Does Baseball Need More Home Runs?

During 2019, worried about a surge in home runs, MLB officials commissioned a less bouncy ball. By making it slightly lighter, they shrunk the distance that a 375′ hit traveled by one to two feet.

Still though, the average home runs per game was trending up. In 2024, the number was 1.12:

For two very different reasons, the numbers will probably continue to rise.

Where are we going? To how home runs affect baseball economics.

Home Runs

Climate Change

Researchers tell us that baseballs experience less resistance in warmer air. Using data from 1962 to 2019, they concluded that players hit 20% more home runs when the temperature was 18 degrees Fahrenheit above the average. With more sophisticated technology, they also were able to suggest that reduced air density helped to propel 500 home runs since 2010.

Bat Design

Further adding to the number of home run hits, an MIT scientist invented a better bat. Giving players more power, he moved the fat part of the bat closer to the handle. Called “the torpedo bat,” it complies with MLB specifications that say bats must be “a smooth, round stick not more than 2.61 inches in diameter at the thickest part and not more than 42 inches in length.” Hesitant at first, players were convinced by the record breaking 15 home runs that several Yankees, using the “torpedo bat” hit during their first three games.

The difference is the sweet spot:

Our Bottom Line: Baseball Economics

Like all businesses, baseball is concerned about competition. The question though is what competition to look at.

Wealth Metrics

A recent WSJ article looked at baseball economics through the lens of its wealth gap. Focusing on player salaries, television deals, billionaire owners’ payrolls, and franchise valuations, readers saw the power of their wealth:

The Fans

For our lens, let’s just look at the fans.

In a recent Gallup poll, 41% of the respondents named football as their favorite sport. Far behind, baseball and basketball each had a 10% following. Further exacerbating the problem, baseball attracts an over 65 crowd. Meanwhile, a more youthful cohort cites basketball and soccer as their favorites.

Recognizing the problem, MLB accelerated up the game with a pitch clock that speeds pitchers and batters with time limits. They also tried to increase the number of hits by “outlawing the shift” while larger bases were supposed to encourage more steals.

In addition, home runs could have some of the answers. But not with more of them. The question is how to make them more exciting. A Boston University scholar suggests that longer homers could be worth two runs. Similarly, an inside the park home run could push the score up more.

And that returns us to climate change and torpedo bats.

My sources and more: After looking back at an econlife post on home runs, we moved onward to Scientific American. Then, continuing to focus on the ball, the NY Times had more detail. But these articles from WSJ and the NY Times about bat technology were most fascinating. And finally, this Boston University scholar shared his analysis of baseball economics very differently from WSJ.

(Please note that I am not sure that “torpedo bats” were responsible for all of the home runs in the Yankee games. Aaron Judge does not use one.)