You hear people say that pitching is too dominant and we need more offense in the game. My belief is that just because people say something, well, that doesn’t make it true. But let’s not assume that they’re wrong, either. Let’s approach this question of offense with an open mind. It seems to me that the first thing to settle is how we’re going to measure offense.
My opinion is that the first mistake people make is that they’ll measure it by AVG. If there’s a game with 10 hits and no runs scored – is that a good offensive game? While that’s an extreme example, it’s very clear to me that we need to look at this issue thru the prism of runs scored.
If we settle on runs as our metric – what’s the ideal for runs scored in a game? That will differ depending on who gets asked the question. And it’s likely tied at least a little bit to what the game was like when you first became a fan. If you came of age when a walk, a stolen base, a sac bunt and a sac fly was the preferred way to score, you have a different view than of those who became fans with three-run homers.
But it’s probably safe to say that the ideal for run scoring isn’t the 3.42 rpg of 1968 or the 5.14 of 2000. But if we add those two together and divide by two, we get 4.28 rpg. That’s not the hands-down-correct answer. But it’s somewhere in that vicinity. Maybe it’s 4.20 or maybe it’s 4.40. The exact number isn’t really that important. A ballpark figure is fine.
So, what’s scoring like here in 2024? Here at the All-Star break, MLB clubs are averaging 4.39 rpg.
That seems pretty close to ideal. So why are people complaining? Well, people love to complain. And the people who run the game let others define what’s “good” or what’s “bad.” We could look at objective marks, like attendance or tv ratings. The 1961 Yankees, who won 109 games and saw Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle engage in an epic HR chase of Babe Ruth’s single-season mark, drew 1,747,725 fans. The 2023 Yankees won 82 games and drew 3,269,016 fans.
The attendance is a slam dunk for today’s game. The tv ratings aren’t as clear because of the different landscape of all of the channels and all of the streaming services available today that weren’t available at any point in the past. But the tv numbers this year are above what they’ve been recently – and not by a small amount, ether. A recent Yankees game was the most-watched ESPN game since Opening Day in 2022 and a Dodgers’ game on Fox was up 14% from a Yankees-Red Sox game from the same week last year.
This is the type of thing that everyone involved in MLB should be shouting from the mountaintop. Instead, we hear that there’s a problem with offense. It’s like the Wilpon-era Mets in that you just wish the people in power would get out of their own way. It would be great to see the league do a better job of promoting the players and the product on the field. There’s great pitching and great hitting and we should be hearing about that rather than baseless claims about not enough offense.
Having grown up with both small ball and Earl Weaver’s love of the 3-run homer, it seems the answer falls back to pitching. A Google search reveals that in 1901 (no I’m not that old) the average starter went 8.7 innings. In 1975 it was a little over seven innings and in 2012 it was just over six innings. In 2024 it’s not quite five and a third and takes an average of 86 pitches to get there. So is it fair to reason that not having to rely on an overworked pen nearly every night would make that four plus runs a game go further? Seems teams are more successful when their starters go longer which would seem to reflect that they are holding the opposition down. The Mets generally seem to score a sufficient amount of runs but their overworked pen gives leads back often too quickly.
While I appreciate the comment, I’m not sure what the complaint about Mets starters being pulled early leading to an overworked bullpen has to do with what we should consider the ideal amount of offense for MLB teams in a given season.
I think theres a short story here. Enough offense to win games.
Solid pitching could mean a couple runs.
Lousy pitching might need 8.
I don’t believe you’re looking at this think-piece in the right way.
In terms of enjoyment for fans in 2024 – are we not seeing enough offense on a day-to-day basis? Are pitchers too dominant? Is there not enough offense present in the game? Jerry Koosman got enough offensive support to win 19 games in 1968. But nearly everyone thought there wasn’t enough offense in the game at that point, so they lowered the mound. Are we at a similar point here in 2024?
I think the amount of offense is fine. There’s no way we are looking at the doping era tallies. However, I’d give anything to see 50% less foul balls. I’d still make the third foul ball after 2 strikes an out. If you cant put the ball between the lines, then time to sit down. And it would shorten games, I think.
I know you’ve mentioned this before.
My opinion is that most people think there are too many strikeouts in the game now and this would only increase that number. It would definitely make the games shorter. It would decrease offense, too.
I like this thought piece, Brian. As I think about games that I’ve enjoyed, there is quite a range. As a fan, I love a slugfest. But I also like to see a well-played pitcher’s duel, with few hits, 1-2 runs, and importantly, no errors and minimal walks. I want to see hitters raking but I also want to see pitchers dealing. Errors and especially walks are huge buzzkills.
Perhaps for me it boils down to a competitive, well-played game, regardless of the number of runs. This is all meant to be objective, of course. In reality, if the Mets win, I don’t really care if they win a sloppy blowout or eke one out in the 12th innning.
Thanks Bull!
I like an occasional pitching duel but I don’t want to see 100 of them in a 162-game season. Maybe it’s not feasible to engineer the exact type of offense that any of us would prefer.
Guess I just don’t see the problem with where we’re at now.
This is a wonderful site. Thank you.
if we’re only looking at the number of runs scored to correlate to enjoyment, my preferred metric would be variance instead of average. I don’t think we would want to watch 4-3 games every day. We want some 1-0 games, some blow outs, and everything in-between.
There’s probably another metric around lead changes. That’s just a start.
Thanks for the kind words!
We hope you’ll be a regular reader and commenter from now on.