I Don't Like The "Shift" In MLB....

[Pogo]

Here's another thing, unrelated to the shift, since we have some baseball minds here........

Say an offense has decent runners on the corners with less than two outs. Runner at 1B takes off on the pitch. Upon seeing the catcher throw to 2B, shouldn't that runner on third automatically break for the plate?

You see it once in a while and it seems to always work. Ball's gotta go P to C to 2B and back to C. That should be enough time for anybody. I think Ryan Howard could make it. We should see this more often. Whether the first runner gets thrown out or not, you have a run.

 

[martybegan]

At long last we agree on something.

I dunno about legislating it but yeah it is lame. But there's also a way around it. I still recall a great game against Sparky Anderson's Big Red Machine where they put the shift on for Richie Hebner, notorious lefty pull hitter. Hebner surveyed the field, laid down a bunt up the 3B line. Nobody there, no play. Second time up, Hebner surveyed the same shift, laid down a bunt up the 3B line. Nobody there, no play, 2 for 2. Third time up, shift again, Hebner surveyed the field, laid down a bunt up the 3B line. Nobody there, no play. 3 for 3.

Finally the fourth time up Sparky got it, went back to normal field, and Hebner promptly lined a single to right -- directly into the hole that the shift would have covered. 4 for 4. And that's how you make a defense shiftless.

The problem is current baseball metrics probably dictate that in the long run giving up the dinky single leads to less runs produced than the person swinging away into thew shift.

I do agree, however, that some team should at least TRY the bloop through the gap method to see how other teams react to it.

Maybe, maybe not. Laying down a bunt where no fielders exist may be just a single but at the same time it's not-an-out, and that gives one more batter a shot, so on that basis alone I'd think the odds favor the offense.

In the long term though, if a Ryan Howard somehow (I know it's hard to picture) starts bunting up the 3B line, it's eventually gonna force the defense to assign somebody there. Now if I were the defense and committed to the shift I guess I'd have my 3B stay where he is and shift the other three, leaving an opposite-field gap, and take my chances, but at least there's somebody to handle the bunt.

There probably is some Sabermetrics calc for all this, and while I was originally a fan of the extra analysis and Stats, to me it can get taken too far.

And it doesn't even have to be a bunt, if they can't handle it. Just a check swing doink into the gap.

 

[martybegan]

Here's another thing, unrelated to the shift, since we have some baseball minds here........

Say an offense has decent runners on the corners with less than two outs. Runner at 1B takes off on the pitch. Upon seeing the catcher throw to 2B, shouldn't that runner on third automatically break for the plate?

You see it once in a while and it seems to always work. Ball's gotta go P to C to 2B and back to C. That should be enough time for anybody. I think Ryan Howard could make it. We should see this more often. Whether the first runner gets thrown out or not, you have a run.

The counter for that, if they know they have a runner at third, is concede the runner going to second, and have the pitcher cut off the throw from the catcher, and gun it back to the catcher.

The counter-counter is for the runner at third to hold his full run until he can be sure the catcher is throwing to the 2nd baseman, but that delay then allows for the 2nd baseman to throw it back to the catcher for a try at the plate.

 

[Pogo]

There probably is some Sabermetrics calc for all this, and while I was originally a fan of the extra analysis and Stats, to me it can get taken too far.

Agree. Sometimes we humans just left-brain the shit out of something. Tim McCarver used to call it "paralysis through analysis".

 

[Pogo]

Here's another thing, unrelated to the shift, since we have some baseball minds here........

Say an offense has decent runners on the corners with less than two outs. Runner at 1B takes off on the pitch. Upon seeing the catcher throw to 2B, shouldn't that runner on third automatically break for the plate?

You see it once in a while and it seems to always work. Ball's gotta go P to C to 2B and back to C. That should be enough time for anybody. I think Ryan Howard could make it. We should see this more often. Whether the first runner gets thrown out or not, you have a run.

The counter for that, if they know they have a runner at third, is concede the runner going to second, and have the pitcher cut off the throw from the catcher, and gun it back to the catcher.

The counter-counter is for the runner at third to hold his full run until he can be sure the catcher is throwing to the 2nd baseman, but that delay then allows for the 2nd baseman to throw it back to the catcher for a try at the plate.

Yeah I know. So the runner on 3B has to see the throw get past the pitcher. But by definition of being on 3B he's already got a healthy lead so by the time the ball arrives at second he's at least halfway home. Then the 2B or SS has to receive the throw, tag the runner and relay back to the plate. I still think there's plenty of time.

Assuming that's true and would regularly work, it could lead to conceding 2B as a standard defense to protect the plate, which means the offense has a (nearly) automatic device to eliminate the force play, which then gives them a situation where any ground ball scores a run.

I should be managing. I've got as much playing time in the Show as Joe Maddon.

 

[Tom Horn]

Now if I were the defense and committed to the shift I guess I'd have my 3B stay where he is and shift the other three, leaving an opposite-field gap, and take my chances, but at least there's somebody to handle the bunt.

They normally put the 3B into RF and leave the SS on the left side of the infield. As I've already said, I have no problem with the shift as long as the infielders have to stay on the infield dirt.

 

[Pogo]

Now if I were the defense and committed to the shift I guess I'd have my 3B stay where he is and shift the other three, leaving an opposite-field gap, and take my chances, but at least there's somebody to handle the bunt.

They normally put the 3B into RF and leave the SS on the left side of the infield. As I've already said, I have no problem with the shift as long as the infielders have to stay on the infield dirt.

They leave the SS but he's way too distant to field a bunt plunked up the 3B line.

 

[Tom Horn]

They leave the SS but he's way too distant to field a bunt plunked up the 3B line.

Nobody pays to see the great hitters BUNT...it's absurd...everybody hates it which is why eventually the rules will be changed and exaggerated shifts outlawed.

 

[Votto]

Looks like a rover in a damn beer league......offense is WAY down because the saber-weenies figured out how to ruin the most beautiful game on earth by using computer-models to design a defense. Yeah I know they've played the percentages for years....lefty vs. lefty, how long a pitcher takes to get the ball to home if you want to steal a bag. Swinging outfielders around to the hitter's pull side if he can turn and burn a fastball. Or do you play him to swing late and swing the outfielders the other way? I know. And that's fine and I don't even care if the infielders swing around to mass on one side of the infield or the other......I say an infielder can't have his feet on the outfield grass....can't touch it...has to stay in the dirt. If one strays too far back, that's a ball one to the hitter....if he keeps doing it, the guy walks...that will stop this.....

Too many hits that have always been hits are being taken away. I don't watch baseball to see a 2-1 game....soccer fans can have that crap. I want to see these boys hitting some gappers....nothing gets fans off their asses faster than a stand-up triple. OFFENSE....seat-busters, fans going home with HR balls...not this chickenshit stuff.

So let me get this straight, the baseball unions have essentially turned baseball into the rich teams that always win and the poor teams that never see the light of day and you are worried about a "shift"?

Enjoy watching the Yankees/Red Sox in the Series.....again....this year.

 

[Pogo]

They leave the SS but he's way too distant to field a bunt plunked up the 3B line.

Nobody pays to see the great hitters BUNT...it's absurd...everybody hates it which is why eventually the rules will be changed and exaggerated shifts outlawed.

Nobody wants to see small ball? No I don't think that's true. When I was watching Richie Hebner defeat the shift all day in my example above I loved it every time, exactly because he kept beating it.

MLB puts way way too much emphasis on the extremes, i.e. the HR. We regularly hear reports of "Cespedes hit his 12th" without a noun following --- you're just supposed to assume "12th home run", which in turn implies that the HR is always the ultimate goal. That mentality has got to go. Smallball is creative.

 

[Tom Horn]

So let me get this straight, the baseball unions have essentially turned baseball into the rich teams that always win and the poor teams that never see the light of day and you are worried about a "shift"?

Enjoy watching the Yankees/Red Sox in the Series.....again....this year.

Kansas City won it all two years ago and almost won the year before that and Cleveland got to the WS last year....both small market, low payroll teams....so your theory is baloney. And yeah, like a lot of others, I see this shift business as the sabre metrics weenies ruining our game.

 

[rightwinger]

Here's another thing, unrelated to the shift, since we have some baseball minds here........

Say an offense has decent runners on the corners with less than two outs. Runner at 1B takes off on the pitch. Upon seeing the catcher throw to 2B, shouldn't that runner on third automatically break for the plate?

You see it once in a while and it seems to always work. Ball's gotta go P to C to 2B and back to C. That should be enough time for anybody. I think Ryan Howard could make it. We should see this more often. Whether the first runner gets thrown out or not, you have a run.

I agree and the runner on first can try to take out the guy covering second
Takes perfect timing and throws to get the guy out at the plate

Only problem is if the catcher acts like he is throwing to second and throws to the pitcher as a cut off

 

[rightwinger]

They leave the SS but he's way too distant to field a bunt plunked up the 3B line.

Nobody pays to see the great hitters BUNT...it's absurd...everybody hates it which is why eventually the rules will be changed and exaggerated shifts outlawed.

Nobody wants to see small ball? No I don't think that's true. When I was watching Richie Hebner defeat the shift all day in my example above I loved it every time, exactly because he kept beating it.

MLB puts way way too much emphasis on the extremes, i.e. the HR. We regularly hear reports of "Cespedes hit his 12th" without a noun following --- you're just supposed to assume "12th home run", which in turn implies that the HR is always the ultimate goal. That mentality has got to go. Smallball is creative.

I agree

The NFL did the same thing in abandoning the run

 

[martybegan]

Here's another thing, unrelated to the shift, since we have some baseball minds here........

Say an offense has decent runners on the corners with less than two outs. Runner at 1B takes off on the pitch. Upon seeing the catcher throw to 2B, shouldn't that runner on third automatically break for the plate?

You see it once in a while and it seems to always work. Ball's gotta go P to C to 2B and back to C. That should be enough time for anybody. I think Ryan Howard could make it. We should see this more often. Whether the first runner gets thrown out or not, you have a run.

The counter for that, if they know they have a runner at third, is concede the runner going to second, and have the pitcher cut off the throw from the catcher, and gun it back to the catcher.

The counter-counter is for the runner at third to hold his full run until he can be sure the catcher is throwing to the 2nd baseman, but that delay then allows for the 2nd baseman to throw it back to the catcher for a try at the plate.

Yeah I know. So the runner on 3B has to see the throw get past the pitcher. But by definition of being on 3B he's already got a healthy lead so by the time the ball arrives at second he's at least halfway home. Then the 2B or SS has to receive the throw, tag the runner and relay back to the plate. I still think there's plenty of time.

Assuming that's true and would regularly work, it could lead to conceding 2B as a standard defense to protect the plate, which means the offense has a (nearly) automatic device to eliminate the force play, which then gives them a situation where any ground ball scores a run.

I should be managing. I've got as much playing time in the Show as Joe Maddon.

It all depends on how fast AND how smart a base runner the guy on third is. If you are missing either one, he is probably dead meat.

 

[Pogo]

Here's another thing, unrelated to the shift, since we have some baseball minds here........

Say an offense has decent runners on the corners with less than two outs. Runner at 1B takes off on the pitch. Upon seeing the catcher throw to 2B, shouldn't that runner on third automatically break for the plate?

You see it once in a while and it seems to always work. Ball's gotta go P to C to 2B and back to C. That should be enough time for anybody. I think Ryan Howard could make it. We should see this more often. Whether the first runner gets thrown out or not, you have a run.

I agree and the runner on first can try to take out the guy covering second
Takes perfect timing and throws to get the guy out at the plate

Only problem is if the catcher acts like he is throwing to second and throws to the pitcher as a cut off

That would be the only defense. The answer to it is the runner on third doesn't break until he sees the ball pass the pitcher which I think leaves plenty of time. You'd need a lightning-quick relay and a perfect throw on both ends to get him so I like the chances.

Of course OTOH... if I'm the catcher, what I might do as a countermeasure is to throw to third instead of second. Might catch the guy off the base like a pickoff, and he won't be expecting it. Of course --- you signal that play in advance and you work on it in spring training.

See, this is why smallball is more interesting. More different things can happen.

 

[rightwinger]

Here's another thing, unrelated to the shift, since we have some baseball minds here........

Say an offense has decent runners on the corners with less than two outs. Runner at 1B takes off on the pitch. Upon seeing the catcher throw to 2B, shouldn't that runner on third automatically break for the plate?

You see it once in a while and it seems to always work. Ball's gotta go P to C to 2B and back to C. That should be enough time for anybody. I think Ryan Howard could make it. We should see this more often. Whether the first runner gets thrown out or not, you have a run.

I agree and the runner on first can try to take out the guy covering second
Takes perfect timing and throws to get the guy out at the plate

Only problem is if the catcher acts like he is throwing to second and throws to the pitcher as a cut off

That would be the only defense. The answer to it is the runner on third doesn't break until he sees the ball pass the pitcher which I think leaves plenty of time. You'd need a lightning-quick relay and a perfect throw on both ends to get him so I like the chances.

Of course OTOH... if I'm the catcher, what I might do as a countermeasure is to throw to third instead of second. Might catch the guy off the base like a pickoff, and he won't be expecting it. Of course --- you signal that play in advance and you work on it in spring training.

See, this is why smallball is more interesting. More different things can happen.

I've also seen it where the runner stealing second intentionally gets into a rundown and the guy on third goes halfway and breaks for home

 

[Manonthestreet]

They leave the SS but he's way too distant to field a bunt plunked up the 3B line.

Nobody pays to see the great hitters BUNT...it's absurd...everybody hates it which is why eventually the rules will be changed and exaggerated shifts outlawed.

You arent a great hitter if you hit the ball to same spot most of the time......

 

[Tom Horn]

You arent a great hitter if you hit the ball to same spot most of the time......

Deep...man... But back to reality, "small ball" is the punch and judy approach that died for good reason back in the 1960's because Americans like HOME RUNS... Babe Ruth once said homerun hitters drive Cadillacs, singles hitters drive Chevys. Spray hitters are a dime a dozen....pitchers have no fear of them because they can dictate where and how the weak hitters make contact. I know the "small ball" gives the socialists in this thread little woodies, but the average fan wants to see OFFENSE not bunts, flares, and dribblers....that's candyass and irritating same as their politics. My OP is very specific about what I want to see in the future....My first time at Tiger Stadium (then called Briggs Stadium) was in 1959 just as the new era was peeking through....two years later Maris and Mantle vied all summer to see if one of them would break the Babe's record of 60 HRs and Maris did. Mick, a switch-hitter, finished with 54 and a leg injury. The country was enthralled with them. Both pull-hitters, which is the ultimate skill in baseball....nobody used 4 outfielders then and shouldn't be allowed to now...it's UNamerican.

 

[Manonthestreet]

You arent a great hitter if you hit the ball to same spot most of the time......

Deep...man... But back to reality, "small ball" is the punch and judy approach that died for good reason back in the 1960's because Americans like HOME RUNS... Babe Ruth once said homerun hitters drive Cadillacs, singles hitters drive Chevys. Spray hitters are a dime a dozen....pitchers have no fear of them because they can dictate where and how the weak hitters make contact. I know the "small ball" gives the socialists in this thread little woodies, but the average fan wants to see OFFENSE not bunts, flares, and dribblers....that's candyass and irritating same as their politics. My OP is very specific about what I want to see in the future....My first time at Tiger Stadium (then called Briggs Stadium) was in 1959 just as the new era was peeking through....two years later Maris and Mantle vied all summer to see if one of them would break the Babe's record of 60 HRs and Maris did. Mick, a switch-hitter, finished with 54 and a leg injury. The country was enthralled with them. Both pull-hitters, which is the ultimate skill in baseball....nobody used 4 outfielders then and shouldn't be allowed to now...it's UNamerican.

reality is you have plenty of home runs, without plate setters their punch is reduced. Rod Carew, WAde Boggs, George Brett, ....what crappy players

 

[Tom Horn]

reality is you have plenty of home runs, without plate setters their punch is reduced. Rod Carew, WAde Boggs, George Brett, ....what crappy players

Once again you're in some other universe.....have you ever played baseball??????