|
Post by FB fan on Apr 2, 2012 7:54:37 GMT -6
I played when all bats were made of wood so I am very familiar with what wood bats perform like. These new bats are NOT like wooden bats. The aluminum bats were too lively and these are too dead. They need to go back to the drawing board on this one and keep the helicopter over protective safety nuts out of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2012 8:02:55 GMT -6
You got that right. The stats kind of prove it as far as HR production.
|
|
|
Post by FB fan on Apr 2, 2012 8:24:20 GMT -6
You got that right. The stats kind of prove it as far as HR production. Here is a new homework assignment for the Cal king of the stats. What was the HR and hitting stats the last time wood bats were used compared to this season so far using these new bats? I will bet you wood was better.
|
|
|
Post by johnnyduval on Apr 2, 2012 8:30:09 GMT -6
FB isn't much of a HR park, but Calallen is and that is where you can see the difference. Cal played 42 games last year and hit 61 HR's. With half of the games played this year (21), Cal only has 14 HR's so if everything stays on pace, their HR production will have decreased more than 50% since the BBCOR's have been forced on them. Hopefully they are in the labs now trying to get a better design.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2012 8:35:27 GMT -6
FB isn't much of a HR park, but Calallen is and that is where you can see the difference. Cal played 42 games last year and hit 61 HR's. With half of the games played this year (21), Cal only has 14 HR's so if everything stays on pace, their HR production will have decreased more than 50% since the BBCOR's have been forced on them. Hopefully they are in the labs now trying to get a better design. Some of the stats from the Colleges used them last year and saw their HR production decrease. It should not be a surprise. I don't know if it's that big of a factor, but a good number of our games this year have been played with less win than we normally get this time of year which like you note, makes the Cal ballpark a good HR ballpark. I'd like to see our HR production on the road vs home in not so friendly HR ballparks whether the wind being a factor or not.
|
|
|
Post by FB fan on Apr 2, 2012 8:48:35 GMT -6
The comparison I want to see is the new bats compared to wood that they were supposed to approximate.
|
|
|
Post by johnnyduval on Apr 2, 2012 8:50:41 GMT -6
FB isn't much of a HR park, but Calallen is and that is where you can see the difference. Cal played 42 games last year and hit 61 HR's. With half of the games played this year (21), Cal only has 14 HR's so if everything stays on pace, their HR production will have decreased more than 50% since the BBCOR's have been forced on them. Hopefully they are in the labs now trying to get a better design. Some of the stats from the Colleges used them last year and saw their HR production decrease. It should not be a surprise. I don't know if it's that big of a factor, but a good number of our games this year have been played with less win than we normally get this time of year which like you note, makes the Cal ballpark a good HR ballpark. I'd like to see our HR production on the road vs home in not so friendly HR ballparks whether the wind being a factor or not. Max Preps shows Calallen hitting their first 8 HR's in the Valley and Smithson Valley tournaments combined. After that, they have hit 6 at home and none on the road. FB has hit 4 HR's this year with 3 of them hit during the Calallen tournament. There has only been 1 HR hit out of FB's park this year and that was from Humpal. We have had some deep shots, 2 by Hawkins, that fell just shy of the promised land. Hawkins was pretty much cussing our field after that.
|
|
|
Post by johnnyduval on Apr 2, 2012 8:52:29 GMT -6
The comparison I want to see is the new bats compared to wood that they were supposed to approximate. The only comparison might come from the "All Wood Bat" tournaments in the summer. Of course their are other factors to consider, but it may provide a little analysis that is useful.
|
|
|
Post by DD Booger on Apr 2, 2012 8:53:16 GMT -6
I'm fine with it. I think more of the talent stands out. Just my opinion. College ball has become small ball where in the past if you watched a game you'd likely see 6-7 homers on the reg.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2012 8:57:41 GMT -6
I'm fine with it. I think more of the talent stands out. Just my opinion. College ball has become small ball where in the past if you watched a game you'd likely see 6-7 homers on the reg. Valid point. More attention will have to be paid to base running on offense and of course, picking off runners on Defense. And most importantly, sound defense from your infield. It would sort of be like going from the spread to ball control in football if teams across the nation went to it. The dynamics across the board will change.
|
|
|
Post by FB fan on Apr 2, 2012 9:10:43 GMT -6
The comparison I want to see is the new bats compared to wood that they were supposed to approximate. The only comparison might come from the "All Wood Bat" tournaments in the summer. Of course their are other factors to consider, but it may provide a little analysis that is useful. Cal has stats from many years past. What year was the last year for wood bats? I am NOT fine with the dead bats. As Yogi might say, this ain't baseball. To be clear, I never liked aluminum bats either for the same reason but in the other direction.
|
|
|
Post by catfromwayback on Apr 2, 2012 11:01:14 GMT -6
I am still trying to see the point of the BBCOR. I was told that it was to protect the pitchers from line drives. I was also told that if you connect with a BBCOR bat on the smaller "sweet spot", it comes off the bat just as fast as it did with the old bats. I saw Neslony hit a homerun over the scoreboard at Calallen Saturday that I doubt would have gone any further with the old bats. He caught it well. My question is: If you connect well with the BBCOR and it reacts the same as with the old bats, who are you really protecting? Most line drives back up the middle are hit well and off the "sweet spot" so there really is no difference in the velocity of the ball heading back to the pitcher. Personally, I hate the BBCOR. It just makes the game less exciting unless you are a fan of the lazy fly ball to the outfield.
|
|
|
Post by DD Booger on Apr 2, 2012 11:56:27 GMT -6
I am still trying to see the point of the BBCOR. I was told that it was to protect the pitchers from line drives. I was also told that if you connect with a BBCOR bat on the smaller "sweet spot", it comes off the bat just as fast as it did with the old bats. I saw Neslony hit a homerun over the scoreboard at Calallen Saturday that I doubt would have gone any further with the old bats. He caught it well. My question is: If you connect well with the BBCOR and it reacts the same as with the old bats, who are you really protecting? Most line drives back up the middle are hit well and off the "sweet spot" so there really is no difference in the velocity of the ball heading back to the pitcher. Personally, I hate the BBCOR. It just makes the game less exciting unless you are a fan of the lazy fly ball to the outfield. I think the sweet spot on the bat is smaller on the new bats CFWB, whereas the other bat was basically a stick of dynamite.
|
|
|
Post by FB fan on Apr 2, 2012 13:00:32 GMT -6
Holy cow. Just google wood vs BBCOR to see a whole LOT of talking going on about this.
|
|
|
Post by catfromwayback on Apr 2, 2012 21:26:39 GMT -6
I am still trying to see the point of the BBCOR. I was told that it was to protect the pitchers from line drives. I was also told that if you connect with a BBCOR bat on the smaller "sweet spot", it comes off the bat just as fast as it did with the old bats. I saw Neslony hit a homerun over the scoreboard at Calallen Saturday that I doubt would have gone any further with the old bats. He caught it well. My question is: If you connect well with the BBCOR and it reacts the same as with the old bats, who are you really protecting? Most line drives back up the middle are hit well and off the "sweet spot" so there really is no difference in the velocity of the ball heading back to the pitcher. Personally, I hate the BBCOR. It just makes the game less exciting unless you are a fan of the lazy fly ball to the outfield. I think the sweet spot on the bat is smaller on the new bats CFWB, whereas the other bat was basically a stick of dynamite. I am aware of the smaller sweet spot, Booger. That is my whole point. If hit on the smaller sweet spot, the ball still comes off with the same velocity it did off the old bats with the larger sweet spot. Now...if the new sweet spot was less lively instead of just smaller, it would make more sense in the "protect the pitcher" reasoning. Kind of like wearing half a helmet on a motorcycle.
|
|