Doolittle at ESPN: "Is positionless baseball MLB's next big thing?"

[folly412]

Intriguing piece featuring the Brewers, the recent trades and the position-shuffling.

 

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/24267936/is-positionless-baseball-mlb-next-big-thing

[Point Beer Is Best]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

[Boomer5]

That would end in 2 seconds if players would hit/bunt to defeat the shift.

[Boomer5]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

Maddux and Glavine would have had 5 ERAs if we have e-balls and strikes.

[topper09er]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

Rule 5.02a, you must have a catcher. Also without a catcher very short bunts would be a free hit

[bill hAll Star]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

Maddux and Glavine would have had 5 ERAs if we have e-balls and strikes.

 

I'd also have a lot less of an edge gambling on baseball.

[OnaBadger58]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

Maddux and Glavine would have had 5 ERAs if we have e-balls and strikes.

 

Chacin would have given up one less grand slam in his career too

[KeithStone53151]

This is very interesting. We'll see how that translates when games matter more. With the game on the line, you might see more guys trying to beat the shift by bunting or slap hitting opposite field against good pitchers than you normally would in a regular season game against a 5+ era pitcher.

 

I tend to enjoy how pretty much everyone outside the Brewers front office and fan base seems to assume Aguilar is big, slow, and immobile. He is 2 of those 3 things, but surprisingly nimble for his size and a good defender at 1b in general. Braun isn't very comfortable at 1b, but his defense in left is still very solid...he has quite a few highlight reel plays this year as proof...the author made him seem like an old man that needed a cane to move around out there. I know that isn't the point of the article, but mildly annoying comments from someone who is supposed to know something about baseball.

[jerichoholicninja]

The defining traits of that new era: There are no positions. There are only spray charts

 

What a crazy idea? Just put the fielders where the ball is most likely to be hit instead of equally spacing them apart on the field.

 

I am "self-taught" at baseball. My mom showed me how to throw a ball and swing a bat but I didn't really learn how the game is played (or is "supposed to be played") from my parents, coaches, etc, because I really didn't play much of it until high school. I haven't been drilled by "tradition" or the "that's just the way we've always done it" mentality so I always find it hard to understand when people have data in front of them that doesn't require any interpretation (like hitting spray charts) and they scoff at the thought of doing something different than what has always been done. There's so much of the Jim Thome attitude below:

 

Thome, on shifts: "Being a guy that the shift hurt -- they shifted me notoriously the last stages of my career -- I'd like to see them go straight up. I'd like to see baseball go back to traditional play. Personally, I'd like to see what it would do. Would it speed the game up? We don't know. How many times is the shift actually helping the team win?"

 

Umm, Jim. You just said that shifting hurt you as a hitter and then you questioned if it works. Of course it works and of course it's helping teams win.

[MadScientist]

The defining traits of that new era: There are no positions. There are only spray charts

 

What a crazy idea? Just put the fielders where the ball is most likely to be hit instead of equally spacing them apart on the field.

 

The article wasn't about the use of the shift per se, but about what players, with what skill sets are in the shifted positions. The basic alignment was not anything required by rules, it was done to have the best chance of infielders getting to balls. It wasn't always that way, in the beginning first baseman played very close to the bag, then one team figured you could get more balls by moving him over and having the pitcher cover first on balls hit to the right side.

 

The thing about the standard layout is that it requires players with certain preferred skills 2b and SS are fast / rangy with SS having a strong arm. First and 3rd need quick reactions, but need not necessarily be fast and cover ground. The new paradigm the Brewers are using is saying you not only don't have to put players in the traditional place, you don't have to have the traditional skill sets if your spray charts are good enough. Will it work? Will the defense still be saving a lot of runs? We have two months to get an idea.

[jerichoholicninja]

The defining traits of that new era: There are no positions. There are only spray charts

 

What a crazy idea? Just put the fielders where the ball is most likely to be hit instead of equally spacing them apart on the field.

 

The article wasn't about the use of the shift per se, but about what players, with what skill sets are in the shifted positions. The basic alignment was not anything required by rules, it was done to have the best chance of infielders getting to balls. It wasn't always that way, in the beginning first baseman played very close to the bag, then one team figured you could get more balls by moving him over and having the pitcher cover first on balls hit to the right side.

 

The thing about the standard layout is that it requires players with certain preferred skills 2b and SS are fast / rangy with SS having a strong arm. First and 3rd need quick reactions, but need not necessarily be fast and cover ground. The new paradigm the Brewers are using is saying you not only don't have to put players in the traditional place, you don't have to have the traditional skill sets if your spray charts are good enough. Will it work? Will the defense still be saving a lot of runs? We have two months to get an idea.

 

I get that and I think it's amazingly progressive thinking. If you're putting fielders where the ball is most likely to be hit the only real skill that a fielder needs is fielding the ball and making an accurate throw. Basically the bare minimum of skills. In theory, shifting makes range irrelevant, especially with a lefty shift. The player nearest the traditional short stop position is the only one who should be making a play to his right and most likely it's going to be a hit anyway.

[Oxy]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

 

Pure genius. The rules should obviously prevent this, but if they do not it is silly that teams have a catcher to begin the inning.

[MrTPlush]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

 

Pure genius. The rules should obviously prevent this, but if they do not it is silly that teams have a catcher to begin the inning.

 

Until you beat it into the ground by bunting and walk to first.

[KeithStone53151]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

 

Pure genius. The rules should obviously prevent this, but if they do not it is silly that teams have a catcher to begin the inning.

 

You'd still want a catcher for foul-tick 3rd strikes and catching pop outs near the plate. A catcher is probably more valuable defensively than a 5th infielder or 4th outfielder.

[OnaBadger58]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

 

Pure genius. The rules should obviously prevent this, but if they do not it is silly that teams have a catcher to begin the inning.

 

You'd still want a catcher for foul-tick 3rd strikes and catching pop outs near the plate. A catcher is probably more valuable defensively than a 5th infielder or 4th outfielder.

 

Wouldn't the batter get to first on every strikeout? Essentially a drop third strike.

[nate82]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

Who would catch the ball after the pitcher throws the ball?

 

Also you would just be allowing the runner to steal home or any base for that matter if there is no one to catch the ball.

[Oxy]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

Who would catch the ball after the pitcher throws the ball?

 

Also you would just be allowing the runner to steal home or any base for that matter if there is no one to catch the ball.

 

If I recall, there is a rule against "making a mockery of the game." Not having a catcher when there are no baserunners and less than 2 strikes would probably fall under this category even if it would be a "good" strategy.

[Ennder]

Even with an electronic umpire C would be one of the most important defensive positions in baseball.

 

The big change that is going on is that teams are realizing 3B is just not very important overall. You can shift that particular spot for a large portion of the game which results in other positions defense not being as valuable because there is an extra fielder helping them out a lot.

 

I would imagine in the future teams will value spray hitters a bit more and it will counteract this.

[BuckyBrewer61]

Once we install the electronic strikezone and move the umpire off to the side, you may as well play your catcher as a 4th OF or 5th IF. The catcher is near useless without any baserunners. A ball boy/girl will retrieve the ball and throw back to the pitcher.

 

Not even putting this in blue - this could happen.

 

Who would catch the ball after the pitcher throws the ball?

 

Also you would just be allowing the runner to steal home or any base for that matter if there is no one to catch the ball.

 

 

As has been mentioned above by Topper09er, there is a rule that you must have a catcher. So all moot points.

[jerichoholicninja]

Even without the rule, a pitcher needs a target to throw at. Trying to pitch to a spot without any visual cue is very difficult.

[homer]

I wonder if the "spray" hitter will gain value going forward?

[clancyphile]

I wonder if the "spray" hitter will gain value going forward?

 

Could very well be how you beat the shifts...

 

One team sees an edge in the trade-offs most of the rest of MLB makes, and exploits it. Other teams rush to adopt the new trend. Then somewhere, a team sees a possible edge due to the trade-offs inherent in the trend that's gripped MLB.

 

All of this has happened before... all of this will happen again.

[istanbultaye]

I think that it makes spray hitters along the lines of Cain and Yelich more valuable, since they actually hit well to all fields, as opposed to just making contact to all fields. Guys who can barely hit it out of the infield like Sogard are still going to be AAAA players even if they don't have a predominant field in their spray chart.