I'm having a hard time being convinced that the "new view" mask really makes that much difference.
A direct hit in the middle of your eyes is going to ring your bell no matter what. I have taken about 2-3 real "monster" shots using a Wilson Dynalite and in my opinion there is nothing that can stop a direct hit at high velocity.
I'm about to start using a "new view" mask here shortly. I chose it over the more common mask after looking at pictures between the two. My best guess is that it is easily less than 1 inch difference in depth.
A square hit is a square hit period, no matter low profile, bucket or regular.
My personal reason for choosing the new low profile mask was that from what I've read and heard there is quite a difference in the amount you can see. The ump-attire article even compared the new view masks "depth" as pretty much being the same as bucket helmets. I haven't heard anyone complaining about deflection related issues with bucket helmets.....?
Talking with a good friend of mine about choosing between the two types of masks and he made a good point. I mean we do have to "see" to "call" pitches right? So seeing better should be the ideal goal... at least in my opinion.. (and his, even though I just stole it!)
I honestly maybe get hit in the face mask about 1 in 7,500 - 10,000 pitches. Realistically I probably get a moderate hit to the face every 30 plate games or so. At best 1 "monster" hit a season, and to even get a hit where the angle of the bars would even help has to be the perfect storm.
So the way I see it, I'd rather have a better view of the pitch and "sacrifice" the "deflective properties" 99.99% of the time.
Am I on a lonely island by myself???
Last edited by Pensaump; Mon Oct 13, 2008 at 10:16pm.
|