THE TALK SHOWS I LISTEN TO ARE CLAIMING IT’S MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO SCORE THIS YEAR…PITCHERS ARE DOMINATING
Copilot said:
They may be reacting to what they’re seeing game-to-game, but the league-wide numbers don’t show a dramatic decline in scoring.
What the data shows:
2026: about 4.46 runs per team per game (about 8.92 total runs per game)
teamrankings
+1
2025: about 4.45 runs per team per game
anecdotebaseball
+1
2024: about 4.39 runs per team per game
anecdotebaseball
+1
So overall, scoring is not meaningfully lower than last year and is actually a bit higher than 2024.
teamrankings
+1
That said, the talk-show hosts may be focusing on a different point:
Pitching talent is exceptionally deep.
Teams are using hard-throwing bullpens more effectively.
Strikeouts remain high by historical standards.
Many hitters are batting around the low-.240s league-wide.
anecdotebaseball
+1
As a result, baseball can feel pitcher-dominated even when the average number of runs hasn’t changed much.
A good comparison is the peak offensive era around 1999–2000:
2000: about 10.28 total runs per game.
anecdotebaseball
2026: about 8.92 total runs per game.
teamrankings
Compared with the steroid-era peak, pitchers are indeed much more dominant today. Compared with 2024–2025, however, scoring has been fairly stable.
anecdotebaseball
+1
Favicon typeFavicon typeFavicon type
Sources
You said:
HERE’S A INTERESTING QUESTION . HOW MANY MAN DAYS DOES AN AVERAGE TEAM LOSE TO INJURY IN A SEASON AND HOW MANY PLAYERS ACTUALLY PLY FOR AN AVERAGE TEAM IN ONE SEASON. HOW HAS THAT CHANGED OVER THE LAS 50 YEARS
Copilot said:
That’s actually a great question, and the answer is surprisingly dramatic.
How many players does a team use in a season?
Today, an MLB team typically uses 40–55 different players during a season because of injuries, call-ups, bullpen shuffling, and roster moves.
In the 1970s, teams often got through a season with roughly 30–35 players.
So compared with 50 years ago, teams are cycling through significantly more players over a season.
How many injury days are lost?
Modern injury databases show many teams accumulating hundreds to well over 1,000 injured-list days in a single season. Current-season team totals around 500–1,300+ IL days are common.
spotrac
If you average that across the league, a typical team can easily lose the equivalent of multiple player-seasons to injury each year. The data also indicates that MLB injuries and injured-list costs have become a major concern, with teams collectively carrying over $1 billion in salary on the injured list in some recent seasons.
scorenetwork
Has it changed over 50 years?
Most analysts would say yes, enormously, although measuring it precisely across five decades is difficult because injury reporting and roster rules have changed.
The broad trends are:
More pitchers than ever throw near maximum effort.
Bullpens are larger and more specialized.
Velocity is much higher than in the 1970s and 1980s.
Teams make many more roster transactions.
Injury tracking is far more comprehensive than it used to be.
As a result:
Era Typical Players Used
1970s ~30–35
1990s ~35–45
2020s ~40–55+
(These are approximate historical ranges, not official MLB statistics.)
The really interesting connection
This may help explain the contradiction you noticed earlier:
Runs per game today are similar to 2024–25.
Yet many people feel that pitching dominates.
One reason is that teams no longer rely on 4–5 pitchers for most of the season. A hitter today may face:
A starter throwing 97 mph,
A reliever throwing 99 mph,
Another reliever throwing 100 mph,
A closer throwing 98 mph with a wipeout slider.
Fifty years ago, hitters saw the same pitcher far more often.
So even though league scoring is still around 9 total runs per game, the game can feel more pitcher-dominated because the quality of pitching is maintained across all nine innings.
WHEN I WAS A KID THERE WERE 8 TEAMS IN THE NL AND 8 IN THE AL …I AM 76…IS THAT RIGHT ?
Copilot said:
Yes, that’s right.
If you’re 76, you were a kid in the late 1950s and early 1960s, and for most of that period Major League Baseball had 16 teams total: 8 in the National League and 8 in the American League. That structure existed from 1901 through 1960.
everybodywiki
+1
The first expansion came in 1961, when the American League added two teams and went from 8 to 10 clubs. The National League followed with expansion in 1962.
wikipedia
+1
What’s also striking is how concentrated baseball was then:
New York had three major-league teams (Yankees, Giants, Dodgers).
Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, and St. Louis each had two teams.
wikipedia
+1
So 11 of the 16 teams were in just five metropolitan areas.
andrewclem
Today there are 30 MLB teams, nearly double the number from your childhood.
wikipedia
+1
One thing many fans your age remember is that when there were only 16 teams, stars were much more concentrated. Making the majors was tougher because there were far fewer roster spots available across the league.
Much more money being made today.
So players are incentivized to top out to keep their jobs. So they get hurt more pushing their limits.
Then again, teams use “options” all the time as a way to distribute the higher intensity of the workload.
I don’t even recall ‘options’ in the 60s, 70s.
So now, esp for pitchers on teams with depth at AAA, teams send players down on options or rehab, and bring up fresh arms often since the idea is to spread out the work and still have physical reserves into the post season.
Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, and St. Louis each had two teams.
Chicago still does (for now; one is moving to Indiana).
But the others LONG preceded my ever watching baseball.
Boston Braves left for Milwaukee then Atlanta.
Philly had the A’s which were a great team for stretches.
I don’t recall the other St L team.
Basically, I miss the running and strategy elements that made the game interesting.
Part of that was going with DH.
Great stuff. Enjoy the rest of this season as it looks like a standoff between owners wanting to implement a salary cap and players opposed will lead to a long strike next year. Reports of some owners betting on a strike? Insider trading or hedging?
THE TALK SHOWS I LISTEN TO ARE CLAIMING IT’S MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO SCORE THIS YEAR…PITCHERS ARE DOMINATING
Copilot said:
They may be reacting to what they’re seeing game-to-game, but the league-wide numbers don’t show a dramatic decline in scoring.
What the data shows:
2026: about 4.46 runs per team per game (about 8.92 total runs per game)
teamrankings
+1
2025: about 4.45 runs per team per game
anecdotebaseball
+1
2024: about 4.39 runs per team per game
anecdotebaseball
+1
So overall, scoring is not meaningfully lower than last year and is actually a bit higher than 2024.
teamrankings
+1
That said, the talk-show hosts may be focusing on a different point:
Pitching talent is exceptionally deep.
Teams are using hard-throwing bullpens more effectively.
Strikeouts remain high by historical standards.
Many hitters are batting around the low-.240s league-wide.
anecdotebaseball
+1
As a result, baseball can feel pitcher-dominated even when the average number of runs hasn’t changed much.
A good comparison is the peak offensive era around 1999–2000:
2000: about 10.28 total runs per game.
anecdotebaseball
2026: about 8.92 total runs per game.
teamrankings
Compared with the steroid-era peak, pitchers are indeed much more dominant today. Compared with 2024–2025, however, scoring has been fairly stable.
anecdotebaseball
+1
Favicon typeFavicon typeFavicon type
Sources
You said:
HERE’S A INTERESTING QUESTION . HOW MANY MAN DAYS DOES AN AVERAGE TEAM LOSE TO INJURY IN A SEASON AND HOW MANY PLAYERS ACTUALLY PLY FOR AN AVERAGE TEAM IN ONE SEASON. HOW HAS THAT CHANGED OVER THE LAS 50 YEARS
Copilot said:
That’s actually a great question, and the answer is surprisingly dramatic.
How many players does a team use in a season?
Today, an MLB team typically uses 40–55 different players during a season because of injuries, call-ups, bullpen shuffling, and roster moves.
In the 1970s, teams often got through a season with roughly 30–35 players.
So compared with 50 years ago, teams are cycling through significantly more players over a season.
How many injury days are lost?
Modern injury databases show many teams accumulating hundreds to well over 1,000 injured-list days in a single season. Current-season team totals around 500–1,300+ IL days are common.
spotrac
If you average that across the league, a typical team can easily lose the equivalent of multiple player-seasons to injury each year. The data also indicates that MLB injuries and injured-list costs have become a major concern, with teams collectively carrying over $1 billion in salary on the injured list in some recent seasons.
scorenetwork
Has it changed over 50 years?
Most analysts would say yes, enormously, although measuring it precisely across five decades is difficult because injury reporting and roster rules have changed.
The broad trends are:
More pitchers than ever throw near maximum effort.
Bullpens are larger and more specialized.
Velocity is much higher than in the 1970s and 1980s.
Teams make many more roster transactions.
Injury tracking is far more comprehensive than it used to be.
As a result:
Era Typical Players Used
1970s ~30–35
1990s ~35–45
2020s ~40–55+
(These are approximate historical ranges, not official MLB statistics.)
The really interesting connection
This may help explain the contradiction you noticed earlier:
Runs per game today are similar to 2024–25.
Yet many people feel that pitching dominates.
One reason is that teams no longer rely on 4–5 pitchers for most of the season. A hitter today may face:
A starter throwing 97 mph,
A reliever throwing 99 mph,
Another reliever throwing 100 mph,
A closer throwing 98 mph with a wipeout slider.
Fifty years ago, hitters saw the same pitcher far more often.
So even though league scoring is still around 9 total runs per game, the game can feel more pitcher-dominated because the quality of pitching is maintained across all nine innings.
WHEN I WAS A KID THERE WERE 8 TEAMS IN THE NL AND 8 IN THE AL …I AM 76…IS THAT RIGHT ?
Copilot said:
Yes, that’s right.
If you’re 76, you were a kid in the late 1950s and early 1960s, and for most of that period Major League Baseball had 16 teams total: 8 in the National League and 8 in the American League. That structure existed from 1901 through 1960.
everybodywiki
+1
The first expansion came in 1961, when the American League added two teams and went from 8 to 10 clubs. The National League followed with expansion in 1962.
wikipedia
+1
What’s also striking is how concentrated baseball was then:
New York had three major-league teams (Yankees, Giants, Dodgers).
Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, and St. Louis each had two teams.
wikipedia
+1
So 11 of the 16 teams were in just five metropolitan areas.
andrewclem
Today there are 30 MLB teams, nearly double the number from your childhood.
wikipedia
+1
One thing many fans your age remember is that when there were only 16 teams, stars were much more concentrated. Making the majors was tougher because there were far fewer roster spots available across the league.
Much more money being made today.
So players are incentivized to top out to keep their jobs. So they get hurt more pushing their limits.
Then again, teams use “options” all the time as a way to distribute the higher intensity of the workload.
I don’t even recall ‘options’ in the 60s, 70s.
So now, esp for pitchers on teams with depth at AAA, teams send players down on options or rehab, and bring up fresh arms often since the idea is to spread out the work and still have physical reserves into the post season.
Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, and St. Louis each had two teams.
Chicago still does (for now; one is moving to Indiana).
But the others LONG preceded my ever watching baseball.
Boston Braves left for Milwaukee then Atlanta.
Philly had the A’s which were a great team for stretches.
I don’t recall the other St L team.
Basically, I miss the running and strategy elements that made the game interesting.
Part of that was going with DH.
Great stuff. Enjoy the rest of this season as it looks like a standoff between owners wanting to implement a salary cap and players opposed will lead to a long strike next year. Reports of some owners betting on a strike? Insider trading or hedging?