Reese Kaplan -- Earl Weaver's Style is Alive and Well in 2019

Any long time Mets fan must remember the quite colorful manager in the opposing dugout during the 1969 Miracle Mets season which resulted in the club’s first-ever World Championship.  Earl Weaver went to the Hall of Fame based upon his remarkable record managing the Baltimore Orioles to an average of over 94 wins per season, over 400 games over .500 and delivering five seasons of over 100 victories.

Weaver was not a man to hold back his opinions on how the game should be played.  He would likely fit right in the new church of launch angle given his disdain for the small ball played by some of his contemporaries like Billy Martin.  Weaver once said, “When you play for one run, that's usually all you get. I have nothing against the bunt in its place, but most of the time, that place is in the bottom of a long-forgotten closet.”

Weaver continued, “There are only three outs an inning, and they should be treasured. Give one away, and you're making everything harder for yourself…I used to be a pretty good hit-and-run man when I played in the minors. I handled the bat well and could hit the ball to the right side of the infield. Nevertheless, I know that you often give the opposition an out on the hit-and-run play.”

Similarly, he was not a big fan of the stolen base as an offensive weapon.  Said Weaver, “If you want to steal a base, steal a base. Don't make the hitter swing at a bad pitch trying to protect the runner.”  Also along those lines, “Don't play for one run unless you know that run will win a ballgame.”

He was well known to have a love affair for the three-run homer.  “There ain't no genius here. Strategy in baseball is overrated. People say, 'That Weaver, he plays for the long ball too much.' You bet I do. Hit 'em out. Then I got no worry about somebody lousing up a bunt, I got no worry about the hit and run - and that's really overrated - I got no worry about base-running errors. And I can't screw it up myself.”

Now when your team includes the likes of guys like Boog Powell, Frank Robinson, Eddie Murray, Ken Singleton and others of that ilk, perhaps the infatuation with the long ball was understandable.  The Mets, by comparison, have had a lot of games started by players like Ruben Tejada, Eric Campbell, Austin Jackson, Nori Aoki and Kevin Plawecki.  Consequently, there is something to be said in not trying to swing for the fences when history suggests you’re simply not capable of doing so.

Way back in 1968 which is the same year Bob Gibson established a record not likely to be broken with a season-long ERA of 1.12, the entire league’s ERA was just 2.98.  After that season the mound height was lowered to help counteract the dominance of the league’s pitchers, yet despite the change the corresponding increase in ERA was not all that significant for some time.  For the next 8 years the league averaged around 3.50 which was a big tick above the 2.98 of 1968 but they didn’t hit the 4.00 plateau until 1977.  When the steroids era began in the early ‘90s it didn’t take long for the league average ERA to shoot above the 4.50 mark.  ERAs have hovered between 4.00 and 4.50 ever since.  

While most people acknowledge that doping is not as prevalent as it once was, the fact remains that HR totals are way up, with 2016, 2017 and 2018 capturing 3 of the 4 all-time HRs per game numbers.  However, at what price does this power come?  In 1999 the league batting average was .271.  Last season it was just .248.   Runs have not significantly increase, so what it suggests is that despite the prevalence of the long ball the depressed batting averages are not producing more scoring. 

So the question is whether or not Earl Weaver was right?  At a time when swinging for the fences is not resulting in greater run totals, could a reintroduction of small ball put some more bodies on base before those long balls clear the walls?  

Going into the 2019 season the Mets may indeed receive power from Peter Alonso (whenever he arrives), Robinson Cano and Michael Conforto.  If/when Yoenis Cespedes returns, there’s another candidate to hit home runs.  Would the team be better served with more high OBP guys like Brandon Nimmo and Jeff McNeil than borderline sluggers like Keon Broxton and Todd Frazier to balance out the lineup?

Personally, I'm fed up with the all-or-nothing approach embraced by the past two batting coaches.  I'd rather see quality ABs, walks, hitting the other way, infield singles and the like than strikeouts and weak pop-ups when the launch angle isn't working.  

How about you?