripe for further evolution. As a baseball fanatic and faithful Dodger follower since 1952 I have accepted the changes, although not always preferred, and have gotten used to them. I do not let them interfere with my enjoyment of the game although there are changes that I would have been most happy not to have witnessed happen. Because I long for the good old days, the “Golden Age of Baseball”, it does not mean I am walking aground  with my eyes closed and refusing to accept reality. It also does not mean that I cannot have a preference about what changes I like and which changes I would probably be more happy if they had not happened.

When speaking about the game evolving the premise seems to be that whatever has evolved is better than what it has replaced or added to. Not all evolution seems to have led to something only better. The industrial revolution and its sequels have done much for humankind but also left our planet in a terrible mess. The evolution of weapons of war now guarantee the earth’s population could be pretty much wiped out. Now to compare baseball to those extreme situations is like comparing apples to pumpkins. Having said that, while many of the evolutionary moments in baseball have been made to make the game fair and the players safe, one could speculate that today’s moments are not always out of necessity. The game would be just fine without them.

A later  evolution in baseball has been the emergence of electronics onto the playing field and analytics into the dugout. I expect that there will be more electronic imposition on the game as time goes by. It is difficult to argue that electronics has not helped to, “get it right” although that is not always the case and the process to question a call on the bases is a bit farcical. The big intervention  will come with balls and strikes, at some point, so we can look forward to some robo-baseball much like Gameday. The human element in the game is fading.

Analytics is now perhaps the biggest evolutionary step the game has ever taken. Again, I suppose it is difficult to argue against the trend which has eroded the opportunity for the manager to manage as he sees the game. It is now managed by those sitting in front of computers and arguably a game manager is not even needed. Just text what the computer is saying at each point in the game. The intent of the analytics is to win more games and we can’t argue with that goal. However, the constant interference in the game with analytics is not fan friendly, at least for this fan. I have accepted it but am not enamored with it. In my opinion analytics are being worked to death usurping the initiative, experience, intuition of the coaching staff. Even the announcing staff is trying to predict what will happen analytically which is not very stimulating for the listener/viewer. I miss Vin.

If the game has continued to evolve, why it is that the players don’t evolve as men? As we move to robo-ball how it is that pitchers still get their panties in a knot when a hitter admires his home run for an extra second or two or doesn’t run the bases to the pitcher’s satisfaction? He is the one that served up the tater. On the other hand why is it OK for a pitcher to slam dunk, fist pump, jump, scream when he gets a strikeout to end an inning? Don’t get me wrong. I think both of those are simply displays of emotion and we do need emotion in the game.  Or, why do players act like children when a hitter lays down a bunt to break up a no-hitter and put a runner on base. Let’s take the ball and go home. The hitter’s sole purpose in standing at the plate is to get to first base. At that point the only thing in the world that matters is first base. That is one emotional outburst that I do no like. However, perhaps the answer is that since electronics and analytics are taking over the game, the only human elements left are those fostered by the  unwritten rules.

I expect that is why I am so drawn to minor league ball. The game is still a game, it is not all about the money, and players are allowed to play. I am sure analytics are now a part of their lives but the game is not so confined analytically or electronically.  

Minor League Report by DC

Gotta love 4-for-4.

Player of the Day – Will Smith

Great Lakes Loons 11 – Lancaster Lugnuts 8 (Toronto)

The Loons started quickly again scoring three times in the top of the first inning and once more in each of the second and third innings. The big blow in the first was a two-run home run by Jacob Amaya. Before the game was over the Loons had scored in seven of the nine innings played. Great Lakes did not benefit from a great pitching start and actually gave up six runs in the bottom of the fifth inning. However, they played long ball after that with two home runs by Niko Hulsizer and the first of the year by Romer Cuadrado. Amaya, Hulsizer, Heyer and Cuadrado all had two hits. Hulsizer now leads the league with ten home runs.

On the mound Jose Chacin had a strong four innings but after that the roof caved in leaving him with a stat line of five runs, six hits, two walks and five strikeouts. Drew Finley followed Chacin with 1.1 innings of scoreless ball although he allowed the two runners he inherited to score. Joel Inoa gave up two runs in his 1.2 innings pitched while Nathan Witt finished up with 1.1 scoreless innings earning the save.

Rancho Cucamonga Quakes 5 – Visalia Rawhide 1 (Arizona)

The Quakes got a good outing from all five pitchers. Michael Grove, apparently on a 50 plus pitch count, went 2.2 innings allowing only one hit, walking two and striking out four. Wes Helsabeck did give up a run in his 1.1 innings but it was unearned. Melvin Jimemez, Ryan Moseley and Logan Salow combined for five innings giving up just one hit, walking one and striking out seven. It is time for Moseley and Salow to move on up to Tulsa.

Rancho Cucamonga had only four hits but three were for extra bases. In the second inning Devin Mann hit a solo homer, his seventh, and in the fourth inning Drew Avans hit a two run home run.  Nick Yarnell hit his fourth triple of the year in the seventh inning scoring Donovan Casey and Drew Avans who had walked.

Tulsa Drillers 3 –  Springfield Cardinals 2

Dustin May started for the Drillers and through five innings held a 1-0 lead on another lead off homer  by Gavin Lux in the top of the first inning. In the bottom of the sixth May gave up a two-run home run to  center fielder Dylon Carlson. He  was followed by Jordan Sheffield  who went 1.1 innings with a walk and two strikeouts. Marshall Kasowski picked up the win with a perfect eighth inning on 10 pitches while Shea Spitzbarth got the save with a perfect ninth inning and two strikeouts.

Trailing 2-1 in the top of the ninth the Drillers scored the winning runs on  a two-out double by Jared Walker. Logan Landon was the only Driller with two hits.

OKC Dodgers  6  –  New Orleans Cakes 5 (Miami)

Daniel Corcino started for the Dodgers and went five innings on three hits, one run, two walks and three strikeouts. Joe Broussard followed Corcino and gave up one run in 1.2 innings pitched while striking out three. He was taken out with two outs and a runner on via a HBP in the bottom of the seventh inning and replaced by Tony Cingrani who allowed the inherited runner to score and gave up an additional run. In turn Kevin Quackenbush and Jaime Schultz each gave up a run in their appearance. JT Chargois was able to strand two runners and record two outs to claim a save being the only Dodger pitcher not to concede a run.

Offensively the night belonged to Will Smith with his sound and light show. That is, a solo homer to left field in the third inning and a two-run shot to left center in the fifth inning. The winning runs actually scored in a less conventional manner on a single, a walk, a force out and a New Orleans error resulting in two runs in the top of the eighth inning.