Manfred: Eliminate Shifts

[justD]

You should've heard Buck's reaction an hour ago on 105.7...

Something like, "Did you hear what they're talking about now?!?!?!"

He said he honestly wants to be open-minded about any ideas they have, is sure they've done a lot of research on it and he's interested in hearing what they're research entails.

And, of course, he was being completely facetious about that. :laughlol: I love his subtle jabs he does!!

He had to stop himself from saying much, said every time he's on that show he says something that gets himself into trouble...

[harp6]

Why did it take over a century for MLB teams to start using shifts?

Shifts have always been around in baseball, it is just that now one type of hitter has a certain shift being placed on them and some people do not like it. No one complains when the outfielders move in on a weaker linedrive hitter. The weaker linedrive hitter has had to adapt to the shift since the beginning of baseball because they did not have the power to routinely put it over the outfielders heads. Their playing field was always smaller than the power hitters playing field because of their abilities, so they had to figure out how to become a smarter hitter and hit them where they ain't. While those weaker hitting players have had to beat the shift by being smarter, it is assumed that it would be bad for baseball for left-handed power hitters to do the same thing. So it brings it back to my one simple thought, why cater to one type of hitter and not another? Keep it simple. Keep it the way it has always been. Why dummy the game down because of certain players lack of ability. Players need to adapt to the shifts, baseball should not have to adapt the game because of players talents or abilities or lack thereof.

[Can_of_corn]

Why did it take over a century for MLB teams to start using shifts?

It didn't.

[TakebackOPACY]

Just eliminate the shortstop. What the hell is he doing out there in the first place? His only purpose is to make it more difficult for the batter to put the ball in play. Often, he helps the defense get two outs in one play! Sheesh, that's awful.

[Can_of_corn]

Just eliminate the shortstop. What the hell is he doing out there in the first place? His only purpose is to make it more difficult for the batter to put the ball in play. Often, he helps the defense get two outs in one play! Sheesh, that's awful.

Owners will be down for it, one less player to pay.

[TakebackOPACY]

Just eliminate the shortstop. What the hell is he doing out there in the first place? His only purpose is to make it more difficult for the batter to put the ball in play. Often, he helps the defense get two outs in one play! Sheesh, that's awful.

Actually, now that I think about it:

• Eliminate the Shortstop
• Put a circle around each bag (I guess it's a semi-circle around 1st and 3rd) and three circles in the outfield. Defenders have to stand in the circle until the ball is hit.
• I suppose we could actually eliminate an outfielder too.

We should also consider using paddles instead of bats. Or allow the hitter to choose his pitcher.

Just a thought: Have you noticed that the goal to speed up the game and the goal to increase offense contradict each other in many ways?

[justD]

Why did it take over a century for MLB teams to start using shifts?

In-game (or at least pregame) availability of spray patterns per hitter, data that was not previously available to the extent it is now, right?

[mdbdotcom]

Shift: Eliminate Manfred

[Can_of_corn]

In-game (or at least pregame) availability of spray patterns per hitter, data that was not previously available to the extent it is now, right?

Spray data was available at your local bookstore in the early '90's.

Of course the data now is a ton more detailed but one of the yearly baseball guides included the spray charts for every hit a position player had the previous year.

I already mentioned they used the shift on Williams. Infielders used to play on the outfield grass when Ernie Lombardi was at bat.

The practice has been around, it is just a lot more advanced now.

[justD]

The practice has been around, it is just a lot more advanced now.

Hence my inclusion of the phrase "to the extent it is now." He also asked about an entire century.

[Can_of_corn]

Hence my inclusion of the phrase "to the extent it is now." He also asked about an entire century.

First professional game was in 1871.

According to Wiki the shift was first used against Cy Williams during the 1920s.

That isn't 100 years.

My guess as to why the shift wasn't adapted earlier is that in the early days of baseball many players used large bats and didn't produce great bat speed. That would help them combat the shift.

Why it wasn't used more in the later half of the twentieth century I have no idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infield_shift

[DrungoHazewood]

Why did it take over a century for MLB teams to start using shifts?

There's pretty good evidence that King Kelly's bizarre fielding stats (i.e. five times as many assists/game as a typical outfielder) are a direct result of him being listed as an outfielder in the box score, but would often shift in to play all kinds of places in the infield. In, like, 1885. If you outlaw shifts you outlaw things that went on in baseball 125 years ago.

[DrungoHazewood]

Also, I'm generally opposed to rules that punish people for innovating. I love shifts, and eligible tackles, and Eddie Gaedel. And I at least chuckle at Bill Veeck's movable screen he put up in his minor league Brewers' right field for one game before then changed the rule, just when the other team was up.

[Moose Milligan]

There's pretty good evidence that King Kelly's bizarre fielding stats (i.e. five times as many assists/game as a typical outfielder) are a direct result of him being listed as an outfielder in the box score, but would often shift in to play all kinds of places in the infield. In, like, 1885. If you outlaw shifts you outlaw things that went on in baseball 125 years ago.

I took the question to mean how come it took this long to catch on. Shifts have been around forever but they never seemed to be as common as they are now.

[justD]

I took the question to mean how come it took this long to catch on. Shifts have been around forever but they never seemed to be as common as they are now.

Me too.

I still think having more data available in near-realtime has made a difference, but how about this:

Theory: It hadn't been a thing recently until Joe Maddon started using shifts in most games, because he likes to think "out of the box" and no one else was doing it, and he needed an edge given the rosters he had to work with. When they became more successful and it became something you had to prepare for in facing the Rays, teams might have had to start using that approach to "keep up with the competition" as it were.

I believe, and I may be completely off base of course, but I believe using the shift against Ted Williams was a reaction to a far more obvious trend/weakness he had, as well as him being a much more ominous threat at the plate than anyone else. I believe the shift against him was a reaction to that specific threat, and that his weakness was identified as a result, and pursued/defended against with the shift specifically because he was such a threat, not because teams felt using the shift was a better way to play the game day-to-day, as it seems to be heading towards now.

So my additional theory is that teams are now having to respond to the growing threat of other teams using shifts, by using shifts themselves, and it's starting to become more common as a result.

Caveat: If you guys are suggesting that the original question had a false assumption -- that the shift hasn't gotten more common recently -- then that's something I haven't considered, I grant that. I've been posting under the assumption that it has, whether it was used against Ted Williams or not.