http://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/articl...39-percent

This link has a comparison in stats between this year and last, assessing the impact of the new ball. Of note, HRs are up 39%. Also sacrifice hits are down to 0.66 per team per game from 0.76 for 2014. The average team has two successful bunts in three games. Also, for every four successful bunts, there are three home runs.

So we are still playing with the old ball? /s

It looks like it sometimes. :)

(04-02-2015 06:55 AM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  So we are still playing with the old ball? /s

(04-02-2015 10:14 AM)OldOwl Wrote:  It looks like it sometimes. :)

(04-02-2015 06:55 AM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  So we are still playing with the old ball? /s

...saving money and not using the new balls until the old ones run out is good fiscal stewardship. j/k

(04-02-2015 10:23 AM)13thOwl Wrote:  

(04-02-2015 10:14 AM)OldOwl Wrote:  It looks like it sometimes. :)

(04-02-2015 06:55 AM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  So we are still playing with the old ball? /s

...saving money and not using the new balls until the old ones run out is good fiscal stewardship. j/k

It's always about the money with you ! You a bean counter or sumfin

Midseason report shows Division I baseball home runs up 39 percent | NCAA.com

http://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/articl...39-percent Wrote:As of March 29, runs scored in a game are up five percent, and the batting average is basically flat from .268 in 2014 to .269 in 2015. However, this season, strikeouts have risen from 6.64 per nine innings in 2014 to 7.34 per nine innings in 2015, an increase of 10.5 percent.

This makes me wonder how much the change in ball is responsible for the change in results. If both strikeouts and HR go up, that could just be a result of more kids swinging for the fences than swinging to make contact. If HR went up without an increase in strikeouts, then I'd say there's more to it than a change in approach by the batters.

Maybe if they'd phased in the new balls by having a year with a controlled study involving placebos, the collegiate baseball amateur statisticians society would've been a bit more happy...

(04-01-2015 07:42 PM)Owl Is In Chains Wrote:  http://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/articl...39-percent

This link has a comparison in stats between this year and last, assessing the impact of the new ball. Of note, HRs are up 39%. Also sacrifice hits are down to 0.66 per team per game from 0.76 for 2014. The average team has two successful bunts in three games. Also, for every four successful bunts, there are three home runs.

Good post. Not only is the introduction of fact-based analysis to the message board very welcome (especially in a first post), but your user name is top notch.

(04-02-2015 11:34 AM)I45owl Wrote:  Midseason report shows Division I baseball home runs up 39 percent | NCAA.com

http://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/articl...39-percent Wrote:As of March 29, runs scored in a game are up five percent, and the batting average is basically flat from .268 in 2014 to .269 in 2015. However, this season, strikeouts have risen from 6.64 per nine innings in 2014 to 7.34 per nine innings in 2015, an increase of 10.5 percent.

This makes me wonder how much the change in ball is responsible for the change in results. If both strikeouts and HR go up, that could just be a result of more kids swinging for the fences than swinging to make contact. If HR went up without an increase in strikeouts, then I'd say there's more to it than a change in approach by the batters.

Maybe if they'd phased in the new balls by having a year with a controlled study involving placebos, the collegiate baseball amateur statisticians society would've been a bit more happy...

I think you may be overthinking this a little.

When batters don't think they can get the ball out of the park (last year) they might cut down on their swing and try to drive it where it is pitched (resulting in fewer K's).

Conversely, once they see the new ball carries further, they may be more likely to take bigger cuts, thinking they can put it out if the park.

Thus the new ball would accomplish both results. The percentage increase in HRs might be a tad higher as a result of some players changing their approach, but the change in approach would not have occurred if there had not already been a noticeable increase in distance (HRs) due to a livelier ball.

In other words in this case you can probably assume which came first, the chicken or the egg.

(04-02-2015 02:50 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 07:42 PM)Owl Is In Chains Wrote:  http://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/articl...39-percent

This link has a comparison in stats between this year and last, assessing the impact of the new ball. Of note, HRs are up 39%. Also sacrifice hits are down to 0.66 per team per game from 0.76 for 2014. The average team has two successful bunts in three games. Also, for every four successful bunts, there are three home runs.

Good post. Not only is the introduction of fact-based analysis to the message board very welcome (especially in a first post), but your user name is top notch.

Agree.

It's also good to see the positive impact on the game the ball has had, and that Rice was at the forefront of pushing for this change.

(04-02-2015 02:50 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 07:42 PM)Owl Is In Chains Wrote:  http://www.ncaa.com/news/baseball/articl...39-percent

This link has a comparison in stats between this year and last, assessing the impact of the new ball. Of note, HRs are up 39%. Also sacrifice hits are down to 0.66 per team per game from 0.76 for 2014. The average team has two successful bunts in three games. Also, for every four successful bunts, there are three home runs.

Good post. Not only is the introduction of fact-based analysis to the message board very welcome (especially in a first post), but your user name is top notch.

Is the user from Seaowltle?