Eliminating Defensive Shifts?

[BuckyBrewer61]

Already miss good ole Allan after seeing this...

 

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12221038

 

Seriously? It's the commissioner's job to eliminate "really smart people in the game" from gaining "a competitive advantage?" That sounds like good strategy to me. Sounds like the new commish just wants to increase offense artificially and pander to the marginal fan to seek the almighty dollar - not that this should be surprising.

[jerichoholicninja]

This would be a pretty terrible idea. Would he also eliminate preventive bunt defense since the 1st and 3rd basemen play out of position?

 

I saw a comment on MLB Trade Rumors about this that said if they want to increase offense they might as well eliminate breaking balls and have the hitter tell the pitcher where to throw it like the game was intended.

[pete]

Such a remarkable thing to say. He was Selig's right hand man at least in recent history and his choice to succeed him. He also chose Fred Wilpon as head of the finance committee. Sad.

[Eye Black]

Eliminating defensive shifts seems like an awful idea. Who exactly is it going to appease? If anything it becomes more controversial by potentially having teams push the limits and forcing umpires to move fielders. There is no possible argument that could get me on board with this concept.

[trwi7]

How about trying to hit it away from the shift? Easier said than done, I know but if you do it enough they might ease off on the shift a little bit.

 

I mean, should we make outfielders play straightaway or is it okay for them to shift? Shifting outfielders take away extra base hits. Shifting infielders take away singles. If you want to increase offense, don't have outfielders shift. Of course that would be stupid too.

[jerichoholicninja]

Let's get rid of the foul lines too while we're at it. I mean there are so many balls that land foul that would have been hits if not for those silly foul lines.

[TooLiveBrew]

And while we're at it, let's make sure the catcher can't position himself in different locations behind the plate. Wouldn't want the pitcher to be gaining a competitive advantage.

[bill hAll Star]

The worst thing about this is I wouldn't be able to hear the Harold Reynolds-types discuss how managers are foolish for implementing shifts when some guy pokes one to a vacated spot.

[DuWayne Steurer]

I can't begin to express what a terrible idea this is. Unbelievable.

[folly412]

Sweet, let's draw lines on the field to box in each defensive player too. We can even spin that off as a player safety move since it would reduce collisions if every fielder stayed in his box.

[ewitkows]

Half the time I think they just throw these stupid ideas out there and see if it sticks

[JohnBriggs12]

If enough guys defy the shifts, they'll go away for all but the most dangerous sluggers. That's how I hope it ends, not through artificial rules changes. Pitchers get away with bad pitches that are hit hard into the shifts, and then are not rewarded when they induce what would be easy ground ball outs to "normal" infield positions only to see they've been vacated. That takes from the art of pitching and it skews the stats as much as PED's.

[Patrick425]

I'm so glad that it appears most people posting here agree that this is an awful idea. Seems like he just wants to appeal to the lowest common denominator that believe that offense is the only thing that makes sports appealing. What really bothers me is this quote I saw from him:

 

Manfred made it clear that examining the pace of the game is first on his list of priorities, but not far behind will be finding ways to "inject additional offense into the game."

 

 

This seems similar to some of the crazy golf ideas that have been thrown around (reduce courses to 13 holes and make the size of the cup bigger). Really? Is there where the collective attention span of American's is currently at?

[dlk9s]

Sweet, let's draw lines on the field to box in each defensive player too. We can even spin that off as a player safety move since it would reduce collisions if every fielder stayed in his box.

When contacted for comment, Yuniesky Betancourt said, "I tried to tell everyone that I was ahead of my time, but nooooo, you didn't listen."

[reillymcshane]

Sweet, let's draw lines on the field to box in each defensive player too. We can even spin that off as a player safety move since it would reduce collisions if every fielder stayed in his box.

When contacted for comment, Yuniesky Betancourt said, "I tried to tell everyone that I was ahead of my time, but nooooo, you didn't listen."

Thank you. This made me laugh.

[reillymcshane]

This is really, really moronic. You're taking away where a team can place its players. Just considering that is moronic.

 

How about just raising the strike zone a few inches. The great decline in offense coincided with the expansion of the bottom of the strike zone a few years ago.

 

Amazing that this is one of the first things the guy is considering.

[patrickgpe]

day 1 on the job and is trying to ruin the quirkiness of baseball, not a good sign.

[TooLiveBrew]

I'm so glad that it appears most people posting here agree that this is an awful idea. Seems like he just wants to appeal to the lowest common denominator that believe that offense is the only thing that makes sports appealing. What really bothers me is this quote I saw from him:

 

Manfred made it clear that examining the pace of the game is first on his list of priorities, but not far behind will be finding ways to "inject additional offense into the game."

 

 

This seems similar to some of the crazy golf ideas that have been thrown around (reduce courses to 13 holes and make the size of the cup bigger). Really? Is there where the collective attention span of American's is currently at?

This post is boring. I'm bored. Way too many words. Ugh.

[RobertR]

Terrible idea. Probably not implementable either. Believe it or not, some people like to see good defense as well as offense.

 

There's a natural, within the rules, cure for defensive shifts if teams believe it's hampering their offense. Go the other way occasionally. If some players can't adjust, then maybe guys that will go the other way are the new market inefficiency.

[jerichoholicninja]

Terrible idea. Probably not implementable either. Believe it or not, some people like to see good defense as well as offense.

 

There's a natural, within the rules, cure for defensive shifts if teams believe it's hampering their offense. Go the other way occasionally. If some players can't adjust, then maybe guys that will go the other way are the new market inefficiency.

 

I wouldn't go quite that far but I think there is something to it. I remember reading an article during the World Series that either the Giants or Royals (can't remember which) looks for hitters that don't have pull tendencies to neutralize the effects of defensive shifts.

[pacopete4]

Terrible idea. Probably not implementable either. Believe it or not, some people like to see good defense as well as offense.

 

There's a natural, within the rules, cure for defensive shifts if teams believe it's hampering their offense. Go the other way occasionally. If some players can't adjust, then maybe guys that will go the other way are the new market inefficiency.

 

 

I heard you just have to swing harder so you hit the ball harder and earlier too, so you make sure to pull it. That will beat the shift every time!

[RobDeer 45]

What a joke this would be. Can't even say anything else because it would make me so mad.

[Bombers]

At first, I thought the same thing, well this seems stupid. But the question asker in me said, ok - what is the argument for this? So I did some looking into last year and started to realize, well maybe there is an argument. Ultimately the argument is, has defensive shifting suppressed not just hitting in general but specifically left handed hitters? The answer is clearly yes. Advanced statistics have hurt all hitters (IMO) as defenses can align themselves to spots on the field you are prone to hitting to. That part, I can get past as those same advanced stats can provide a benefit to smart hitters to know how pitchers work. However, with lefties, the defense can pull a player way away from his normal spot (left side of infield) and provide an advantage to the defense whereas they rarely do that shift vs righties. Say what you want but their is proof to this as SI reported last year:

http://www.si.com/mlb/2014/07/22/shifts-rule-change-lefthanded-batters-david-ortiz

 

I am sure they cherry picked some numbers, but it does make sense. I for one would be slightly peeved as a lefty hitter. It's a shift that can only be used on lefties. And I know, we can all say "well, just drop down a bunt, it's sooooo easy!" - which is a very easy thing to say. But I highly doubt bunting a 94 MPH slider is "easy." So, if you are generally more of a power hitter, and probably haven't bunted since spring training or maybe not even for a few years are you really going to bust this out in a game and lay down a bunt?

 

I guess to me, I am starting to believe you need to have 2 infielders on the left side of the infield and 2 on the right isn't such a bad idea. I am not saying you can't shift. But when they play the 3rd basement in-between 3rd and SS and put the SS to the right of 2nd, and then the 2nd basement in shallow RF, that is getting out of control. (And then on top of it, the pitcher throws nothing but inside of the plate pitches to make sure the left-handed hitter can't go to the opposite field.)

[jerichoholicninja]

At first, I thought the same thing, well this seems stupid. But the question asker in me said, ok - what is the argument for this? So I did some looking into last year and started to realize, well maybe there is an argument. Ultimately the argument is, has defensive shifting suppressed not just hitting in general but specifically left handed hitters? The answer is clearly yes. Advanced statistics have hurt all hitters (IMO) as defenses can align themselves to spots on the field you are prone to hitting to. That part, I can get past as those same advanced stats can provide a benefit to smart hitters to know how pitchers work. However, with lefties, the defense can pull a player way away from his normal spot (left side of infield) and provide an advantage to the defense whereas they rarely do that shift vs righties. Say what you want but their is proof to this as SI reported last year:

http://www.si.com/mlb/2014/07/22/shifts-rule-change-lefthanded-batters-david-ortiz

 

I am sure they cherry picked some numbers, but it does make sense. I for one would be slightly peeved as a lefty hitter. It's a shift that can only be used on lefties. And I know, we can all say "well, just drop down a bunt, it's sooooo easy!" - which is a very easy thing to say. But I highly doubt bunting a 94 MPH slider is "easy." So, if you are generally more of a power hitter, and probably haven't bunted since spring training or maybe not even for a few years are you really going to bust this out in a game and lay down a bunt?

 

I guess to me, I am starting to believe you need to have 2 infielders on the left side of the infield and 2 on the right isn't such a bad idea. I am not saying you can't shift. But when they play the 3rd basement in-between 3rd and SS and put the SS to the right of 2nd, and then the 2nd basement in shallow RF, that is getting out of control. (And then on top of it, the pitcher throws nothing but inside of the plate pitches to make sure the left-handed hitter can't go to the opposite field.)

 

That is just strategy. Lefty's don't need to bunt, just go the other way or up the middle. Be a complete hitter. If teams aren't going to be able to take advantage of hitters weaknesses then they shouldn't be able to throw certain pitches or pitch to locations that hitters can't handle either.

 

Shifting the defense against lefty's is, as Mr. Burn's would say, playing the percentages. If teams can't play percentages then there should be no pinch hitters, no changing pitchers to get a favorable matchup, no starting a bench RHB over a LHB against a tough lefty.

[topper09er]

Great idea, lets copy the NBA and introduce the illegal defense? What is the penalty going to be? Maybe the hitting team will get to hit the ball off a tee instead of the next pitch. That would be so great because it would cause more dingers, and dingers make money and the only goal for any professional sports league should be to increase the money that can be made in the only industry with a legal monopoly. Looks like MLB is really trying to compete with the NBA, NFL and NCAA for the title of biggest wh*re league. They have all already correctly realigned their priorities to:

 

1. Sucking every possible cent out of every single thing that happens even though we have a legal monopoly

2. Average mindless "fan" who thinks Sportscenter is interesting or is very concerned with Lebron's twitter account or really wants to know who Aaron Rodgers is dating (we may be able to extract an extra cent from these idiots)

...

999999999999999999998. Life long die hard fan who follows their team when they are below .500 (they will give us their money no matter what we do)

999999999999999999999. Integrity of the sport/things we should not change even if we could make some more money by changing it.