Or, is it that the long term effects of past steroids use have diminished and/or do the players now have the fear of getting caught buying HGH? I'm not a doctor, so I don't know if there even are any long term benefits from the 'roids. But, it certainly must be a question in the minds of many fans like me.

They've been testing for steroids for a long time now. I don't doubt that some mediots - Buster Olney, for instance - will do roids as the Explanation for Everything. But I'm not convinced and I doubt that many other people will be. Offense actually rose last year to a healthy (by historical standards) 9.7 runs per game. It's hard to believe roids "wore off" that much over one winter long after they started testing.

My guess is that (1) the ball's been fiddled with, or (2) it's just small sample noise. Every day (2) gets less likely. Last night MLB averaged a whopping 5.5 runs per game (both teams combined, as opposed to per team, as would have been the case a few years ago). That makes 1908 or 1968 look positively robust. Okay, it was a short schedule and a real small sample.

Mediots are starting to chatter about the big drop in offense, as I mentioned on the Rollins story below. A couple more weeks of low scores, and it will be the story.

Then, of course, there's always the "convergence of several factors" explanation.

Yeah, convergence always gets a workout. I still think it's just small sample, but they're opening messing with the ball in Denver. There was a story on mlb.com about how other teams in baseball were interested in humidors.

Just for fun, let's say the big drop in offense is real and persists throughout the year. Will any teams particularly benefit or suffer? Offhand, I'd say the Padres will be helped, because their pitchers have already been conditioned by PETCO to give up fly balls, which now won't hurt them as much on the road. It might take a while for other staffs to catch on.

Oh well, something to talk about in April.

By the way, here's the mlb.com story:

http://colorado.rockies.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070208&content_id=1798476&vkey=news_col&fext=.jsp&c_id=col

Kinda makes you wonder.

I feel that if you look at all of the players who have either been suspended for using steriods, or have "whispers" about usage, you'd find there were a significant number of pitchers. It may be that the ratio of steriod users, pitchers to hitters, became fairly close in the years 04 and 05. Assuming there is a decline in steriod use, its difficult to imagine that now the ratio is in favor of the pitchers --- leaving white noise or ball storage as much more likely.

The dropoff in homers is huge with 140 less than a year ago. It will be interesting to see if these numbers stay in this range over the entire season but with the warmer weather coming in May the home runs should be hit more frequently.

I'd say it's more due to the number of games cancelled, and the weaker pitchers are being skipped.

That and the cold weather.

Hm... "weaker pitchers being skipped" sounds pretty plausible to me. How many games have been pitched by the #1-#3 guys in the rotation?

Also, it may just boil down to several good pitchers hitting their stride at the same time. Eventually statistics break down into discrete units; maybe we're just looking at the effects of a talented crop of pitchers vs. a tiring crop of hitters.

Look at the effect the humidor has had in bringing down offense in Colorado the last few years. If balls are being treated the same way league-wide now, that could have a drastic effect on offense over the course of the season.
I wonder if storing them at a slightly higher temperature (5 degrees?) would increase offense significantly.

I think you hit the nail on the head to make the connection to the climate controlled balls, David.