Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

Baseball needs to Jui Jitsu the idea that "BASEBALL IS BORING".

The endless repetition of this phrase needs to stop.

Grasshopper... when you can take this trouble from my land... it will be time for you to PLAY BALL!

When someone says to you, "Baseball is boring", Jui Jitsu would have you grab the naive idiot by his heresy, and go with it, using his momentum to throw the idiot into realizing the greatness of the game and come up smiling -

So, how does that work in detail?

sorry but you either "get" that the situation changes with EVERY pitch or you don't...
explaining it to the Average Joe who only sees action when the ball is is play or sailing over the fence is futile...
you will get just as far trying to explain physics to a worm!!

Walk home run strikeout

Average game has gone from an hour 52 minutes in 1930 to over 3 hours last year, kind of the opposite of jiu jitsu which is intense and quick and intellectual using the force that is applied against you. It is true in the past baseball was more jiu jitsu. Pitchers have gone from 1.4 per game to 4.3 even with DH. It has been an accelerating game solved by computer model using humans and has turned into boring garbage over the last 15 years.

gkhd11a wrote:Walk home run strikeout

Yup.

But to meet your request divad, how about "Modern Baseball is boring." Certainly could say that ratings, attendance, and ad prices potentially support that statement.

The underlying beauty of the traditional game's nuances have been eclipsed by the modern game's walks, homeruns, and strikeouts.

The only saving grace is the occasional sap who almost ties themself into a knot when a bunt play is put on. Those moments, as seldom as they are, can be funny.

I was reading an article on how the game has gotten so much worse. But here are the ACTUAL differences:

"The average game in 1988 took two hours, 45 minutes and gave you 57 balls in play and 11 strikeouts. The average game today takes 19 minutes longer and gives you 49 balls in play and 17 strikeouts."

And also:

Time of Game

2:49

3:04

Pitches

287

298

Plate Appearances

78

76

Pitches Without Ball in Play

232

249

Percentage of Pitches Without Ball in Play

81%

84%

Minutes Between Balls in Play

3:04

3:45

Those changes dont look that big to me. Game is 19 minutes longer. Over a three hour game you see eight more balls in play. This is that big of a deal?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com ... e-baseball

freeman wrote:I was reading an article on how the game has gotten so much worse. But here are the ACTUAL differences:

"The average game in 1988 took two hours, 45 minutes and gave you 57 balls in play and 11 strikeouts. The average game today takes 19 minutes longer and gives you 49 balls in play and 17 strikeouts."

And also:

Time of Game

2:49

3:04

Pitches

287

298

Plate Appearances

78

76

Pitches Without Ball in Play

232

249

Percentage of Pitches Without Ball in Play

81%

84%

Minutes Between Balls in Play

3:04

3:45

Those changes dont look that big to me. Game is 19 minutes longer. Over a three hour game you see eight more balls in play. This is that big of a deal?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com ... e-baseball

The difference works out to a ball in play every 5.8 minutes versus a ball in play every 2.89 minutes. I would say that is huge difference in activity. Imagine running a marathon in 2 hours 45 minutes versus 5 hours and 40 minutes and saying that is not much of a difference virtually the same.

I think the 3.04 and 3.45 figures are roughly correct. On average you have to wait 45 seconds more for a ball to be put in play.

Actually, since presumably time between innings has stayed the differences would be more concentrated in actual gameplay. I am not sure what that would be.

I saw an article saying there are 42 minutes of commercials in a game. So it's 3.16 minutes vs 2.31 minutes for actual gameplay. That's just length of game minus commercial time. There are actually only 18 minutes of action (the above was from a survey by WSJ--wouldnt call that scientific but maybe at least gives a general gist of things)

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424 ... 2341903720