Batting around. Every heard of that phrase? I have, and it's not as straight forward as I thought. What do you take away from this piece? What made you go hhhmmmm?
Great questions for Lance. He was so impressed with the breadth and depth of the questions. Nice work!
I think this is an interesting piece, because it points out two very definite beliefs on what batting around really means. It's not something I've ever given any thought to, and I find it fascinating that people who are (relatively) equally qualified to make a judgment call can go such opposite directions. Somehow I'm leaning towards 10, only because that would indicate the batters coming full circle; however, each side has its own convincing arguments. I really wonder why the MLB doesn't have an official definition, especially given the diversity of opinions. I feel like they would want to control the definition of the phrase, and I wonder if they will establish an official definition any time soon.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting article talking about two totally different beliefs about what batting around really means. It’s not something I’ve ever thought about, nor anything that I find to be an especially pertinent issue, however because of the passion with which both sides state their ideas, perhaps it is pertinent. I think that, because of the history, the official definition should be 10, however since it’s not an official MLB statistic and it’s just something that broadcasters use to describe the game, they don’t need a solid definition and can continue with just the broad idea of “around 9 or 10 players”. Maybe they should make a definition just so that everyone who’s using the phrase is meaning the same thing but at the moment it seems just fine to let everyone hammer it out among themselves.
ReplyDeleteI had previously heard of batting around but never knew there was such a controversy. I was always told that the term related to the entire team batting and returning to the first batter in the 10-batter situation. It’s interesting to have the discussion about this term when no definite definition exists. The only clues about the definition, from the history of the game and the MLB’s official statistician, are merely extrapolated from other facts. To be honest, I don’t think that anything meaningful would come out of a discussion about batting around. The two sides are too polarized, and there cannot be any compromise. Baseball fans will believe what they believe, and unless it becomes an official statistic recorded in games, the ambiguity surrounding the term is acceptable.
ReplyDeleteAlly
It's odd to see just how crazily obsessive some people can seem over baseball. The article, despite being entirely about the definition of "batting around" did not seem to make any sort of effort to emphasize how important it is to define. It doesn't look like it holds a ton of value as a statistical measure of a team's performance, nor does it have the kind of majesty that other baseball feats have, like a grand slam or triple play. Overall, "batting around" just doesn't seem like it has a ton of impact on the game itself, which makes it all the more interesting that it's become such a hot topic. It's also interesting that baseball has a dedicated historian who traced the origins of the phrase back to the 18th century. The fact that the MLB actually identifies John Thorn as their official historian demonstrates the value that they place on history. To many baseball fans nowadays, the past has no bearing on the present. But with debates like the one surrounding "batting around," it seems oddly fitting to have a debate so unique to baseball be resolved by another thing that also seems very baseball-esque
ReplyDeleteSam R.
Considering I have never heard of the the phrase "batting around," there were a lot of aspects of this article that made me go hhmmmm. While reading through the first couple paragraphs I didn't really lean towards either side. Although the arguments for both the nine and ten hitter definitions seem reasonable, the importance of this phrase doesn't seem as essential to the game of baseball as it does to the baseball enthusiasts themselves. The term "batting around" is an example of the passion that baseball lovers have for the game. It is a testament to the role that baseball plays in their lives, as to a bystander, it seems quite silly to have such intense arguments over a phrase. I think the place where each individual's stance on the topic comes from is who influenced or even introduced them to their love of baseball. The fact that s many people care about something as small as a phrase further reveals the impact that baseball has on individuals and the tradition and passion it represents.
ReplyDelete-Chloë
I think the discussion of baseball stats and definitions is an important part of the sport and its future. I personally have heard the phrase but never gave it much thought but I was amazed at how the people who have given their whole lives to baseball could disagree on something as simple as 9 or 10. And in terms of it not being an official stat I think baseball stats are a little wonky anyway. If you hit a ball you can gain a stat from a fielders error or a home run ball can be stolen by a ridiculous play. And if your home stadium has closer shorter walls (because every stadium is different) the chances of you hitting a HR go way up, but that's not factored into the stats. I think that while they take the time to decide 9 or 10 they should discuss the scoring/stat system as a whole.
ReplyDeleteB-Wood
Similar to Chloë, I had never heard of the term “batting around” until this article. In fact, I looked up the phrase before reading this article. I find it interesting that both coaches, teammates, announcers, and baseball fanatics can be so divided on such an idea. The arguments for each side, 9 and 10, both appear reasonable, which makes it even harder to develop an unanimous agreement. However, I believe that the 10 batter situation, compared to the 9 batter situation, is more convincing because it completes the circle - by returning back to the original player. I wish MLB would respond to the issue and create a definition of the term that would be accepted by everyone. Therefore, everyone would be on the same page and it would probably be easier to compare teams and statistics.
ReplyDeleteSamantha
I am very familiar with the term “batting around”- in fact, I have a very firm opinion on what constitutes it. I'm sure the people who belong to "Team 10" have good reason to believe that “batting around” implies that at least 10 batters come to the plate in a half-inning, but I strongly believe that this term should apply when at least 9 men come to the plate, not 10. My analogy of this is dividing a quarter-mile track into 9 equal sections. It is completely unnecessary to run through 10 of these sections to run a quarter-mile, because 9 sections alone already complete the quarter mile, and bring you back to the starting line. The same principal should apply to batting around-if every player in a starting lineup has a single plate appearance in an inning, it should be considered batting around. In terms of the article, it was interesting to see the high level of disagreement surrounding this topic. I was particularly surprised, as a “Niner,” how many people believed that 10 men needed to have an AB to qualify as “batting around.” Overall, I thought it was an interesting piece on a topic that is one of the less-mentioned in baseball.
ReplyDeleteGriff
I can't believe that such a simple term I've heard for the majority of my life can be so ambiguous. Being a baseball player, it is not uncommon to hear a coach say with excitement,"Let's bat around!" But never before have I thought about the true meaning of the term, let alone the possibility that those words could mean something different to the teammate standing next to me. Arguments can be made for both sides, those who believe nine batters are needed to bat around, or those who think its necessary to have ten come to the plate. I personally think that the batting order needs to come full circle in order to bat around, and the hitter who led off the inning must bat twice. This to me seems to be the most logical answer to me, and history appears to support the ten man theory as well. Though it seems ridiculous that such a common phrase is so highly disputed without a clear correct answer, arguments such as these keep the sport interesting and able to progress. Baseball provides a unique experience for everyone, giving each fan their own joy. The batting around debate embodies each individuals unique perspective of the sport.
ReplyDeleteAngus
To start off I want to say that this was a very interesting piece that I found fascinating to read. The debate between 9 and 10 players at bat defining "batting around" seems it will always be argued. In my opinion, I think that "battling around" would be 10 players stepping up to the plate in a half inning because that means the team has completely a full rotation in their batting order, therefore batting around. Even though the article says that there isn't really a middle ground in this discussion, I can also relate to the "Niner" side and understand why they think it only takes nine players. What I found most fascinating about this piece was that this whole debate exists over a non-existent statistic in the MLB. I found it absolutely mind boggling that people can have that much power and opinion in something that isn't even really a part of the game. When looking at the bigger picture, I thought this was a great read.
ReplyDeleteJoe
ReplyDeleteI think that batting around is 10. It has to begin after all nine come to the plate. AFTER. When the player who starts the inning comes to bat is when the "batting around" starts. It is really funny to see players fight over this as you would think they have more important things to worry about, like playing the game maybe. This is the beauty of baseball. There are such small things being fought over, and the shear existence of these things is what makes it so so cool. Vin Scully is correct because he has been calling games for so long. Every tenner is correct. The niners need to get their head straight. Just my opinion though.
I personally have never hard that phrase before and am surprised about the controversy behind it. While I have taken away from this piece is that a term for an unofficial baseball state can stir up quite a bit of controversy. What really made me go hhhmmmm however was that there was no actual consensus on any level about what the true definition of the phrase “batting around.” Also what was very interesting was the arguments that were used by each side to prove that their definition was the correct one.
ReplyDeleteI found it kind of interesting that there is no general consensus for the phrase "batting around". In my mind, batting around clearly relates to the tenth batter of the inning. Around is like a circle, it is not complete until you return to where you started. The nine side is an acceptable debate, but it is still not completely formed and accurate in my opinion. To me, it is similar to the debate about how many a dozen is with one side being the bakers dozen. One side is clearly right, while the other semi-makes sense but is still flawed in its argument. Once the circle is completed the line will have gone all the way around, therefore batting around should be when the 10th batter steps up to the plate.
ReplyDeleteConnor R