Jump to content

Banning the shift.........taking back baseball from the stat geeks and having a more entertaining game.


Gurgi

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, owknows said:

Can't believe I'm ostensibly on the same side of an issue as Corn... but baseball has fundamental rules.

9 players on the field.

When someone figures out how (within the rules) to get the most strategic defensive value out of those 9 players.... baseball demands that they stop doing that, and that they intentionally configure their team to get sub-optimal value out of their defense.

Because some players can't cope.

What's next?

No pitching over 85 mph?

Baseball is an entertainment product. Rules should be able to evolve in order to keep the product optimally entertaining. Yelling at players to just figure it out while the game dies is a terrible solution.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, deward said:

Baseball is an entertainment product. Rules should be able to evolve in order to keep the product optimally entertaining. Yelling at players to just figure it out while the game dies is a terrible solution.

Baseball is like cricket, in that there's long been a vocal contingent shouting "it's not cricket!" every time someone suggests some tweak to make the game more engaging to someone other than die hard fans.  In cricket's case soccer passed it as the most popular sport in the UK roughly 130-140 years ago and has never looked back.  Cricket became a bit of a niche sport because it took day(s) for a match that includes multiple tea breaks, and strategies that basically involve bunting ball after ball into the ground to spoil pitches and play defense. It's only been recently that other variations of the sport like 20-20 have become very popular because they finally adopted rules that greatly increased action and decreased the time to complete a game.

In baseball really the only major on-field rules change from 1905 until very recently was the DH. Sure, they'd occasionally clarify the boundaries of the strike zone, or remember they were supposed to enforce mound heights, secretly change the ball, or change how many teams made the playoffs.  But 99% of the rules were the same in 1908 when the White Sox hit three homers all year as they were in Barry Bonds' prime. But the game was wildly, completely different.  That's because the traditionalists who ruled refused to make any changes and, paradoxically, everything changed. By sticking to the idea that God handed Alexander Cartwright the rules on stone tablets that will never be modified they opened the door to every manager and GM and player to innovate within the gray areas and ambiguities in those rules. And there are many.  Gentleman's agreements about how the game is to be played get pushed aside when wins and losses are on the line.

People often moan about how there are no longer any complete games, that every team has 11 anonymous relievers, that everyone is just trying to strike out every batter and every batter is trying to hit the ball 800 feet, and defense has never been less important, and base stealing doesn't make sense so nobody really does it. All those things are true because nobody did anything about any of it for 100 years.

If you loved baseball as it was when you were 12 AND you're going to never change the rulebook you'd better be pretty sure the rules very strictly defined the game as it was when you were 12.  Or you'll wake up one day when you're 40 or 60 or 80 and see that everything is different, you don't like a lot of it, and baseball is the 2nd or 3rd or 5th most popular sport in the country. And that's exactly what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/19/2022 at 7:01 PM, DrungoHazewood said:

To make the game more interesting.  To reduce the amount of time where you have seven fielders drifting off to sleep because the ball's never in play.  To take it back to the way it was meant to be and as it was played for more than a century, as a sport that typically takes two hours or so. To allow my children, aged 15 and 14 to finally, for the first time in their lives, to have fighting chance to see a 9th inning of a weekday game before going to bed.

Any reasonable organization regularly looks at its weaknesses and proposes improvements.  For a long time baseball has looked at its weaknesses and proclaimed that they were really strengths and that the fans who were leaving didn't really understand baseball.  I'm not a fan of banning the shift, but I'm very happy that they've finally gotten out of their 100 year rut of proclaiming every bug to be a feature and hoping nobody notices they're full of it.

My dad always let us stay up to watch baseball. He even took me out of school to watch day games from time to time.

Those were special memories, watching Koufax and Drysdale at Chavez Ravine, with a Carnation chocolate shake in one hand and peanuts in the other.

Baseball has never been boring to me…ever.

Edited by Lurker
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Oh, I'd love to have one come through our system by being drafted and developed. No doubt at all. 
    • Paging @Tony-OH to the thread.  🤣 I've actually advocated for this in the minors forums...letting other teams draft and try to develop guys to see which have a shot of sticking and which don't.  Essentially let other teams make mistakes in the draft and trade for guys that are still in the lower levels in other systems but you think have a shot.  I do believe that's part of Elias's strategy....as risk adverse as he is, he's not going to take risks on drafting pitching if he views that's the biggest risk in the draft. All I'm saying it'd be nice to have a Skubal come through our system.  Does anyone really disagree with drafting and developing a Cy Young winner or is that something you guys aren't interested in?
    • Oh, I get that. I just think you'd be hard pressed to say year in and year out the Central is anything but a mediocre division.  Typically, the AL East has at least 3 strong teams, with some seasons where 4-5 of them have winning records or close to it.  But it doesn't matter. As said before, I've been saying for weeks prior to the end of the season that the Tigers were a very good team. I just wouldn't trade our org, team, farm, whatever for the Tigers. 
    • Does it matter if they get drafted and developed vs. traded for and developed? Hell, the O's starting rotation was a strength this year. Here's a breakdown of how it was constructed: Burnes - traded for (Elias) Suarez - free agent (Elias) Kremer - traded for (Duquette) Eflin - traded for (Elias) Grayson - drafted (Duquette) Bradish - traded for (Elias) Povich - traded for (Elias) Irvin - traded for (Elias) Tyler Wells - Rule V (Elias) Rogers - traded for (Elias) McDermott - traded for (Elias) Means - drafted (Duquette) I'm excluding Bowman being an opener and getting a starting credit.  But that said, out of all of the starters that the O's used this year, none were drafted by Elias, and only 2 were drafted by the O's (GRod, Means). 8 were acquired via trade (7 by Elias, 1 by Duquette), and 2 via FA or Rule V.  I don't necessarily think that Elias needs to draft starters to build a rotation, but it would be nice to see a couple make it before being traded, TBH.  That said, I don't think the above is sustainable, but the strategy would be sustainable if you have free agency play a bigger part. Look at the Royals. Their best 3 starters weren't drafted by them (Ragans - traded for, Wacha - FA, Lugo - FA). 
    • Unfortunately, it's looking like there is a lot of truth in that statement.  I believe Steve Bisciotti (Ravens owner) once said, he wanted to have a good team every year, get into the playoffs enough, eventually things go your way and win the Super Bowl.  This was in response to playing salary cap games for a few seasons and then eventually having to pay the piper with the dead money and being uncompetitive for a few years. Hopefully the O's can be consistently good and get hot at the end of the season and make a run through the playoffs.  Go back to June 1st and the five best teams in the league were the Orioles, Yankees, Guardians, Phillies and Dodgers.  Two are already out, Guardians fading fast with the Yankees and Dodgers still alive.   A Tigers - Mets World Series would be quite fitting.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...