Interesting read on a hot topic.

 

Killer Bats

Interesting read on a hot topic.

 

Killer Bats

Very interesting indeed. I didn't realize there really was as much organized oposition as apparently exists. It is conceivable that the data simply doesn't exist, but it is hard for me to agree with statements that say wood and metal perform the same. Anyone who has ever coached and/or played with both, immediately recognizes the difference. Whether safety is in deed a significant issue, I suppose, will require more data. Unfortunately, more data may be more accurately defined as 'more injuries'. I find it very difficult to believe that profit from both products aren't the driving force behind the debate for the metal manufacturers. The article implies that they are more concerned with all kids having the ability to swing a lighter metal bad and, therefore, not lose interest in the game due to lack of success. It also implies that they would make as much or more selling wood? I don't buy that.

Why are the advances in metal marketed every single year if the performance is a mute point? Wood is wood for the last how many centuries?

While I understand the reasoning for younger kids, and for that matter in High School, but what I don't understand is why the MLB doesn't underwrite the cost of wooden bats in the College or Summer leagues teams. No one will ever convince me that in my day if we had the bats that the kids use today, my, and for that matter every kid I played ball with, batting average, and slugging average wouldn't be increased by 75 or so points. I have seen far too many hits coming off the handle of today's bats that would have either broken the wooden bats of my day, or at least been soft ground ball outs hit to a infielder. The day MLB allows aluminum bats to be used, is the day, that every single record must have an *** next to it. I hope I never see that day......