OT: Any baseball fans seeing MLB player regression at fundamentals?

Remember when it was unheard of throwing behind a runner, swinging at a 3-0 pitch, getting thrown out at home plate with less than 2 outs?    

None of those formerly unwritten rules seem to appy anymore, and what makes it even worse is the youth imitating the pros they see on tv.    

I prefer fundamentals and team play over what seems to be more selfish, hero-ball.

and.......

Get off my lawn!

Fundamentals haven't regressed as a whole, there are just more offense-first players dotting lineups, which is in response to the ability of modern pitching. The fundamentals are still there, they just aren't executed as consistently, because being able to hit pitcher after pitcher throwing 100+ with wicked breaking balls is more important than hitting the cutoff man 90% of the time instead of 80% of the time.

The data says otherwise, so I think it's probably more a memory artifact or just the fact that you're seeing those "low" lights in the highlight reels because they were game-changing plays, not because they were representative of overall quality of fielding.  Looking at the fielding errors per game on Baseball reference shows a pretty clear trending down in errors-per game over the decades. 

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/majors/field.shtml

This is either recency bias, the result of a selective data set, or perhaps an explanation for why your Cubs have outscored opponents by 75 runs on the year but are only 4 games over .500. 

If I'm reading the stats right, it looks like errors per 9 innings are overall down this year and notably so against historical data.  And errant throws home by outfielders have always been common: it's one of the reasons defensive assists are so exciting. You are trying to throw a ball at maximum velocity hundreds of feet to a single point with the exact correct trajectory. It's insanely hard.

In sum, it is ridiculous that the Brewers (go Crew!) are currently winning the division. Probably won't last.

Give me Greg Maddox and Wade Boggs. 

I see the Tigers make little league type fielding errors almost daily.

I don't think fundamentals are worse ... but there's nothing worse than players not having a sense of game time and place.  It's only anecdotal, and maybe I watch too much of a typically bad team (Reds), but I feel "hero play" at the expense of "smart baseball" has been on the rise.

An example.  Few weeks ago, Reds hosting the Brewers.  3-2 Cinci, top of the 8th, 0 out, Milwaukee has runners on the corners.  Important moment in the game.  Fly ball to middle-deep CF: it's clearly deep enough to score the run but TJ Friedl still tries the hero throw home.  So the runner on 1st gets 2nd base for free: a single now scores him and an inning-ending ground-ball DP is now out-of-play.  Naturally, the next batter singles: 4-3 Milwaukee and that's the final score.

That's just bad, bad baseball.

I did some quick spot checks between 1984-2022.

Total errors in MLB were 2573 in 2022, which was the lowest I saw.  1984, for example had 3527 total errors.  1995 had 2911, 2000 had 3447, 2018 had 2792.

Fielding percentage seems the highest over the last 5 years (.985/.986) vs where it’s probably closer to .981 as you look back over the last 40 years 

How about that throw home by Tauchman, though. You don't see that every day. As for the Cubs, that series with the Reds was just rife with errors by the Reds. I think there's more hero ball, or attempted hero ball, nowadays. Guys want to make the big play rather than the smart play. When it works, like with that Tauchman play at home, it's very exciting. 

Yes.  Tim Anderson needs to keep his hands up and head moving.

Traditional expectations vs actual data is my guess to some degree. I think the old unwritten rules about how the game should be played have come into question as a result of the analytics that show probabilities and what should be done vs. what is just traditionally accepted.

In football, it was unheard of to go for 2... unless absolutely critical, over time, the expected value of the 2 pt conversion, and the game situation, played a huge role in increasing the frequency.  

The arrival of the 3 ptr in basketball had a similar effect to long-range 2 point shooting, where everyone said that nobody had basic fundamentals to use the backboard or take shots inside the arc, but the data said.. it was idiotic to take a 2 ptr inside the 3... and eventually we've adjusted and the NBA is predominantly a drive or 3pt league. Anything in between has a poorer outcome over the long haul.

Also, I think skill sets change. We heard "losing fundamentals" in basketball with the kobe era.. guys taking crazy shots all over the place, but the athleticism of the average NBA athlete today (and id argue in any sport) is significantly greater than that of the athlete 20, 40, 60 years ago.. some of it is what we know about how to train, or what goes into it (nutrition, exercise, cryo, etc..) and some of it is some version of evolution of what makes up a "great player". The guy who can't jump 3 inches but can shoot is of less value in many cases to the guy who can jump out of the building but can't make a 10 foot shot. You can teach the 10 foot shot, you cant teach the ability. So, as a result, I think the expectations change for what should be done...

Taking it back to baseball - the guys are far more athletic than they were in the past. Long gone are the days of beer bellies and smoking in the dugout. Guys are drinking green smoothies, doing yoga, and in super specific training to put their bodies in position to make amazing plays. Perhaps, what is perceived as a lack of fundamentals, is a transition to athletes attempting to do more (air-mailing the cutoff man) because they think their body will let it happen. Probably can lead to some more bad outcomes, but it must succeed enough that they keep trying.

So to summarize:

1. Our expectations of what fundamentals are has changed thanks to analytics.

2. The game has evolved as teams have more clear data about what it takes to win, not to mention some rules changes.

3. Athletes can do more than in the past and they push themselves to do so, even if it leads to some negative outcomes.

Simply put, Travel ball is killing baseball.  While they may practice year 'round now, they typically only get cage time and work on launch angles and exit velos. Ask a MLB player to lay a bunt down to sac to the runner to 2nd when the leadoff hitter gets on base and see how many can pull off the safest play in baseball.  I wonder how many 1st basemen trail the runner to 2nd on a sure double.  

Parents pay ungodly amounts of money for their kids to be on travel teams and disregard school baseball where the game is taught.  If little Johnny isn't playing, he doesn't have to work harder, we'll just find a different team to play on next year.

The recent "rebuild" of the Tigers may be skewing my perception. I don't trust the "fewer errors" argument exclusively because this is a function of official scorers, who are human and subject to post-game (and sometimes in-game) criticism for making an error call. And players are paid for more hits and fewer errors. This is particularly relevant on "bad hop" grounders and errant up-the-line throws that may have been called errors in the 80s but are not today. 

As for fundamentals, I think the slide started happening even 10-20 years ago when phenoms and high draft picks were rushed to the bigs because of pressure on the front office and manager to show the results of paying a lot for a draft pick. While it has helped reduce 1st round pick hold-outs, the pay slotting for high picks has made players more wealthy right away vs. having to wait until arbitration (which could be 3-5 years later, depending on if the player was a HS or College player). Scott Boros is a rich man because he helped break the old system by signing the big name players and scaring off small market teams who had top 5 picks. 

Used to be that players spent 3-4 years in the minors before getting their first cup of coffee. Guys like Earl Weaver and Sparky Anderson spent no little time managing in the minors before getting a shot at the bigs. They helped drive fundamentals like throwing to the right base, not getting thrown on at 3rd base with zero or two outs in the inning - stuff that a lot of us learned as a 11-13 year old in Little League. 

There are some teams that seem to make the plays - Tampa for one seems fundamentally sound. Honestly, I though AJ was making good plays with his team two years ago (two-out suicide squeeze to win a game, etc.) before things fell apart last year.

OMG YES

Everyone wants to hit the ball out of the ballpark.  Uppercut swings on everything, even if 2 strikes.  Swinging at balls in the dirt, 2 feet off the plate.  It's bad.  Or maybe I'm just grumpy as my Reds have clearly hit the wall and the overachieving season to date is in danger of fading away.  Wouldn't be surprised if they finish under .500.

Guess it depends on who you watch.

I watch the Padres every day.  They've definitely been a dissapointment this year but it's not due to their defense or starting pitching.  I still have faith in them to get a WC spot.

They trotted out some new stat that I'd never heard before - defensive runs saved? - like a month or so ago.  Ha-seong Kim was 1 on the list and Tatis was 4.  Machado to me is the best infielder in baseball.  He should have 8 gold gloves but they keep giving em to Arenado.  Mannys problem is he just makes tough plays look too easy.  Throws a laser dart to 1st every time.  Our Michigan boy Cronenworth hasn't made an error all year I don't think after moving to 1st base full time.  I would say the weak link is Soto in left and Bogaerts hasn't been lights out at SS.  But as far as fundementals I can't agree.  Pretty sure I would put Padres D up against any in baseball.  There's been some base running fuck ups but I blame coaching on those as much as players. 

My prob with MLB is I just don't think we need these fuckin umps anymore.  Sure you can still put a few out there just to have em there but they fuck the game up.  Tired of having to figure out what the strike zone is game to game, inning to inning, at bat to at bat.  Just silly.  If it's a close play they get it right maybe 50% of the time.  Coin flips would be quicker. 

I was at a Red Sox-Mets game a couple of weeks ago where 4 out of 24 Red Sox outs occurred on the basepaths, and then two days later the Sox were victims of one of the worst triple plays I’ve ever seen.  So anecdotally I’m with you.

I do wonder if the new bases can explain some of the baserunning errors — players and coaches know that runners can get from base to base a bit faster, but in this first year they’ve overestimated the difference and are making incorrect decisions in the heat of the moment.