Although I can understand the philosophy behind MLB not wanting them, they do need to stop the bat-shattering problems.

Let’s say the current round of radial bats perform no better than solid bats. They then won’t affect the game. But that doesn’t mean it’s impossible to make a radial bat that will give a hitter a great advantage. In order to keep traditionally-performing bats MLB would have to test every new bat, and keep a closer eye on the bats that are used in games. If a better-performing radial bat was invented MLB would have a hard time detecting them when they’re surrounded by other radial bats.

Now, on the other hand, in golf, cycling, some kinds of auto racing, and apparently college baseball, there are maximum performance levels that equipment can reach. Their equipment testing regimes aren’t always perfect, sometimes making designers make seemingly strange optimization choices for pro competition models (in cycling there are limits on how light and aerodynamic a frame can be, for example), but those sports all still work. MLB has tried to limit bat performance by specifying that bats have to be solid; players and batmakers have responded by using a type of wood that causes a safety hazard. It’s not really so different, and MLB can’t just stick their heads in the sand.

I don’t think it would be a bad idea to adopt the radial bats and deal with super-bats if and when someone invents them. At the same time, I think the real issue is figuring out what’s behind the shattering bats and making sure whatever it is is taken out of MLB. If it’s maple bats then ban maple. If, assuming maple is the issue, players consider maple to give them an advantage, introducing a new safe bat that performs below the level of maple bats isn’t going to change anything if the players can still choose maple.