04/19/24
August 28, 2008
A Radical 'Radial' Solution:: "Even under the most severe conditions, the worst that will happen with one of the Radial Bats is one of the wedges will crack. No danger will be presented to any of the players, umpires, coaches or spectators in the stadium."
It may prove to be somewhat critical that the bat has a larger sweet spot...
Baseball has long been said to be "a game of inches". The difference between a warning track fly ball out and a home run is often just a fraction of an inch on where the bat hit the ball. While it is true that baseball records have been affected by many factors, a change in the bat is not one of them. Enlarging the 'sweet spot', however slightly, could alter the game and its records.
posted by Howard_T at 01:10 PM on August 28, 2008
I'd be more willing to watch an offensive explosion then any more injuries caused by flying shrapnel. Most interesting to me is the idea that making a bat out of many pieces of wood will actually prevent the bat from shattering into many pieces of wood.
posted by BoKnows at 01:29 PM on August 28, 2008
I'm with bo on this one. Maple bats, which have become very prevalent in the game, have shown an alarming tendency to shatter which endangers everybody on the field of play. I think the possibility of an offensive explosion is a fine price to pay for a safer game of baseball.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 01:52 PM on August 28, 2008
Besides which, MLB could just raise the mound or do something else to mitigate the batters' new advantage.
posted by ursus_comiter at 04:40 PM on August 28, 2008
Hm- that's good thinking, ursus. They should test these bats thoroughly- I like the idea that they are less likely to shatter, and probably last longer/use less wood. If the sweet spot is larger, raise the mound a couple of inches to help compensate.
I believe part of the reason for the maple bats' prevalence is precisely because their characteristics include a greater coefficient of restitution, and I guess a larger sweet spot. However, I've said before that from my understanding of the physics of hitting, the hitters would actually get better performance, and lessen the breaking of the bats, by using wider handles. They should consider using wider handled bats- adding a clause to the rules that maple bats can't have a handle thinner than N centimeters in diameter- if that would accomplish the same thing as experimenting with new bats, or outlawing maple altogether.
posted by hincandenza at 05:04 PM on August 28, 2008
Good point Hal. But, like the blades of hockey sticks, players can and will tweak their equipment to their own preference. Whether it be the thickness of the handle or the curve of the stick, a piece of equipment that left the warehouse meeting all legal criteria is bound to be 'adjusted' after arrival. Leaving the only fool-proof method of confirmation to the home plate umpire prior to every at-bat.
Although, maybe MLB would go for that. It sure would make the games longer and allow for more ads.
posted by BoKnows at 05:51 PM on August 28, 2008
Why fix what is not broken I played from the time I was big enough to hold a bat (A REAL BAT) We got bumped and brusied but that was all part of the game. Whats next rubber balls come on people quit being sissys PLAY BALL!!
posted by leprachuan64 at 08:23 AM on August 29, 2008
people quit being sissys PLAY BALL
Except that the people who have been injured, an umpire, a coach, and a fan, are not playing the game, nor are they expecting to get bumped and bruised.
posted by irunfromclones at 03:10 AM on September 02, 2008
I'm intrigued by this, because MLB has had a long, long standing rule that bats must be turned on a lathe from a single piece of wood. If they allow this kind of bat- and if it passes a rigorous testing system and proves to be safer, why not- that would be one of the most significant equipment changes in the game's history. It also would be environmentally more sound: turning out 12 much thinner pieces of wood is easier than getting the lumber thick enough to turn a single bat.
It may prove to be somewhat critical that the bat has a larger sweet spot; it's disingenuous for the inventor to say that it's okay because the ball doesn't travel any further than with a regular bat. The way hitting works, it's the rule and not the exception that the ball is hit away from the optimal sweet spot. A larger sweet spot = more swings that put the ball in play with a "good" contact, and thus if a bat like this gets used regularly and is as described, we could see an offensive explosion as batting averages and even power numbers go back up.