Thought you might like to hear about something I’ve been following for the first week of the season. I began wondering at the large number of long home runs being hit in the first two full days of the season, and started watching the numbers closely. The distance of the home runs being hit this year (the true distance, i.e where they actually land, as well as the standard distance, which factors out weather and altitude) is significantly higher than last year, with the average standard distance being 8.5 feet longer this year than last…

…The p-value actually works out to 0.0000341, which is a very strong indicator that something is making 2009 home runs fly farther than 2008 home runs, in isolation of the weather, and to me that implicates the ball. In the course of observing all the homers, I have also heard lots of comments from announcers who were surprised at how far the ball had carried.

Greg from Hit Tracker via Tango

A+ for Fields so far.

This year, however, that doesn’t seem to be the case. MLB is averaging 4.96 runs per game so far in 2009, up from a league average 4.65 runs per game in 2008. It’s pretty rare to see run scoring in April higher than the league average from the previous season.

The main culprit appears to be a rise in home run rate. Last April, there was ahome run hit every 43 plate appearances. That number ended the season at one per 38 PA, as the ball flew better in warmer weather. So far this year, we’re at one home run per 34 plate appearances, accounting for 311 total home runs to date. At last year’s pace, we’d only have 248 home runs.

According to Greg Rybarczyk, who runs Hit Tracker Online, it isn’t just the number of home runs being hit either – the home runs are flying further than they used to, by an average of 8.5 feet per home run. Even with a limited sample, the probability of a deviation of that kind of distance is extremely unlikely to be caused by random chance.

After seeing run scoring levels decrease the last few years, we might be in for a spike in 2009. It’s worth monitoring, at least.

fangraphs blog

He’s a line drive monster so far

http://www.fangraphs.com/graphs.aspx?playerid=7490&position=3B&page=1&type=mini

fangraphs.

he’s striking out a ton, still, but he’s cut it down somewhat while his walk rate has improved drastically. his BB/K has doubled to .56 from .28 in 2007. his BABIP is ridiculous.

he doesn’t have a new swing. stances change somewhat regularly if watching the Sox are any indication. the basics of your swing mechanics usually don’t.

Coming in you knew CF was going to be a black hole. 2B, I figured about average to a little below average production – Getz had pretty steady put unspectacular minor league numbers. But Fields has been a hugely pleasant surprise so far – I don’t think he’ll have a monster year like Q did, but he looks like he can have a pretty major positive impact on this season.

I love young players, they’re the ones who can really surprise you in a good way.

http://smellslikemascot.blogspot.com/2009/04/playoffs-at-uc.html

which one of you jokesters painted over the “preview” and “post” buttons in white?

WHITE SOX

Getz 2b

Fields 3b

Quentin lf

Thome dh

Dye rf

Konerko 1b

Pierzynski c

Ramirez ss

Anderson cf

Colon p

TAMPA BAY

Upton cf

Crawford lf

Longoria 3b

Pena 1b

Burrell dh

Navarro c

Gross rf

Iwamura 2b

Bartlett ss

Shields p

White Sox third baseman Josh Fields and Chris Getz took early infield work under dim lighting conditions.

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2009/04/white-soxtampa-bay-lineups-friday-night.html

Colon against Shields, yikes

We barely won with our best pitcher against their worst yesterday

and why i’ve probably been a bit higher on him than others. first, we often joke on here about “player x was a football player.” well, josh was a quarterback in college. while some get caught up in the he must be tough or he must be an athlete pomp which surrounds such things, probably the more important thing to keep in mind is that, unlike other players his age at the time – whether in college or in the minors – he wasn’t focusing on baseball year round. so his depth of experience is shallower than other players his age. this is probably something that has less and less relevance as the years pass but it’s still there and i think especially shows up in his defense – he was taking snaps in the fall instead of grounders.

second, josh is a makeup guy. like, extreme high end if you’re going to chart it. you can see evidence of this in this past offseason when he basically moved to florida to work with cora on his defense. while makeup also isn’t going to overcome a lack of skill, a main tenet of scouting is that good makeup guys are more likely to exceed expectations, while bad makeup guys are more likely to fall short of them.