Recess #8: "Hats for Bats.... Keep Bats Warm"
An abbreviated argument for custom hardware design by professional sports teams
Over the last couple weeks, the baseball world has been turned (a good lathe-based pun for any baseball bat manufacturers reading this) on its head. Last week, the New York Yankees hit three home runs on the first three pitches of the game— an MLB record and something you can only dream of achieving in a game like Backyard Baseball. Even though the torrid scoring pace didn’t sustain, the Yankees ended the game with 9 home runs, becoming only the third team ever to hit that mark in a single game. To be honest, I would have expected far more teams had hit 9 home runs in a game, and ironically the majority of the media focus didn’t end up on the players achieving this feat, but the equipment that those hitters used: a new bat geometry with a reduced diameter towards the tip of the bat, dubbed the “Torpedo Bat.”
Since the breakout game for the torpedo bat, other players like Elly De La Cruz of the Cincinnati Reds have tested the new bat geometry to great effect, and coverage of the unique bat style has exploded. Pundits are asking important questions like “is the bat legal?”, “when did it debut?”, and “who designed it?” These types of questions have relatively straightforward answers like “Yes,” and “Last season actually,” and “An ex-MIT, ex-U-Michigan professor in tandem with manufacturer Maine Billets.” Of course, we’re in a period of explosive interest about the bat, so there’s absolutely a positive selection bias to the news that becomes widespread. However, the fact that the bat debuted for the first time last year in the MLB to almost no acclaim whatsoever speaks to the fact that it needed a viral moment to breakthrough into mainstream usage.
As a result of this delayed explosion in popularity, the sample size of usage is still quite small, so teams likely still don’t know how efficacious the new design actually is. I’m of course interested in these results, but answers about the final performance boosts from the new bat design are somewhat superfluous to broader questions this episode raises about the current state of hardware innovation space in professional sports, namely: how did no one think to try this out in earnest before? It’s super cheap to test different bat shapes, and most professional teams probably could estimate average contact point on bats for many years at this point, which means that the answer to this question is likely as straightforward as those above: no one thought to try it in earnest!
Throughout history, there have been a wide variety of experimental bats in the MLB, and probably even more in other leagues. However, the creativity and unique pursuits of teams and players to capture a competitive edge through hardware innovation seems to have somewhat died out with the unification of league rules. Perhaps more importantly, gear brands like Nike and Adidas now serve a large set of professional teams so can’t serve as a hub for one-off innovation for specific teams (vs. a sport like running where they can innovate for their specific athletes). It’s also possible that a majority of a team’s innovation resources are funneled into software and analytics in the current landscape!
Setting aside my inclinations as a hardware engineer, I still find the ubiquity of this trend across many professional sports leagues like the MLB, NHL, NFL, or EPL quite disappointing. For modern sports where hardware innovation is allowed and encouraged, it can make a huge difference! Among the numerous examples, racing sports like F1 and Cycling seem to lean farthest into team-by-team hardware optimization— in part because the rules allow it, but even more so because it provides such a large competitive advantage. Nowadays, teams seem to spend increasing amounts of money on software and analytics improvements, but it’s important to remember that every piece of gear we use today was once designed to give a team or an athlete an edge over the competition, even seemingly silly things like eye black or a golf glove!
The real kicker is that very often, the core skill in improving existing equipment or designing completely new products lies in asking the right questions, most of which can seem completely inane. This can apply to upgrades as simple as a unique bat shape, or as complex as a dynamic aerofoil. Some simple interrogation about the way things are right now and what problems exist can spark ideas about a solution that often doesn’t require brand new inventions or pushing the laws of physics. Sometimes high-quality product design and engineering teams are needed to execute the design of a new product, but often a solution or new unique product requires almost no unique skills! To make this concept a bit more concrete, I think it’s fun to look at some unique hardware innovations in the world of sports, and back out what type of question could spark the creation of that product:
If some of these questions seem super basic, I think you’re right! There are hundreds, and thousands of these types of questions that have sparked the design of some of the most fundamental pieces of gear for most major sports. Yes, some of the lowest hanging rules-eligible fruit might already be picked in terms of new hardware products that will significantly impact the outcomes of most matches. However this torpedo bat episode once again proves that there’s still so much ripe fruit left to be picked from the tree (end poor metaphor). Even if a problem has been considered and solved in a specific way that serves players and teams well, an even better solution may still be out there that serves the modern needs of a team or player!
To help once again with some examples, the rapidly-generated list below illustrates somewhat fundamental questions that I think are generally unanswered, and that could have major impacts on the what gear and processes athletes and teams use. This is just a small sample of the basic questions that pervade every single major sport, and I hope it sparks some of your own ideas for sports you follow!
What is the optimal temperature for a bat to achieve the highest energy return? Should we keep them warm?
Is there a haircut that is most aerodynamic for sprinters?
How much does drafting matter in marathons? What about for shorter distances? What about for speed skating?
Is cloth tape the best surface for hockey stick blades to control a puck?
Why is the football helmet shape practically the same for all positions?
Why do football players wear cleats that let them exert enough force to rupture their own ligaments and tendons?
Is a full peripheral field of view good for a sport like fencing? For pitchers?
Can a batter wear non-prescription glasses when they hit?
Why do star soccer players run less distance than star players in other sports? How can you measure it?
How much impact do hockey and football pads actually dissipate?
Different answers to each of these questions illicit solution or product ideas that are often anchored in the world of hardware. However, similar exercises and questions can help spark ideas geared towards software and analytics solutions, and some may require expertise in both! I am a firm believe that asking these types of fundamental questions helps not only overcome confirmation bias within an organization about the best way to strategize and develop competitive advantages, and for new hardware products specifically, there is so much opportunity to seize.
In fairness, I do think teams (and even leagues) are beginning to see these potential advantages, and many like the NBA with its Launchpad incubator are beginning to spool up their own startup incubators and making investments in unique tech. In all these pursuits, though, governing bodies must actually allow individual athletes and teams to utilize and deploy unique hardware and products into competition. This might require new viable rules and regulations, but be difficult or impossible for many to do from a structural, contractual, or sponsorship perspective. However, I still think that if leagues allow teams to deploy their own analytics and software-based tools in practice and in-game, they should unlock the hardware realm as well!
If nothing else, this article has served as an outlet for some of the frustrations and ideas kicking around in the back of my mind. However, I do hope you walk away with a shared belief that the world of custom hardware and hardware-oriented innovation at the individual team and league level could see an uptick in popularity. Most importantly, I hope you have fun asking and answering your own inane questions about sports!
There’s the bell!
