Why is it so hard to win a lot of games in baseball versus other pro sports?

Road games, the fellas are away from wife and responsibilities of home life. Except for starting pitcher and starting catcher for next game, the players are anywhere from slightly hung over, moderately hung over or slobberknockered for road games.

truth about M.L.B. wrote:

Road games, the fellas are away from wife and responsibilities of home life. Except for starting pitcher and starting catcher for next game, the players are anywhere from slightly hung over, moderately hung over or slobberknockered for road games.

They may come into the stadium slobberknockered ( I like that term) but the trainers have things that get them unslobberknockered before going out on the field for warmups.

jamb innn wrote:

Hitting a baseball is the hardest feat in sports.

A good hitter is .250, which means only 2.5 out of 10 at bats produces a favorable outcome. Thats a really low success rate. Then you gotta get 9 other guys firing on all cylinders as well.

plenty of hard things in sports and they are hard in different ways

Baseball players like to feel good about their unathletic sport by saying this😉 . But yes that is what makes hard to win a lot. You need somewhat rare events to happen close together. Your time will average around 9 hits/game. Have 1 per inning and you score 0 runs. Have 5 in the same inning and you might have 3 runs. Batters performed the same with vastly different outcomes.

Sports like basketball have more attempts and the attempts are independant which reduces the luck factor.

yeah really tough to be consistently good over 162 games vs. 16 where sure Brady may have a game off or two, but his teams usually win 12-13 out of 16; Baskets as you say-top shelf talent can go out every night like the Greek Freak and ball, compared to a dominant starter in baseball who can only control on out of every 5 games (compared to one in 4 in the 60's/70s); Now more games being controlled by plug-and play bullpens.

Basketball consistently have 4-5 teams in "tank mode" such as the Pistons in a season-a lot of bad teams-6 in the association last year won less than 32% of their games-making the converse true-a considerable amount of clubs that win more than 65% of their games. To compare the worst team in baseball Baltimore still won 52 of 162 games last season for a 32.1% win percentage-more parity for sure in baseball. Harder to compare football since the number of games is dramatically less than baseball, whereas NBA plays about half of MLB. Stars control the game a lot in NBA compared to MLB.

to the rescue wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

Because baseball is not a sport and the players are not athletes. They lack true aggression or the will to dominate. So if 60% is good enough to be #1, that's all they go for.

Looks like we found our Dwight Schrute.

looks like we found our triggered baseball fan

Baseball is not a sport.

coach wrote:

Manchester wrote:

At least four good reasons off the top of my head.

1. Law of large numbers - lots of NFL teams win 75% of games in a 16-game season but how many do it for a combined 10 years? You might find an MLB team that went 14-2 for their last 16 games.

2. Can't go all-out every game. If games were once a week, you could have your ace pitcher every game.

3. More luck involved in a game.

4. More parity between teams because one player can't dominate a game (except a pitcher, but they only pitch every 5 games).

#4. One or two great players can not help you win in baseball the way it can in the other sports.

Bryce Harper and Zack Wheeler proved the rule this year.