Mansolino on the shift

[SemperFi]

I love defense, and think it is a huge part of the Orioles turnaround-pitchers can work with more confidence. I enjoy sitting in the upper deck and watching the choreography of the infield and outfield.  I cringed everytime a ball was hit to Trumbo, Mancini or Mouncastle in the OF.  I am excited to see how the shift ban affects play, I also think the Orioles more than most are well positioned to take advantage of the change.  I found this article and the following excerpts quite interesting.

Orioles IF coach Mansolino on the shift:

“I don’t think that’s how the game was meant to be played. In talking with most infield guys around the league, they feel the same way. I also think most infield guys feel like the athletic, dynamic infielder has been minimized because of the ability to, in theory, put defenders where they hit the ball. A lot of the infield guys around the industry, myself included, are excited to see the athletic infielder highlighted and the overuse of the shift stopped.”

I think it’s going to increase singles for the left-handed hitter. Usually, left-handed hitters’ singles are pull singles. When there’s a runner on first, it produces a first-and-third opportunity. Along with the increase in singles, we’re going to see a bigger increase in the [moving] first to third for the baserunner. It means a more exciting version of baserunning and then it’s going to make the rightfielder have to be able to throw again.

“That first-to-third is going to be a big play in Major League Baseball this year, so that rightfielder is going to be able to throw. You just can’t stick a big bopper out there that can’t defend his position.

“Those specific plays are going to increase, and I think that probably brings us back 10 or 15 years in how the game was played.”

I like defense. I like baserunning. I like action. I like the situational part of the game. I like stolen bases. I think we’re going to see more of that. Does that mean that we’re going to hit less home runs? No, I don’t think that. I still think guys are going to hit the way they hit here initially, but I do think over the course of time, we might see less of the all-or-nothing approach at the plate that we’ve become so accustomed to over the last five years ago or so.”

https://tinyurl.com/588xevpj

[Can_of_corn]

That's just nonsense right?  What teams are putting unathletic players at second, short, and third?

More teams aren't "sticking big boppers" in right these days over when I was growing up.

The overall athleticism in the sport has never been higher.

[Pickles]

45 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

That's just nonsense right?  What teams are putting unathletic players at second, short, and third?

More teams aren't "sticking big boppers" in right these days over when I was growing up.

The overall athleticism in the sport has never been higher.

Regarding the bolded, it is all relative.  Every major leaguer is an "athlete" even the fat ones.

What he's saying is less athletic guys have been able to get away with playing in the middle infield of late with the increased shifting.  Odor is a good example imo.  Without the shift, Odor is not a 2nd basemen.  With the shift, because of his arm strength, he can play there and even be an asset.  

Middle infielders, particularly 2b, are going to have to start to prioritize range over arm strength with the new rules.

[jabba72]

Its good for the game IMO.  I wont miss a 2B standing in RF catching or fielding a linedrive every other game. 

 

[forphase1]

1 hour ago, Pickles said:

Regarding the bolded, it is all relative.  Every major leaguer is an "athlete" even the fat ones.

What he's saying is less athletic guys have been able to get away with playing in the middle infield of late with the increased shifting.  Odor is a good example imo.  Without the shift, Odor is not a 2nd basemen.  With the shift, because of his arm strength, he can play there and even be an asset.  

Middle infielders, particularly 2b, are going to have to start to prioritize range over arm strength with the new rules.

So close to a perfect post, until you ruined it with the bolded falsehood.  He was not an asset in the field at all, made a few nice plays, but botched a ton more.  By any defensive metric I've seen, and the eye test, he was far from an asset...indeed he was a liability out there.  

[Pickles]

2 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

So close to a perfect post, until you ruined it with the bolded falsehood.  He was not an asset in the field at all, made a few nice plays, but botched a ton more.  By any defensive metric I've seen, and the eye test, he was far from an asset...indeed he was a liability out there.  

Well, it was a conditional.  As in he was an asset there some of the time.  And his arm undoubtedly was useful some of the time.  But yes, overall, he was a below average defender.

[Can_of_corn]

1 hour ago, Pickles said:

Regarding the bolded, it is all relative.  Every major leaguer is an "athlete" even the fat ones.

What he's saying is less athletic guys have been able to get away with playing in the middle infield of late with the increased shifting.  Odor is a good example imo.  Without the shift, Odor is not a 2nd basemen.  With the shift, because of his arm strength, he can play there and even be an asset.  

Middle infielders, particularly 2b, are going to have to start to prioritize range over arm strength with the new rules.

But that isn't accurate.

Bat first guys have always played in the infield of occasion, with or without shifting.

Dan Uggla, Derek Jeter, these guys didn't have a bunch of shifting covering their defensive shortcomings.  At their best they could hit well enough to provide value despite the defense.

In today's game with the higher K rate and players tweaking their swing to elevate the ball infield defense is arguably less important than ever.

If you can thump and kinda sorta play second they might very well stick you at second with or without the shift.

Now could this push a Odor type who doesn't really do anything well out the door?  Sure.  But I don't think it's going to be a big shift.

[Aristotelian]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

That's just nonsense right?  What teams are putting unathletic players at second, short, and third?

More teams aren't "sticking big boppers" in right these days over when I was growing up.

The overall athleticism in the sport has never been higher.

I don't think he said that the personnel will necessarily change, just that the athletic players will be "highlighted". More opportunities for the athletic fielders to make plays. Makes sense to me. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Aristotelian said:

I don't think he said that the personnel will necessarily change, just that the athletic players will be "highlighted". More opportunities for the athletic fielders to make plays. Makes sense to me. 

I think Machado making those plays down the rightfield line while in the shift was "highlighted".

 

[Aristotelian]

26 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think Machado making those plays down the rightfield line while in the shift was "highlighted".

 

No doubt great plays have been made in the shift. The question is whether they will be more or less common. I wouldn't just call it false.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

No doubt great plays have been made in the shift. The question is whether they will be more or less common. I wouldn't just call it false.

I think the number will be the same(within a normal margin of change of course), they will just be different plays.

 

[Pickles]

58 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But that isn't accurate.

Bat first guys have always played in the infield of occasion, with or without shifting.

Dan Uggla, Derek Jeter, these guys didn't have a bunch of shifting covering their defensive shortcomings.  At their best they could hit well enough to provide value despite the defense.

In today's game with the higher K rate and players tweaking their swing to elevate the ball infield defense is arguably less important than ever.

If you can thump and kinda sorta play second they might very well stick you at second with or without the shift.

Now could this push a Odor type who doesn't really do anything well out the door?  Sure.  But I don't think it's going to be a big shift.

What isn't accurate?  That the shift devalued the range of middle infielders?

Just because everybody wasn't Ozzie Smith in the past doesn't reflect on that at all.

[sportsfan8703]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

But that isn't accurate.

Bat first guys have always played in the infield of occasion, with or without shifting.

Dan Uggla, Derek Jeter, these guys didn't have a bunch of shifting covering their defensive shortcomings.  At their best they could hit well enough to provide value despite the defense.

In today's game with the higher K rate and players tweaking their swing to elevate the ball infield defense is arguably less important than ever.

If you can thump and kinda sorta play second they might very well stick you at second with or without the shift.

Now could this push a Odor type who doesn't really do anything well out the door?  Sure.  But I don't think it's going to be a big shift.

The game had a lot more PEDs then. You could live with poor defense at 2B if someone was hitting 25 HR. 

[Number5]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think Machado making those plays down the rightfield line while in the shift was "highlighted".

 

What would the range factor be on that if he was technically the 3rd baseman on that play?  LOL

[crowmst3k!]

11 minutes ago, Number5 said:

What would the range factor be on that if he was technically the 3rd baseman on that play?  LOL

Entire server farms of analytics computers caught on fire after trying to calculate it.