This 'shift thing' ain't so new. (1946 World Series)
Posted on 06/23/2018 4:25:05 AM PDT by a little elbow grease
There is a haunting stirring in the baseball community to establish that fielders defensive “shifts” should be against the rules.
From BusinessInsider.com: “MLB's New Commissioner Is Open To Banning Defensive Shifts To Increase Scoring — Here's A Simple Way To Do It.”
Does this seem to anyone else as more than heavy-handed, almost totalitarian???
Do you suppose that they also will want to impel OUTFIELDERS NOT TO SHIFT, play deeper in the outfield when a power hitter comes to the plate?
Do they suppose to suggest that when a sacrifice bunt is most likely about to be attempted, that the first and third basemen should NOT BE PERMITTED to creep in toward the plate in order to get the ball and throw out the runner at second base for a force play?
Should outfielders not be permitted to shade toward the right field line when a strong left handed pull hitter comes to the plate? My, my.
Baseball has been shifting since Ted Williams and even before that. Now that we realize its effectiveness, we exploit the advantage. Personally, I don't think that this particular strategy EVER should be made illegal.
As a baseball fan said on reddit.com: “People hate the shift when their team hits into it, but love it when the opposing team hits into your shift. It's a part of the game now. Hitters will just have to adjust.
As Wee Willie Keeler used to say, “ Keep your eyes clear, and hit’ em where they ain’t: that’s all.”
I’ll just say this now …………. I find this idea of restrictions on defensive players’ shifts to be about the most ignorant, idiotic, witless, reactionary, vacuous, mindless, unintelligent, half-baked, harebrained, imprudent, unwise, and foolish idea of which I have ever heard.
“If all seven position players want to form a human pyramid behind second base then they should be allowed to.” LOL
________________
LEAVE THE GAME ALONE …………… and hit’ em where they ain’t.
What do you all think of telling defensive players where to play?
Crazy, eh?
This 'shift thing' ain't so new. (1946 World Series)
I’m more concerned with length of games than with scoring. A well pitched 1-0 game is a beauty to behold.
But, to speed up games, I’d limit each side to 3 or 4 pitchers per game and 1 to each 3 innings after 9.
lol ...... and it worked.
The hitter was an idiot.
The only reason there are baseball defensive positions is because they offered the best odds of covering the bases to make outs and the most even distribution across the field in general. I doubt that ‘second baseman’ or ‘shortstop’ even appear in the rules. Tradition and common sense do not always dictate location on the diamond.
If a team wanted to array 7 fielders within 30 ft of home plate to catch a bunt that would be entirely kosher as long as they’re within the foul lines.
The issue, as always, is that the players don’t like having their liabilities exposed. As one baseball writer noted recently, a team shifted and dared the hitter simply to make contact to the opposite field over 17 pitches or so and the major leaguer couldn’t do it. How can that be the fault of the defense who exposed fully half the infield?
If MLB wants to increase scoring, then maybe they should eliminate half the players on the field. Or maybe they can make everyone play with 50-pound weights chained to their ankles. WTF?
All the batter needed to do was lay a bunt to left to get on base, instead he hit it right at the left fielder who was standing behind the shortstop, who was standing behind the second baseman, but the right fielder ran up and caught it on the fly.
There's some honor system or union contract involved I suppose, because it doesn't make sense and looks silly.
Shifts have been around in some form since the 1870’s. And there is no evidence it works to increases on base % unless you are talking a tiny fraction of one percent.
I heard a stray reference on a telecast last week. I didn’t catch all of it. I’m with you. There is no reason to prohibit the “shift.” If the offensive side can’t take advantage by stealing third, or bunting, or being a spray hitter, they don’t deserve to succeed. Maybe next they should limit the speed the pitcher can throw the ball? Or maybe the amount of movement on a curve ball? Or even start every batter with a 3 ball count.
I once saw a MLB team deploy a rather unusual strategy. The bases were loaded with no outs in the bottom of the ninth and the score tied. The team in the field placed 5 players in the infield to cut down a runner at the plate. Any ground ball getting through the infield would have been a walk off. Any fly ball to moderate/deep outfield would be a walkoff. So, the defense deployed 5 players in the infield to protect the lines, and enhance the probability of a groundball resulting in a double play. Over the years, I’ve thought about that many times.
In that particular instance the batter grounded into a 7-2-3 double play with the left fielder playing at the gap between 5 and 6. The SS was in front of second base. The next batter, when the defense resumed a “normal” placement, filed out to deep left center field.
You always see something new at every game.
Gwjack
Hitters need to learn to adapt.
Right now the game is driven by sabermetrics. OPS über alles. A walk is NOT as good as a hit.
When Ty Cobb attended a game where Ted Williams hit into a shift, he nearly went crazy. He said that if they did that to him, they would never get him out. Williams was an intuitive sabermetrician. He preferred taking a chance on an extra base hit over an easy single.
______
http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/smizik-on-sports/2014/07/19/Bob-Smizik-The-day-The-Deacon-went-18/stories/201407190127
Today marks the 59th anniversary of one of the greatest individual feats in the more than 100-year history of Pirates baseball. If it were not for 12 perfect innings pitched by Harvey Haddix in 1959, it could well be the greatest pitching performance in team history, although it is little remembered.
On July 19, 1955, Vernon Law was the starting pitcher in the Pirates’ 4-3 win over the Milwaukee Braves. Law, nicknamed The Deacon, was not the winning pitcher and didn’t even get a complete game on that Tuesday night at Forbes Field. But the absence of those barometers of success does not diminish his stunning accomplishment.
In this era of pitch counts, side sessions and all-around babying of pitchers, what Law did in 1955 is breathtaking in its magnitude.
The game went 19 innings. Law started and pitched the first 18 innings before being lifted for a pinch-hitter.
In those 18 innings, he allowed nine hits, two runs -- only one of which was earned -- two walks and 12 strikeouts.
ElRoy Face, the great reliever who was a teammate of Law’s, recalled the performance with awe. “He threw over 200 pitches,” he said.
It’s not like Law was well-rested going in to his 18-inning stint. In his three previous starts, July 6, 10 and 15, he had pitched nine, nine and eight innings.
____________________________
Excellent post!
The weak knee, wet, pink panty idiots float a BS regulation to see how many assholes salute. Pissonthemall.!!
Try that with a runner on first. I remember Betts stealing second against the shift, and he never broke stride as he headed for third. There was no one covering. He was perfectly correct, of course. If he reached second, they were giving him third, there was no need to slide if he beat the throw. I think the infielder covering second was slightly stunned because he had never seen a base runner stealing second standing up and in in full stride.
1. Playing surfaces are shrinking. This isn't exactly true, but it is effectively true when you see how much bigger, faster and more athletic players have become. Modern athletes simply cover more area in a defined period of time than their predecessors even just a few years ago.
2. Analytics are taking over the game. With modern computing power and readily available data, it is now easy to get detailed information about even the most minute situations on the field.
Item #2 probably has a bigger effect on baseball than on any other sport, since it's the one sport where every "play" is made from a set position where the DEFENSE has control of the ball. The shift is just one aspect of this data-driven approach to the game. Another aspect is that the role of the MLB manager has basically disappeared. Computers dictate the matchups and the strategy, and the decisions are all made from an office instead of the dugout. That's why the days of the vintage "character" managers like Casey Stengel, Earl Weaver and Tommy Lasorda are over.
One of the consequences of these changes is that scoring will have a natural tendency to decline as time goes on. This is because it's easier to manage and strategize a defensive system in most sports with a bunch of players who are good athletes and are willing to work hard. Offensive production, on the other hand, usually requires exceptional talent that can't really be "coached" into a player.
Proggs are ruining everything else so why should baseball be immune?
Schemes like this could ruin Baseball. So much of what makes Baseball fascinating is strategy, outmaneuvering the odds. There's already too much interference. Example....in playoffs, long breaks between innings affect the flow and probably even the outcome of the game. I don't even like to watch playoff games because of that.
Now why are they trying to tell the coaches what to do? I thought the purpose of the coaching was to win.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.