A childhood memory about hitting. Maybe relevant

[HowAboutThat]

Dallas is home one of the oldest stations in the world, WBAP 820. For years they had a radio call-in talk show called “sports at six.” In the early days it was pretty random, though the focus was usually on whatever sport was in season: Dallas Chapparals, Dallas Tornado, Cowboys, Rangers.

They didn’t have any call screeners, you just call, they answer the phone and talk to you.

I was a little boy, 13 or 14, and I was annoyed by the wimpy little hits that players were getting, And I called in one evening and suggested that they call a wimpy hit, “no play” on the grounds that a player shouldn’t get credit for a hit unless it was a good solid single or more. So the guy gets on base, but doesn’t get credit for a hit, though the defender wouldn’t be penalized.

The guest was some grizzled old baseball vet, and he and the host were very kind to a little boy, but made it clear that getting on base is getting on base. If you get there before the ball does, that’s a HIT, Dammit!

Now fast forward 40-ish years, and it seems that MLB is agreeing with the little boy that I was. If it’s not a solid hit it’s not worthwhile. “Bunt for a hit? “Hit against the shift? How dare you suggest such a thing!”

I would rather see 8 singles than two home runs. I want guys to run. Small ball is good.

Lets get back to that.

[Moose Milligan]

I don't get it.  I thought MLB went through a thing kinda sorta recently where on base percentage was highly sought after.

Orioles missed the memo, apparently.  We've been bad at it for a long time.

Anyway, it's not like ML hitters haven't discussed this before.  For the thinking fan:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/24049347/mlb-hitters-explain-why-just-beat-shift

 

Quote

"It's really difficult to get three hits in one inning. If you hit three singles, it's one run. If you get a walk and a double, you might get one run. If you get a double and a single, you might get one run. So my goal is to touch second base every single time I step to home plate. If I'm not mistaken, somewhere in the neighborhood of 7 percent of ground balls go for extra-base hits. If I want to touch second base, I'm not going to be able to hit the ball on the ground. Pulled ground balls are not really base hits in this league anymore.

Quote

"I haven't really stolen bases for five or six years. If I drop a bunt down, what am I gonna do? I'm stuck at first base, so what I've done is ask our ballclub to get two more singles, or I've asked someone else to hit a double. If 7 percent of balls on the ground go for extra bases, someone is probably going to have to hit one in the air to score me from first. So what I've tried to do is hit a double every single time because it's really difficult to get three hits.

"If I'm not mistaken, the level of production goes: strikeout, popup, ground ball, fly ball, line drive. The production comes mostly from fly balls and line drives, so that's what we want. I'm trying to hit a line drive first. And if I miss, I hit a fly ball. Ground balls, popups and strikeouts aren't going to give you anything. It's not necessarily rocket science.

Quote

 

"I'm not trying to hit it in one specific place. If I look up, and they're full-shifting me, and I only have one defender in the 5-6 hole where the third baseman plays, I have to let the ball get a little deeper. But the pitchers are pretty good, and that's now a foul ball. I'm really never in the business of trying to aim for a certain area because I have to be perfect, and I'm not perfect.

"If any of us could control hits, we would get more of them. But you can't. You can only control the process.

 

Quote

"I used to try to manipulate my swing to hit balls to the left side of the infield and create some easy hits. I'll still try to do it at times, depending on where guys are positioned, but a lot goes into it. It depends on the situation in the game. How many outs are there? Are there runners on base? If there are two outs and I get into a 2-0 count and I hit a little ground ball to the shortstop hole, that probably wasn't as productive a team at-bat as it could have been if I ended up hitting a double somewhere.

"I've tried to bunt a few times, and I've had a few successes. But the third baseman is usually still in there for the first two strikes, so the bunt is not as big a factor as it could be. Again, it's dictated by the score and the situation in the game.

Quote

 

"Think about which hitters teams shift against. They shift on guys who drive the ball. By trying to hit a ground ball to short -- which is the one spot on the infield where you would be able to beat the shift -- that's exactly what they want you to do.

"There's this whole narrative of 'Why don't guys just hit ground balls to short?' The answer is: (a) It's not that easy and (b) it's the complete thing you've taught yourself your entire baseball career to avoid. If a guy has a chance to hit a homer and a double, and he goes up there trying to slap a ground ball to short, the other team is perfectly fine with that.

"I think it gets blown out of proportion when people say, 'Just hit a ground ball to short.' You can't just take a 98 mph cutting fastball in on your hands and do that. Let's just say I sell out tonight, and I try it four times. The likelihood of me hitting four straight ground balls to short and ending up 4-for-4 are very slim. If I succeed once or maybe twice, at best I'm going to go 2-for-4 with two singles, where if I just play the game, I might go 2-for-4 with a homer and a double. It makes no sense to me.

 

Quote

 

"Just think about this: When there's a runner on third base and less than two outs and the infield is playing back, every hitter in baseball knows that all you have to do is hit a ground ball anywhere, and you score the run. And that success rate is still super small. That play is easy, and it gets screwed up all the time. Guys can't hit a ground ball when all they have to do is hit a ground ball to score a run.

"As defenders, when a guy comes up and hits a ground ball to short [to beat the shift], we still go to the same place the next time. It doesn't change anything. You look at the guys they shift on, and they're paid to drive the ball. People aren't doing it against Billy Hamilton and guys like that.

 

 

[Moose Milligan]

More:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/24265798/mlb-myth-buster-shift-curbing-runs-creating-them

Quote

In fact, the data suggest that the shift doesn't do what it's supposed to do. It's designed to stop grounders, but it's supposed to help the defense prevent runs. And, in four fantastic articles (1, 2, 3, 4) at Baseball Prospectus this spring, Carleton found good evidence that it's not doing this,

 

Quote

 

Even though the shift is good at gobbling up ground balls and line drives, it has the secondary effect of making pitchers throw more pitches out of the strike zone. They don't appear to be pitching to the shift -- by throwing more pitches on the inner part of the plate, for instance -- but merely pitching away from contact, nibbling more and throwing fewer fastballs. This all means more balls. More balls mean more walks, and they also mean more hitter's counts, which means more doubles, more triples, more home runs and fewer strikeouts.

"It's a subtle, marginal effect that produces an extra ball every few dozen pitches or so," Carleton wrote. "By focusing on BABIP, we missed the fact that the battle was already lost. The extra ball means that the count could have been 1-2, but instead it was 2-1."

Carleton first suggested this possibility in 2016, but the data was too limited to draw conclusions from. Shift data at the time included only balls in play, so if the defense was shifting when a batter struck out, walked or homered, the shift was treated as if it never happened. But Petriello, using Statcast's data -- which includes all pitches -- found the same effect this spring:

"Now that we have pitch-level data on positioning, we can look at what happens when the ball is not put into play. Here, it's pretty clear. Our group of 201 players walked 9.8 percent of the time against the shift and 9 percent of the time without the shift. Eight-tenths of a percent doesn't sound like much, does it? As it happens, that's almost exactly the jump we've seen overall in the Majors from 2015 to 2017. On that scale, that was almost 1,800 more walks. It's hard to say why, for certain, but it's happening."

We're talking about fairly small effects, but, as Carleton puts it, "they are literally all pointing in the wrong direction other than the singles." And even if it were a complete wash, it would still counter the premise that shifts are stifling offense. It's not the league that should be eliminating shifts, Carleton suggests, but teams themselves:

 

 

[Moose Milligan]

More:

 

https://www.dodgerthoughts.com/2018/10/09/why-mlb-players-dont-bunt-against-the-shift/

Quote

Why, you might ask, shouldn’t one bunt to that left side?

Or why, you might instead ask, for the love of all that is holy, don’t you bunt to that expletive deleted left side?

Here’s why.

 

For many ballplayers in the year 2018, the challenge in bunting is not finding a place to place the ball. The challenge is getting the bunt down at all, anywhere, in fair territory. Pitches come in faster than ever before, and players practice bunting less than ever before. It’s not a freebie.

So if you tell a player to bunt, you might think you’re calling for a Stephen Curry free throw (.903 in his career from the line). What you’re really requesting, more often than not, is a Shaquille O’Neal (.527) free throw. Moreover, it’s a Shaquille O’Neal who, like it or not, doesn’t want to take the free throw and doesn’t believe he can make the free throw.

It’s a crapshoot that will likely lead to strike one if not strike two (picture Juan Uribe), and then you are worse off than when you started (unless you are Juan Uribe).

Quote

Now, perhaps you’re thinking that this bunting incompetence is just not right, that it’s morally abhorrent, that ballplayers should love the bunt and know how to bunt — and if they don’t, they should get to work on it. Perhaps you read this tweet below and say a grand “Amen.”

 

I wasn’t there, but as far as I’m concerned, Babe Ruth sacrificing 21 times with those numbers was morally abhorrent. In any case, there’s no interest in making that the reality today, especially for the power hitters who increasingly dominate the game up and down MLB lineups.

MLB teams today look for any edge they can possibly find. Maybe the Dodgers, for example, will look back on this season and decide that they need to devote more time to the bunt. But don’t hold your breath. They have already studied the issue and realized that in the modern game, although there might be individual situations where you’d like your players to be able to bunt more competently, your time overall is better spent on practicing things with greater reward.

Let’s look at the specific situation that triggered this post. With the Dodgers trailing by a run in the top of the fifth inning of Game 4 of the National League Division Series on Monday and Justin Turner on first base, Max Muncy came to bat. The Atlanta Braves defense shifted to put three defenders on the right. Johan Camargo, the third baseman, stood in the middle of the basepath between second and third. Despite the entreaties of Smoltz and others, Muncy went to a 1-2 count before grounding into a force play.

Why didn’t Muncy lay down a bunt, taking the free hit and putting the Dodgers in a first-and-second situation?

• It’s not a free hit. Based on the fact that Muncy has one career sacrifice hit in nearly 3,200 plate appearances as a professional — including plate appearances when he was far from the best power hitter on his team — you should be skeptical that a bunt, even to an open field, is his best chance for success.
• Muncy is the best power hitter on a team that thrives on power, and next to Turner, probably has the best plate discipline. Putting aside his ability to walk, he is slugging .582. In his present incarnation, he exists to do damage.
• You might think Muncy bunting will stop other teams from shifting against him. It won’t. Muncy would have to lay down multiple bunts to get the defense to surrender the shift. Even assuming he could and would bunt that many times for hits, Muncy in turn would surrender any attempt at hitting for power in the process.

 

[Moose Milligan]

More:

https://www.azcentral.com/story/sports/mlb/diamondbacks/2019/06/21/bunting-beat-defensive-shift-not-simple-fix-baseball/1526508001/

Quote

Diamondbacks outfielder David Peralta saw the highlight of Carpenter’s bunt and enjoyed it as much as the rest of us. But he doesn’t see the tactic catching on in a significant way.

“I remember the last time I tried, I almost smashed these two fingers,” Peralta said, holding up his left hand. “It looks easy, but I’m telling you it’s not easy. Being at home plate, having a pitcher on the mound throwing all this kind of nasty stuff and think, ‘Oh, I’m just going to hit the ball through that hole.’

“I wish it could happen so everybody could hit .300 in the big leagues. If it was that easy, everybody would be in the Hall of Fame.”

 

[Moose Milligan]

More:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/dont-worry-mlb-hitters-are-killing-the-shift-on-their-own/

Quote

Left-handed hitters are an interesting study since they now put more balls in play with the shift on (26,076 last season vs. shift) than off (23,214 against no form of shift).

Last season, left-handed batters hit for a higher average (.300), greater slugging percentage (.388) and lower ground-ball rate (44.0 percent) when the shift was on compared to when there was no shift (.295 average, .380 slugging mark, 45.7 groundball rate). And because Baseball Info Solutions can only track shift data when a ball is put into play, those stats do not include home runs, since they are not in play.

In some ways, the shift has backfired. Batters have an incentive to hit more balls in the air, and balls hit in the air are more valuable. When batters faced a shift last season, 5.2 percent of balls they put in play went for a home run. When they didn’t face a shift, 4.1 percent of balls went for home runs, according to Statcast data.

Quote

Many have made the case for batters facing the shift to simply bunt more often. After all, batters have hit at least .357 when bunting against a shift every season since 2010. Would bunting be more effective than, say, trying to go over the shift? Not for most batters.

According to weighted runs created plus (wRC+) — a metric that adjusts for ballpark and scoring environments, with 100 representing league average — batters produced a 53 wRC+ mark on bunts against all shift types last season compared to a 127 wRC+ mark when putting the ball in the air against shifts.

Batters seem to be unwilling to sacrifice potential power in pursuit of infield bunt singles. The percentage of at-bats against the shift where the batter bunted has fallen four straight years, from 2.92 percent (2015) to 2.12 percent (2016), 1.88 percent (2017) and 1.73 percent (2018).

One other issue: Teams are pitching less effectively to the shift.

As more and more batters use an uppercut swing to better combat sinking fastballs, which are designed to produce ground balls, the percentage of sinkers thrown has decreased. Sinkers represented 22.4 percent of all pitches thrown in 2010. Last year? 16.9 percent.

The shift will always be effective against pull-side ground balls and low line drives. Batters who hit those batted ball types often, especially left-handed hitters, can see their batting average drop. But more and more batters might be learning to combat the shift. When factoring in all batted ball types — not just grounders and low liners — the MLB batting average on balls in play has remained stagnant. In 2010 — a relatively shift-free season — league-wide batting average on balls in play for all defensive configurations was .297. Last season? .296. The figure has held relatively steady even while scoring and slugging have increased, despite the growing use of shifts. Maybe shifts aren’t such a problem after all.

 

[jabba72]

The extra strikeouts are whats lowering the league average. BABIP is .288 this year, down from .300 a few years ago, but its been much lower in years past, .282 in 1988. So its possible the shift is working to some degree, but BABIP doesn't lie. When players make contact they should hit .288, and even as high as .300 a few years ago.  

[HowAboutThat]

@Moose Milligan

thanks a lot for all the info. It appears the little me was right after all...

[Frobby]

So Moose, you having trouble sleeping last night?

[Moose Milligan]

6 hours ago, Philip said:

@Moose Milligan

thanks a lot for all the info. It appears the little me was right after all...

Had a feeling evidence would be provided to the contrary and you'd still say you were right.  But hey, that's what sports message boards are for.

50 minutes ago, Frobby said:

So Moose, you having trouble sleeping last night?

Nah, I slept like a baby.

[sevastras]

I believe little him said a wimpy hit shouldn’t be a hit and your evidence suggests that bunting against the shift wasn’t effective or at least not as productive. 
Either way, that was a very great collection of articles, thank you. 

[Moose Milligan]

2 minutes ago, sevastras said:

I believe little him said a wimpy hit shouldn’t be a hit and your evidence suggests that bunting against the shift wasn’t effective or at least not as productive. 
Either way, that was a very great collection of articles, thank you. 

I don't know why you wouldn't want to give credit for a hit, no matter how "wimpy" it was.  A duckfart into no-mans land in the outfield counts the same as a line drive single.  It counts the same as a bunt against the shift.

12 hours ago, Philip said:

Dallas is home one of the oldest stations in the world, WBAP 820. For years they had a radio call-in talk show called “sports at six.” In the early days it was pretty random, though the focus was usually on whatever sport was in season: Dallas Chapparals, Dallas Tornado, Cowboys, Rangers.

They didn’t have any call screeners, you just call, they answer the phone and talk to you.

I was a little boy, 13 or 14, and I was annoyed by the wimpy little hits that players were getting, And I called in one evening and suggested that they call a wimpy hit, “no play” on the grounds that a player shouldn’t get credit for a hit unless it was a good solid single or more. So the guy gets on base, but doesn’t get credit for a hit, though the defender wouldn’t be penalized.

The guest was some grizzled old baseball vet, and he and the host were very kind to a little boy, but made it clear that getting on base is getting on base. If you get there before the ball does, that’s a HIT, Dammit!

Now fast forward 40-ish years, and it seems that MLB is agreeing with the little boy that I was. If it’s not a solid hit it’s not worthwhile. “Bunt for a hit? “Hit against the shift? How dare you suggest such a thing!”

I would rather see 8 singles than two home runs. I want guys to run. Small ball is good.

Lets get back to that.

Phil wants to get back to small-ball, he summarizes in his OP.  Which seems to be contradictory to the Little Phil bit.  He'd rather see 8 singles instead of two homers.  MLB agrees with the Little Phil, no more wimpy hits.  But Little Phil was, according to big Phil,...wrong.  Big Phil wants to see small ball.  Big Phil now wants to see wimpy hits...as he said, he'd rather see 8 singles instead of two homers.  He wants to get back to that and doesn't understand why we aren't.

Let's not forget that MLB instituted a rule last year and carried it over to this year where a runner starts on 2nd base to start extra innings...which sets you up for small ball.  A runner on 2nd, no outs, you sacrifice bunt that runner to 3rd and now all you need is a long fly for the sac fly walkoff.  The new rule is absolutely designed to bring small ball back.

[Can_of_corn]

You might be giving them too much credit.  I think it is mostly about ending extra inning games as quickly as possible.

[Moose Milligan]

5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

You might be giving them too much credit.  I think it is mostly about ending extra inning games as quickly as possible.

Right.  Done through small-ball.

[HowAboutThat]

2 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Right.  Done through small-ball.

Your quote selections indicate that the players themselves don’t want small ball, they don’t want bunts or grounders. they want line drives and fly balls. 
I think the game would be more interesting if we did play small ball, don’t you?

I hate the extra innings rule that’s solely to make money for the owners. I hate the 7-inning DH, too, which gives fans less than they paid for.