Strikeouts are killing baseball

I've wondered about that, mostly because he threw sidearm.

 

Wouldn't college bats only exacerbate the problem? They don't make contact more frequently, but instead just cause the ball to travel further when contact is made. That'd only worsen the problem of too many home runs comparative to balls put in play.

If anything, the current game needs weaker bats (and weaker arms on the mound).

 

Yep, his sidearm/ submarine motion probably had a lot to do with it, but in pre-WWII baseball, that was much more common than today.

Today, a submariner throwing 90-95 would probably be a sensation. But in 1910-1925, maybe one-fourth of pitchers were sidearmers. The motion itself wouldn't have been considered real unusual.

 

Walk of Shame Dick Whitman is my favorite Dick Whitman.

 

I was at that ASG in Camden Yards in 1993. Funny as hell.

 

Moving the slab back to 63 feet, 6 inches, would probably make a significant but not disastrous difference.

There's nothing sacred about 60-6. There's no logical geometrical reason for it. It was just a distance they arrived at in the 1890s out of trial and error. It could just as well have been 62-6 or 64-6.

 

Stop calling strikes on pitches right below the kneecap.

 

Is there some reason it has to end in 6 inches?

Moving the slab back sounds logical on the surface, but keep in mind that a third of the problem plaguing the current game is too damn many walks, in addition to strikeouts and homers. I'm afraid any reduction in strikeouts from a lengthier mound would likely be more than offset by an increase in walks. Especially in the short run.

 

Expand the zone along with it.

 

No. I think previous to 60-6, the pitcher's pitching stride had to end a minimum of 50 feet from the plate. Moving the slab (i.e. The rear foot) back to 60-6 really only shortened the actual distance of the pitch about five feet, but made it easier for umpires to call a "legal" pitching motion.

In the 1880s, they screwed around with the pitching distance/ legal motions pretty much every year.

At some points in the 1880s, pitchers were required to throw underhand, but were allowed to take a full running start before they released the pitch (similar to cricket bowlers today).

 

In years past that would mean about a four-team expansion, but no way are there that many untapped or underserved markets for baseball to thrive in.

 

Ehh, there are certainly four (or maybe 10) more markets where baseball could conceivably (or even reasonably) succeed with a well run franchise.

Not even counting overseas expansion which will eventually happen someday.