Eliminating the shift?

5,538 Views | 40 Replies | Last: 11 yr ago by hardtimes
EMY92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
quote:
quote:
Singles don't get the big contracts.

I think Ichiro and Jeter did pretty well for their career money wise.
Short stop is a little different. Also, Ichiro didn't hit for power, but he would often end up on 3rd after an infield single due to being able to steal bases. The average power type hitter doesn't do much on the basepath.
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I guess the modern era of baseball truly began when Ty Cobb called Ted Williams stupid because he wouldn't learn to hit the other way against the shift. Finally we are going to right these wrongs of gimmick baseball that were bestowed upon our beloved game and go back to the true golden age of 1937 or whatever.
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
quote:
The current shift is simply a new kind of shift. But there have always been strategic shifts for position players to gain a defensive advantage. Positioning of OF's, guarding the lines, DP depth, playing in, etc. All of these shifts have a strategic goal and have a risk/reward component, while the offense has an opportunity to take advantage if it in some way. When you start telling them which of these are acceptable and which ones aren't, you are absolutely messing with the fundamental aspects of the game.

Baseball has been rigid with P and C out of necessity. Its never been rigid with the other 7. And by telling coaches where to stand, you mean the coaches boxes that none of them actually stand in?
If they tell player's to stand on a dot, then fine, sure.

I don't envision that's what they have in mind.

I absolutely do not want them to eliminate the "new shift", but they can eliminate the 'new shift' and the game is going to be played almost entirely how it is played right now. Eliminating the 'new shift' isn't a fundamental changing of the game.
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
quote:
And if the sluggers start dropping down some bunts eventually the defenses will stop going to the shift against them.
I think better bunting could definitely slow or reverse the growing use of the defensive shift, but I'm not sure hitters can bunt the shift out of the game or get all that close.

I think a lot of coaches would have been very happy if they could get a slugger to drop a bunt single.

When sluggers swing away against a shift, they still occasionally hit home runs or find a hole for a double or something. If they bunt, worst case is you have a guy that probably doesn't run very well on first base.

Plus, as soon as a defense chooses not to shift because a guy laid down a bunt, the slugger swings away and might beat their "regular" defense- which is the what you were trying to stop when you shifted your defense in the first place.

Its a secondary part of the strategy, I admit, but the shift isn't just to get outs, its to try to get sluggers to change their swing, or maybe even just bunt so that they're not hitting home runs or multi-base hits.

Barring rule changes, the only way the shift will ever fully go away is when a hitter is equally as strong or weak hitting to left, right, center, center-right, center-left, etc... and changing the defense doesn't change their hitting approach in any way. Until then, there will be some statistical reason to adjust the defense, sometimes even as much severely as we see in that picture.
COOL LASER FALCON
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm very much opposed to restricting where players can line up, but this thread did get me thinking.

Could you position a player right in front of the batter to shield his view of the pitcher?
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
quote:
I'm very much opposed to restricting where players can line up, but this thread did get me thinking.

Could you position a player right in front of the batter to shield his view of the pitcher?

Rule 4.06(b)
quote:
(b) No fielder shall take a position in the batter's line of vision, and with deliberateunsportsmanlike intent, act in a manner to distract the batter.
PENALTY: The offender shall be removed from the game and shall leave the
playing field, and, if a balk is made, it shall be nullified.
hardtimes
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quote:
This would be stupidity of NCAA proportions.
This (the rule's change, to be clear) is stupidity that makes the years of Selig's stupidity look amateurish in comparison.

I fear for baseball.
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.