Defensive value and shifting

[NievesNoNO]

Let me start by saying I haven't bothered to research any of this.

 

I'm curious if people think defensive shifting has negated some of the value of some of the more premium defenders. For instance do people think that Orlando Arcia might have less defensive value as he would've say 10 years ago when there wasn't as much shifting going on.... or is it more.. or unchanged because most everyone does it?

 

I tend to think that the defensive shifts probably do negate some value from those stud defenders.

 

Also, if you're shifting wouldn't it make sense to then place your best defender towards the open side. (and maybe teams are doing this. I don't see a lot of games) So, for example when/if the Brewers shift their entire infield to the left side, wouldn't it make the most sense to move Arcia to essentially 2nd base to cover potentially more ground if the ball is hit the other way or up the middle?

[MrTPlush]

No, to me it makes more sense to put Arcia on the side statistically it is hit to more often in a shift. Do you want the ball getting hit to your no range bad defender...or to someone who will cover even more range in the shift with slick hands? He covers just as much ground on the right side when they shift for a lefty. That is because he cover the 2nd base area while Villar is halfway to the right field wall.

 

I get the logic you are trying to use, but if said person hit it to the left side all the power to them cause usually they won’t. And having Arcia over there likely doesn’t help that.

[SeaBass]

If the stats show that a batter has a tendency to hit a ground ball to a certain area and you're shifting your defense to defend that, then moving your best defender to the area where there's the least chance of the ground ball being hit doesn't seem to make sense to me. You either trust your data or you don't.