←back to thread

302 points cf100clunk | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.216s | source
Show context
kaycebasques ◴[] No.43536546[source]
If only the Yankees get access to it (e.g. they patented it and won't let other teams use it) then I could see it as an unfair advantage. In most other areas of America life, though, this innovation would be allowed or even celebrated.

I imagine it will go the way of the brilliant strategic innovation a few years back of shifting defenders heavily depending on the batter's statistical hitting patterns. It'll get banned because it makes the game more boring. If home runs happen all the time, they lose their excitement. I imagine it's quite expensive or impossible to shift the outfield walls back farther in most MLB stadiums.

I actually would love more of a no holds barred evolutionary battle in the MLB [1] but I know it's not gonna happen.

[1] https://youtu.be/gTmLz9B8wls

replies(9): >>43536774 #>>43536821 #>>43536921 #>>43537319 #>>43537857 #>>43539516 #>>43539777 #>>43540404 #>>43540699 #
perlgeek ◴[] No.43539777[source]
> If home runs happen all the time, they lose their excitement.

So you're saying baseball gets more boring when people get better hitting the ball?

Sounds like there's something fundamentally wrong with the sport.

replies(2): >>43539899 #>>43540128 #
1. conductr ◴[] No.43539899[source]
So long as it's not a one sided advantage, the game will be fair and way more exciting. Even now, there's a huge difference in attending, and watching on TV, a game that is 1-0 going into the 9th inning versus a game that is 5-4 going into the 9th. Even though those are even matches at that point in the game, one of them feels painful the other has had some excitement. Good defense is not as exciting as productive offense.