Is It Time To Raise The Mound?

[oneupper]

I agree with you, but I think it's too late. The players union would never go for doing away with the DH.

You know, I always hear that argument. Maybe someone can help us out.

Is the DH rule a part of the CBA?
Do all rule changes need the endorsement of the players union? (as in raising the mound?)

If so, why would the players union go along with raising the mound even?
Less offense = less $$$$$ IMO.

I thought it was the Steinbrenners of the world who opposed eliminating the DH since they understand that the pitcher hitting produces tighter games and one less (overpaid) superstar they can put on the field.

[oneupper]

That is very important. If you picture a pitcher on a mountain throwing down at an 80 degree angle, the millisecond before it entered the better's sweet spot it would be at his head and the millisecond afterward it would be around his ankles. There would be little margin for error.

If I did the math right a change from 10" to 15" changes the angle from the top of mound to home plate from .789 degrees to 1.183 degrees. A small number but surely enough to make a difference to major leaguers since that is a 50% increase.

Your math is probably good, but the pitch leaves the pitchers hand which is several feet (7 maybe?) above the mound. So the angle increase the hitters would feel would be more like 4% than 50%.

[terminator]

Well true. Still a difference that major leaguers would notice.

[dabvu2498]

Do all rule changes need the endorsement of the players union? (as in raising the mound?)

From Article XVIII of the MLB CBA:

Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, if during the term of this
Agreement any playing or scoring rule is proposed to be changed, the
Clubs agree that they shall give the Association notice thereof, and
shall negotiate the proposed change with the Association, provided that
the obligation to negotiate with the Association shall apply only to
changes which significantly affect terms and conditions of employment.
Such proposals to change playing or scoring rules shall normally
be made only during the off-season. If the Clubs and the Association
fail to reach agreement on a proposed change which is subject to negotiation,
the proposed change shall not be put into effect until the completion
of the next complete succeeding season (including the Division
Series, League Championship Series and World Series) following the
date the change was proposed.

http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/pdf/cba_english.pdf

[IslandRed]

That is very important. If you picture a pitcher on a mountain throwing down at an 80 degree angle, the millisecond before it entered the better's sweet spot it would be at his head and the millisecond afterward it would be around his ankles. There would be little margin for error.

If I did the math right a change from 10" to 15" changes the angle from the top of mound to home plate from .789 degrees to 1.183 degrees. A small number but surely enough to make a difference to major leaguers since that is a 50% increase.

The actual effect would be a lot less, but anything helps.

As for me, I'm not sure I'd want to see the mound raised. The primary effect would be to increase strikeouts, and I think the game would be better if the ball was in play more, not less. I'm not sure how to fix it without messing with the baseball.

[westofyou]

Great info!

I was going to ask if Ruth had Hudepohl or Schoenling while fishing, but then realized that was during prohibition. So, it was probably no-label home brew!

The night before the Game Ruth was the man about town, with headlines like this

[Big Daddy P]

Without a doubt, boyz. Been saying this too for a while. The balance between pitching and hitting is totally out of wack. This would be a start towards equity again. ERA leaders used to be the 1st thing you saw when you looked at the stats of pitchers in the league leaders. Now it's not even listed! WTF? That says a lot.

[westofyou]

ERA leaders used to be the 1st thing you saw when you looked at the stats of pitchers in the league leaders. Now it's not even listed! WTF? That says a lot.

And in the 50's it ws HR's and RBI's and in the 30's it was batting average and in the teens it was assists, errors.. the game changes and when the game changes the important information changes, heck ERA wasn't even an official stat until after Teddy Roosevelt left the scene in D.C.

[flyer85]

with the abysmal state of official scoring I am not sure that ERA means as much anyway.

[westofyou]

Abysmal? Shoot it's way better then when the payers used to run roughshod on the official scorekeepers moments after the owners did it for a different reason.

[Chip R]

The actual effect would be a lot less, but anything helps.

As for me, I'm not sure I'd want to see the mound raised. The primary effect would be to increase strikeouts, and I think the game would be better if the ball was in play more, not less. I'm not sure how to fix it without messing with the baseball.

Aren't strikeouts at an all time high now anyway?

[Cyclone792]

Aren't strikeouts at an all time high now anyway?

A quick snapshot of the trend of NL K/9s through history ...

1905: 3.65
1925: 2.80
1945: 3.15
1965: 5.93
1985: 5.50
2005: 6.57

[RollyInRaleigh]

Raise the mound. 2007 would be fantastic.

[Roy Tucker]

Loveland has resorts?

[westofyou]

Loveland has resorts?

Back in the day, the Miami Train line went through Loveland and the Little Miami was dotted with Fish Camps, remember the railroads used to go to great lengths to create outdoorsy get-aways for the city bound folks.

The Cincinnati Free Setters hosted Babe Ruth and the Yankees at a banquet at the Hotel Gibson where the Yankees were staying. Most of the New Yorkers left that evening, but Ruth remained behind as the guest of a local attorney at “a beautiful sylvan retreat on the banks of the Little Miami River” near Loveland. Near the end of his career, Babe Ruth still remembered his Redland home runs, and declared that neither of those were Dipsy-Doos.

Cincinnati Times-Star, July 26, 1921.