How Can MLB Kick-Start Offense Again in the League?

Where have all the runs gone?

Not long ago, offense was the name of the game in Major League Baseball. But in the past few years, offense has become downright offensive—and not in a good way.

Consider the following statistics regarding the state of offense in 2013:

1. The league-wide runs per game per team number is 4.20 R/G, lowest since 1992 (4.12 R/G).
2. The league-wide batting average is .253, lowest dating back to 1990. 
3. The league-wide on-base percentage is .317, lowest dating back to 1990.
4. The league-wide weighted on-base percentage (wOBA) is .313, lowest dating back to 1990.

So in case you weren't buying into MLB's severely depleted run-scoring and hitting environment in 2013, it's time to make your purchase from the believer's bin.

How can baseball jump-start offense across the league? It's an intriguing question with plenty of possibilities.

The more controversial and fanciful ideas, though, aren't going to be entertained here. For instance, we're not going to suggest legalizing performance-enhancing drugs, especially in light of the recent suspensions related to the ongoing Biognesis investigation.

And no, forget the idea of adopting metal bats. As Bryce Harper said during the media session prior to participating in last month's Home Run Derby, "If major leaguers got to use metal bats, I would tell fans to get out of the stands so they don't get killed."

That goes double for fielders and pitchers, who already have enough trouble avoiding injury from comebackers hit by wooden bats. Just ask J.A. Happ and Alex Cobb.

But what about some options for upping offense that are based more on good, old-fashioned reality? Like these.

Adopt a Robot Strike Zone 

Here's the old we-have-the-technology-so-we-might-as-well-use-it case.

While the idea of instant replay in baseball is a divisive one, it has already been introduced to the game for determining home runs—and it's likely to be expanded soon too. So why not extend the efforts to include calling balls and strikes?

Anyone who watches baseball is aware of those little strike-zone-outlining boxes that appear in the lower-right corner of the television screen and indicate—almost magically—whether a borderline pitch is a strike or a ball.

Thanks to endeavors like QuesTec and all of the various other cameras used for broadcast purposes, ballparks already have the gadgets and gizmos needed to get this done.

But why would this improve offense? Think about how much variation there is now in strike zones, which can change based on everything from the umpire to the hitter to the inning to the count to the game situation. Certainly that doesn't make things any easier for batters, who occasionally have to worry about something like this happening:

Forcing hitters to deal with not only 95 mph fastballs, knee-buckling curves, wicked sliders and deceptive changeups but also moving and shifting strike zones? That's a battle batters aren't going to win very often.

But after a little time to adjust, hitters would welcome—and eventually have more opportunities to excel with—a more uniform strike zone.

Bring in the Fences

If players can't hit it out, move the walls in, right?

In recent years, shortening the distances between home plate and the outfield fences has become somewhat of a trend. Teams like the San Diego Padres, New York Mets and Seattle Mariners have all done this in the past season or two.

The good news is, these ballpark adjustments are helping hitters, which not only makes sense but also proves that it can be done.

Obviously, shorter distances leads to more home runs, which leads to more runs and more offense. But it also means fewer outs made, which results in more opportunities for more runs. That's a lot of "mores," but if we want to help hitters, isn't that the idea?

Add the DH to the NL

Here's another idea that the purists will hate, but it's still worth at least discussing.

Care to guess what the triple-slash line for hitting pitchers is in 2013? Try .133/.163/.172.

Now, how about for designated hitters this year? .256/.337/.425.

Step back and really ingest those numbers, and you'll realize that DHs own a batting average and on-base percentage that are more or less twice as high as pitchers. The difference in slugging percentage? Practically two-and-a-half times higher.

That's incredible. It's also an opportunity.

By removing pitchers from batting lineups altogether—c'mon, National League!—offense would spike dramatically. Even if there aren't as many sluggers acting as full-time DHs as there used to be, the addition by subtraction in this scenario would mean hundreds more runs would be scored over the course of a season.

Again, this is something MLB appears to be inching closer to at some point. Between the implementation of everyday interleague play this season and the arguments and logic for making the game more uniform, it might not be too long before pitchers no longer have to hit.

Considering how inept hurlers are at the plate, especially compared to how dominating they are on the mound, that would be a very good thing for offense.

Got any other suggestions for helping hitters? That's what the comments section below is for.

Stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference and FanGraphs.