Meredith Wills is explaining the difference between physics and science.
She’s thorough, as you’d expect, in describing the differences in a way that doesn’t turn boring. She’s relating it to baseball, so that helps. A lot. But she to clarify exactly what her work is. Her very thorough, thoughtful explanation of the inner workings of science and physics continues.
“Actually (and despite the astrophysics background), I don't think of my baseball construction studies as "physics." Science, yes, but not physics. Physics relates to applying the laws of physics and putting them in a real-world context,” she continues, explaining, “Alan Nathan looks at physics; Barton Smith (baseballaero.com) looks at physics; Rob Arthur looks at at physics. I, on the other hand, study the structure of the baseball itself, and use my knowledge from other fields (physics, fiber arts etc.) to understand how changes to its makeup may have implications going both forward and back.”
She goes on to describe the thing that draws so many baseball fans, intellectuals, analyzers and writers to her study of that little round thing we’re happily obsessed with.
“By "forward," I mean how measurable changes (seam height, roundness, leather sm oothness etc.) could affect the ball's in-game performance. The most visible connections have been to the 2017 Home Run Surge, the 2019 Home Run Surge, and the 2019 Postseason "Dead Ball" (largely because home runs are exciting and that's what the physicists look at.) However, defensive players (outfielders, and especially pitchers) have been affected as well. For instance, changes to the 2019 regular season ball were reported by pitchers months before my June article came out. Also, one could argue that Aaron Sanchez' career was derailed by the laces on the late-2015 - 2018 ball.”
This continues, and becomes no less fascinating as she weaves intricate storytelling, personal experience and scientific (yes?) facts to explain the central aspect of her work in baseball: understanding the actual baseball. And, more than thats, she’s asking Major League Baseball to examine, with the assistance of expertise such as hers, to explain changes in the ball. One might assume that MLB would show great interest in understanding the ball, and how its changes have impacted the game. But when asked…
“ I assume you mean the work on the pre-2019 ball? Actually, there was surprisingly little response over the course of 2018. A few days after the article came out, I did have a telecon with a few members of MLB's HR Committee, but no official notice beyond that,” she said. “In fact, the closest MLB has ever come to publicly acknowledging my work is a vague parenthetical reference in the 2019 Home Run Committee Report, discounting "alternate hypotheses discussed in the media (e.g. roundness, surface roughness, lace thickness)" as affecting drag. It turns out those are all section headings in my June 2019 article,” she said.
Wills goes on to say that after her first piece was published in June of 2018, there was strangely no more mention she could find of the ball, and home run production by major league players. She cites an NBC Sports piece as the sole reference to the home run resurgence. Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred dismissed any notion that there’s an issue. (https://mlb.nbcsports.com/2019/02/27/rob-manfred-still-thinks-other-factors-contributed-to-rise-in-homers/ , https://twitter.com/EricFisherSBG/status/1100838741340577795).
“Needless to say, this flat out contradicts the findings of MLB's own Home Run Committee,” Wills states.
Manfred has been a fierce protector of the gates that surround the MLB empire. This is just another example of unwillingness to examine the modern game, and how some things need to change, while other aspects clearly have already changed. To ignore the latter takes effort. But Wills work isn’t just taking up space somewhere, waiting to be attended to. She actively promotes her findings on social media (find her on Twitter @Bbl_Astrophyscs), engaging and debating regularly.
Her baseball life mixes the scientific elements with the romantic; the basis of facts with the human emotions of wonder and curiosity; the guiding light of childhood with the broader light of what lies ahead. The impact of her research was particularly felt in 2018 at a SABR Seminar, where she gave a talk on the 2017 ball, including debuting forthcoming research that thicker laces would’ve led to a “rounder ball.” She wasn ‘t entirely prepared for the response. “While the general response was positive, that of the HR Committee was unexpected. They did a panel the following morning, and for some reason spherical symmetry was not addressed as a possible way to decrease drag. In the Q&A, nobody brought up my name, but there were questions referring to my results, and the answers that were, in some cases, just odd,” she said.
There are several scenarios we can imagine in which this all happens to a woman in baseball, but one of those scenarios is that this happens to a woman in baseball because she is a woman in baseball. This possibility isn’t shocking. But looking beyond that, there’s no answer that isn’t cynical (or maybe just realistic) as to why someone as highly respected and knowledgeable should be ignored by MLB for these discoveries. What will major league baseball do with Wills findings, if anything? Whatever the answer in the future, she’s going to keep her voice.
Baseball is not a passing interest. It’s permeated her being since the day she was born. Opening Day to be exact. Wills describes a childhood that began with an early introduction to baseball, (“I was three weeks old when I attended my first ballgame.”) and parents who announced her birth with baseball in mind; she was posed in a baseball cap beside a bat, with the caption, “Just in time for Spring Training!” She shifted her career from astrophysics to becoming a sports data scientist, and works as a Product Specialist for SportsMEDIA. Oh, and by the way, she's also in the Baseball Hall of Fame. A few years ago, her other passion, knitting, led her to a contest for a knitting design. Her winning creation--a pair of Colorado Rockies socks-- was chosen to represent the fan organization Stitch and Pitch.
As her research has developed, so has her enthusiasm and interest in expanding that work. But what makes Dr. Meredith Wills run?
“Actually, that's a good question. I'd say that are two things. First, there's simply the idea of completeness. Most of the questions I'm asking aren't (in my opinion) that difficult to answer, and if the ball ever stabilizes, any additional research becomes sort of "fringe." However, since the ball keeps changing (and differently each time), I'm going to keep asking questions,” she said.
And those questions have a lot to do with the history of the little white object, and understanding more about how and when signficant changes began to show up in hitter's production.
"I'd like to look at baseball construction historically, especially over the past 50 years. For instance, I'd be curious to see if the home run increase at the beginning of the Steroid Era was entirely player-related, or if there might have been some contribution from the ball. The 1987 Rabbit Ball is another obvious candidate. The problem is getting enough baseballs to study," she explains.
We spend so much time--whether as baseball fans, journalists, bloggers, and/or analysts-- observing and assessing swing paths, batspeed and other aspects of hitting; Wills is providing a unique service to the baseball conversation.