Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Josh Rovner's avatar

One other thought about how few pitchers Ted Williams faced in 1941: think of how much easier it must have been to be a fan back then. If you just discovered baseball on Opening Day and read the morning edition of the Boston Globe and listened to a few games (all taking place in the afternoon), how long would it take you to learn the starting lineup for your own team and the best pitchers on the other seven American League teams? Combine that fact with all the folks who tell stories about sneaking into the old ballparks without paying, you can understand why baseball was once the county's most popular sport. *You* can understand this, unless *you* own a baseball team, in which case you have no idea why anyone likes baseball and act accordingly.

Tom Martinsky's avatar

I think about this a lot. Not complete games, maybe, but ways to make baseball more entertaining. To me, strikeouts and walks are boring, balls in play and fielders making plays and baserunners taking the extra base are what's fun. I think the best way to make baseball more interesting and fun is to lessen the number of pitchers a team can use. I just don't know how you do it in a way that is not heavy handed and not fraught with unintended consequences. But it would be better if pitchers had to throw enough innings so that they're not ALL throwing 95+ MPH seeds on every pitch. I've been watching baseball since the 60s, and the players are the most talented they've ever been but at the same time the game is a less enjoyable spectator sport than it's ever been. That shouldn't be.

88 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?