MLB also denied there were issues with the ball in the past, until they were eventually faced with such overwhelming evidence that they admitted it.
Perhaps you misred. In this case they are saying that these allegations are both "wholly inaccurate" and "just plain wrong." So I think we're fine here.MLB also denied there were issues with the ball in the past,
Yeah all baseballs within specs means nothing, no one is arguing they weren't. The only reason to say that is to try to make it look like they weren't doing anything fishy.Perhaps you misred. In this case they are saying that these allegations are both "wholly inaccurate" and "just plain wrong." So I think we're fine here.
Seriously, this statement is weird. All baseballs were within specs. Ok. Not really responsive I don't think.
But then: "Multiple independent scientific experts have found no evidence of different ball designs."
Ok. What does that even mean. You had "multiple experts" test for an issue that just got reported today. Unlikely. Presumably this was about the prior reporting, which was not nearly this specific. Also, "no evidence of different ball design." Not sure exactly what this even means.
This might be fair, but I wonder when the gambling starts to factor in here. If MLB is using three different balls, how do gamblers and houses react to that?It seems like the big 3 leagues are moving more towards entertainment than strict principles of fairness and sportsmanship. I don’t know that I really care. These records aren’t actually sacred, and it was cool watching a home run race again.
In a broad sense I share some of that sentiment as well, which is why I thought the whole hype around a "clean record" was a bit much. But in this case, I would be kind of pissed because the undertones of the whole Judge HR race was that this could be "the clean record." And while the MLB may not have directly promoted it as such themselves, they certainly took advantage of it and rode the wave for the advertising. The sheer hypocrisy of that doesn't sit well with me.It seems like the big 3 leagues are moving more towards entertainment than strict principles of fairness and sportsmanship. I don’t know that I really care. These records aren’t actually sacred, and it was cool watching a home run race again.
GAZETTE:Which team did you grow up rooting for?
MANFRED: I grew up a Yankees fan.
Good point. I figure complications and conspiracies always favor the sharps and the casinos, who are the ones with the leagues’ ears.This might be fair, but I wonder when the gambling starts to factor in here. If MLB is using three different balls, how do gamblers and houses react to that?
Probably need to edit and add this to my post in the old fogey thread, but I despise the fact that the entertainment imperative is taking precedent over the competitive integrity imperative. All for personalities, celebrations, etc. But hate tricking up the on field product to make it more exciting. Think it is plenty entertaining enough without that. Make a fucking consistent baseball, and stick with it.It seems like the big 3 leagues are moving more towards entertainment than strict principles of fairness and sportsmanship. I don’t know that I really care. These records aren’t actually sacred, and it was cool watching a home run race again.
Well, they were all spherical, I do have to give them that.Perhaps you misred. In this case they are saying that these allegations are both "wholly inaccurate" and "just plain wrong." So I think we're fine here.
Seriously, this statement is weird. All baseballs were within specs. Ok. Not really responsive I don't think.
But then: "Multiple independent scientific experts have found no evidence of different ball designs."
Ok. What does that even mean. You had "multiple experts" test for an issue that just got reported today. Unlikely. Presumably this was about the prior reporting, which was not nearly this specific. Also, "no evidence of different ball design." Not sure exactly what this even means.
This is what I have been saying repeatedly for years now, it is absolutely fucking ridiculous. It is hard enough to try to build a team, how can you do that when the league drastically changes the ball every few months without telling anyone beforehand (or afterwards)?Make a fucking consistent baseball, and stick with it.
Shocked!Why would a 100+ year old league suddenly buy the ball company and change the manufacturing process as legalized gambling is exploding. Makes no sense!
It's absurd. As is their supply chain, bullshit excuse for 2021.This is what I have been saying repeatedly for years now, it is absolutely fucking ridiculous. It is hard enough to try to build a team, how can you do that when the league drastically changes the ball every few months without telling anyone beforehand (or afterwards)?
Exactly my thought, if I were some average pitcher like Frankie Montas for instance (1HR/9IP Oakland, 1.4 HR/9IP Yankees in 2022) I'd start to question if it was only park adjustment or performance that spiked my ERA last season.This sucks if it is true.
I think a livelier ball hurts the Yankees more than it helps them win. Judge and Stanton don't hit too many wall-scrapers. And Cole had problems giving up the long ball this year. It's total bullshit for reasons beyond Judge's HR record chase.
Well he did win MVP in ‘19Cody Bellinger, who has put up OPS+'s of 44 and 78 in 900 plate appearances over the last two years, gets $17.5 million!? This guy's career might be over because of his injuries, but he gets that much money!?
What a country!
Perfect!Assuming the Patriots are going to lose another first round pick over this.
And Danny will somehow end up with a $4.6m trade exceptionAssuming the Patriots are going to lose another first round pick over this.
I think it's pretty likely that a SABR award-winning astrophysicist knows how to run a T-test.205 baseballs seems like an absolutely ridiculously small sample size. If they got 5 of them from one batch in Yankee Stadium at the same game in September it basically nullifies their entire argument.
Don't get me wrong, I think MLB has a major problem with the baseball manufacturing. This just isn't enough for me to chalk it up to nefariousness as opposed to plain incompetence.
This is quite a take. It won’t be entertaining if people assume the game is fixed. When the basketball refs seem to be cooking up a competition through inequitable foul calls, it sure detracts from the game—even if it keeps it close.It seems like the big 3 leagues are moving more towards entertainment than strict principles of fairness and sportsmanship. I don’t know that I really care. These records aren’t actually sacred, and it was cool watching a home run race again.
Yes, please, someone think of the poor Yankees.This sucks if it is true.
I think a livelier ball hurts the Yankees more than it helps them win. Judge and Stanton don't hit too many wall-scrapers. And Cole had problems giving up the long ball this year. It's total bullshit for reasons beyond Judge's HR record chase.
not quite that high. Yet.Has anyone seen the ball Judge hit for the record? Last I saw it was being auctioned off for like $3M.
The yarn windings are given as the reason for the weight change: "Meanwhile, the circumference and diameter of the ball remained unchanged, which indicates that Rawlings wound the yarn around the core tighter."It wasn't just the weight (and sometimes the presence of commemorative stamps) which distinguished the goldilocks balls, it was also that the yarn windings were tighter on the inside of those, which results in more pop off the bat. If it was just weight, you could squint and say maybe it was normal variation, with a bad batch.
So adding a gram makes the balls a lot livelier ... as proof, here's a case where a league added a gram to the balls as part of an effort to make them *deader.* Huh?A one-gram difference in baseballs, while perhaps nearly imperceptible in one's hands, can be significant when played out in thousands of hits over the course of a season. When the Korea Baseball Organization, for instance, decided to deaden its ball in 2019, it did so by slightly increasing its size and adding a gram in weight; home runs dropped by a third. (While a heavier ball would ordinarily be bouncier, the corresponding increase in diameter had a deadening effect.)
They don't share what percentage of control group balls are from Yankees games, which would be pretty important for judging how nefarious it is that such a high percentage of the "Goldilocks" balls are.Our sample is not random. We got balls from whatever sources were available to us,
I mean, that was explained in the parenthetical in your very quote. Density, not just weight, is a key parameter; the Koreans making them bigger ("increasing its size" / diameter) resulted in a lower density overall, therefore lower COR. Holding the size constant, greater weight = greater COR = balls fly farther.So adding a gram makes the balls a lot livelier ... as proof, here's a case where a league added a gram to the balls as part of an effort to make them *deader.* Huh?
Yes, winding the yarn tighter means more of it can get into a ball of the same size, slightly increasing its weight and thus density and thus COR. Although they described the tightness of the yarn as a separate factor from the weight, presumably affecting how it transfers energy and controls the shock waves running through the ball at the moment of impact.The yarn windings are given as the reason for the weight change: "Meanwhile, the circumference and diameter of the ball remained unchanged, which indicates that Rawlings wound the yarn around the core tighter."
It's a bizarre paragraph. The initial sentence suggests the example is going to paint a picture of what a 1-gram difference can mean, but then the example doesn't do that at all. You would get points marked off for a terrible example in a middle school essay assignment; I can't believe this made it past an editor.I mean, that was explained in the parenthetical in your very quote. Density, not just weight, is a key parameter; the Koreans making them bigger ("increasing its size" / diameter) resulted in a lower density overall, therefore lower COR. Holding the size constant, greater weight = greater COR = balls fly farther.
My reading is that there aren't two factors here. There's more center weight at the same density, so it's inferred that the yarn is wound tighter.Which explains this:
Yes, winding the yarn tighter means more of it can get into a ball of the same size, slightly increasing its weight and thus density and thus COR. Although they described the tightness of the yarn as a separate factor from the weight, presumably affecting how it transfers energy and controls the shock waves running through the ball at the moment of impact.
That this separate set of balls were both weightier (= more dense) as well as having tighter-wound yarn, are two factors whose concurrence more strongly suggests that the categorical difference in balls was intentional on the part of the league and Rawlings.