Great article by Will on the state of baseball, including the impact of the shift, and how an excess of home runs and strikeouts have led to much fewer balls in play and other in-game action.
Sports Illustrated’s Tom Verducci notes that by the end of June there were “more strikeouts in half a season than there were in the entire 1980 season.” And “on average, you have to wait [3 minutes and 45 seconds] between balls put in play — 41 seconds longer between movement than 20 years ago.” Steals (hence pitchouts), sacrifice bunts, hit-and-run plays — interesting things for fans — are becoming rarer.
Link - (
New Window )
If you were home and your pitcher likes to hit, you make the other guys pitcher hit too. You have a great DH on the bench and the other team is a little challenged, you pencil in the DH to maximize your advantage.
OK, that ruins it for the purists and for the guys that would rather watch athletes than watch pitchers strike out too.
My work is done here.
There are some very good ideas for changing the game. IMHO, baseball has the dumbest rule in all of sports. A batter with nobody on 1st base can swing at a 3d strike; if the catcher mis-plays the ball, he can run to first base. Really!?
There are some very good ideas for changing the game. IMHO, baseball has the dumbest rule in all of sports. A batter with nobody on 1st base can swing at a 3d strike; if the catcher mis-plays the ball, he can run to first base. Really!?
First let me say that George Will is an asshole . Who gives a shit about what he says ? He’s always had this self -proprietary relationship with the game. Like LaRussa in that regard-their opinions are the end all.
As for your comment about the batter being able to take first base if the catcher doesn’t secure the ball cleanly on the third strike : first the rule itself-he can do so if first base is uncovered with less than 2 outs or regardless with two outs . All 27 outs have to be secured by putout . That is a ball fielded cleanly into the glove of a fielder . The reason for the uncovered aspect is the same for the development of the infield fly rule -prevent cheap double plays .
I think they should limit pitching changes and perhaps reduce to 12 the number of pitchers that can be on a roster . I’ve never liked the 40-Man expansion that is permitted on Sept 1. But outlawing or limiting shifts is not desirable . I don’t care that Verducci harps every time a ball is fielded behind second base, with the batter thrown out . He says it was a hit for over a 100 years . Well now it’s not .
Broken or not, I don't watch baseball on TV- BOOOORRRING!!
Quote:
It's terribly unfair to lefty hitters, and robs offense from the game.
It'snot unfair. It was born out of too many guys becoming dead pull hitters. And it isn't new. Teams shifted for Ted Williams, for example, but he was too good a hitter for it to have a huge impact. The goal of the defense is to get outs and the shift accomplishes that.
Of course it's unfair. The fact that first base is on that side of the diamond makes it far more difficult for LH hitters to get base hits on sharply hit balls to their natural side of the diamond. The shift is less effective against RH hitters, since the fielders have to play on the dirt to have a realistic shot at throwing a guy out at 1B.
And talented pitchers throw inside to LH hitters to force them to hit into the shift, a smart move but one that makes it far harder to hit it the other way.
As the article says, even Ted Williams' average went down 30 points or so once they shifted against him.
Otherwise leave baseball alone, it's meant to be boring, go to the park on a warm sunny day, pay for overpriced beer and food. Maybe cut the season down, no more coldass early April late Sept games.
Agree with this 100% and I've been saying much the same thing to my baseball friends.
Teams shouldn't be able to position their 2nd baseman in short RF to screw lefty hitters, because they can't use a similar defensive setup (put their SS in short LF) to thwart righty hitters.
Keep the shift, but make all the infielders stay in the infield. That at least makes it fair to both RH and LH batters.
There are some very good ideas for changing the game. IMHO, baseball has the dumbest rule in all of sports. A batter with nobody on 1st base can swing at a 3d strike; if the catcher mis-plays the ball, he can run to first base. Really!?
Congratulations on identifying the most insignificant problem facing baseball.
Quote:
In comment 14012994 yatqb said:
Quote:
It's terribly unfair to lefty hitters, and robs offense from the game.
It'snot unfair. It was born out of too many guys becoming dead pull hitters. And it isn't new. Teams shifted for Ted Williams, for example, but he was too good a hitter for it to have a huge impact. The goal of the defense is to get outs and the shift accomplishes that.
Of course it's unfair. The fact that first base is on that side of the diamond makes it far more difficult for LH hitters to get base hits on sharply hit balls to their natural side of the diamond. The shift is less effective against RH hitters, since the fielders have to play on the dirt to have a realistic shot at throwing a guy out at 1B.
And talented pitchers throw inside to LH hitters to force them to hit into the shift, a smart move but one that makes it far harder to hit it the other way.
As the article says, even Ted Williams' average went down 30 points or so once they shifted against him.
I guess I should have read your second post before responding and essentially saying the same thing you said an hour ago ;>)
Quote:
It's terribly unfair to lefty hitters, and robs offense from the game.
It'snot unfair. It was born out of too many guys becoming dead pull hitters. And it isn't new. Teams shifted for Ted Williams, for example, but he was too good a hitter for it to have a huge impact. The goal of the defense is to get outs and the shift accomplishes that.
Couldn't read the article but to me the interesting thing about the Williams shift is that managers at the time didn't expand it's use to other batters. It did work to an extent so why not use it more? My guess is that hitters of the era had better bat control and could bunt plus not as many pitchers threw in the upper 90's.
I'm still in the tough cookies, learn to hit the other way camp. Teams are not going to keep shifting on a hitter if he is hitting .350 on them even if it's all singles. You just can't afford to put that many guys on base.
Quote:
There are some very good ideas for changing the game. IMHO, baseball has the dumbest rule in all of sports. A batter with nobody on 1st base can swing at a 3d strike; if the catcher mis-plays the ball, he can run to first base. Really!?
Congratulations on identifying the most insignificant problem facing baseball.
that was funny...
Quote:
It's terribly unfair to lefty hitters, and robs offense from the game.
It'snot unfair. It was born out of too many guys becoming dead pull hitters. And it isn't new. Teams shifted for Ted Williams, for example, but he was too good a hitter for it to have a huge impact. The goal of the defense is to get outs and the shift accomplishes that.
If you are a lefty and getting pitched inside what do you do? My son is a lefty and has been taught - correctly - if a inside pitch is a strike then turn on the ball. Otherwise, you hit weak grounders or pop-ups.
The object as a hitter, besides getting on base, is to hit the ball hard. To hit an inside pitch hard, you have to pull it.
This.
Otherwise leave baseball alone, it's meant to be boring, go to the park on a warm sunny day, pay for overpriced beer and food. Maybe cut the season down, no more coldass early April late Sept games.
+1.
I love the resultant O, but dump the DH.
I see it like this: here's our rules, except: these teams can use DH but to make it fair, we will alternate rule allowing use of DH during WS. Huh??? Really???
Let pitchers hit. They're supposed to be athletes.
Quote:
Much more tactical and chess like without it.
Otherwise leave baseball alone, it's meant to be boring, go to the park on a warm sunny day, pay for overpriced beer and food. Maybe cut the season down, no more coldass early April late Sept games.
+1.
I love the resultant O, but dump the DH.
I see it like this: here's our rules, except: these teams can use DH but to make it fair, we will alternate rule allowing use of DH during WS. Huh??? Really???
Let pitchers hit. They're supposed to be athletes.
No they're supposed to be specialized in pitching. If they weren't they'd be everyday players.
Nothing more boring or stupid to me in baseball than seeing pitchers try and hit. Except maybe seeing them try and run the bases.
It makes even less sense to me why MLB plays under different rules than their top minor leagues do. In AA and AAA the only time there isn't a DH is when both clubs are NL affiliates. It should be the same in MLB IMO.
It's easy to say learn to go the other way or bunt. Pitchers are throwing harder than ever before. Exit velocity is a big thing and hitters are taught to hit the ball in the air. So you are going to have more homeruns, more strikeouts, and less balls in plays.
The DH is fine. Michael Jordan was one of the greatest athletes ever and couldn't hit so I don't want to see pitchers hit. The BA for pitchers this year is close to .117 They are automatic outs.
I'm fine with the shift - more players need to learn to bunt and hit the other way.
I'm fine with the shift - more players need to learn to bunt and hit the other way.
I understand the logic and don’t disagree, but we are simply at the point where pitching and defense are too damn good. It happened in other sports and modifications were made (they went too far in the NFL) so I don’t see why it’s a bad thing if the MLB goes this route.
Die hard fans need to take a step back and realize the sport is trying to appeal to everyone. NL DH and revising the shift to some copacity are a way to achieve this. Baseball purists aren’t shutting the TV off because their 3B can’t shift over to 2B when a left handed power bat is up.
Quote:
There are some very good ideas for changing the game. IMHO, baseball has the dumbest rule in all of sports. A batter with nobody on 1st base can swing at a 3d strike; if the catcher mis-plays the ball, he can run to first base. Really!?
Congratulations on identifying the most insignificant problem facing baseball.
Funny, I don't see baseball players flopping on the field to influence the umpires...
Quote:
Is coming from yankee fans. Meanwhile even without the shift these players are trying to launch onto the porch shift or no shift and the Yankees are now more right handed than they've been in a long time now anyway.
I'm fine with the shift - more players need to learn to bunt and hit the other way.
I understand the logic and don’t disagree, but we are simply at the point where pitching and defense are too damn good. It happened in other sports and modifications were made (they went too far in the NFL) so I don’t see why it’s a bad thing if the MLB goes this route.
Die hard fans need to take a step back and realize the sport is trying to appeal to everyone. NL DH and revising the shift to some copacity are a way to achieve this. Baseball purists aren’t shutting the TV off because their 3B can’t shift over to 2B when a left handed power bat is up.
Leave the shift alone and get dead pull hitters to go the other way.
but seriously, you can't restrict where teams put their fielders. that's ridiculous. the batters have to adjust.
i rarely watch baseball on tv (maybe 3 games this year?) but I somehow caught both of the Sox grand slams over the last 3 days.
but seriously, you can't restrict where teams put their fielders. that's ridiculous. the batters have to adjust.
i rarely watch baseball on tv (maybe 3 games this year?) but I somehow caught both of the Sox grand slams over the last 3 days.
Baseball surely could restrict where teams put their players.
The NBA has put in rules like no hand checking that help Defenses. The NFL put in rules favoring the Offense, making the game harder on Defenses. Even the NHL put in rules to do away with the trap,and put in the goal line Trapazoid so goalies couldn't play the puck as much.
There's no logical reason why MLB can't change some rules and adapt to the changes in the game now the way other Pro leagues have adapted.
Will adding a few more baserunbers per game really hurt your feelings? There’s restrictions for defenders in other sports because change was needed, this is no different.
Quote:
run the base path in either direction (counter clockwise or clockwise). but if you change directions half way through an inning then runners on base can only advance if forced by a subsequent runner.
but seriously, you can't restrict where teams put their fielders. that's ridiculous. the batters have to adjust.
i rarely watch baseball on tv (maybe 3 games this year?) but I somehow caught both of the Sox grand slams over the last 3 days.
Baseball surely could restrict where teams put their players.
The NBA has put in rules like no hand checking that help Defenses. The NFL put in rules favoring the Offense, making the game harder on Defenses. Even the NHL put in rules to do away with the trap,and put in the goal line Trapazoid so goalies couldn't play the puck as much.
There's no logical reason why MLB can't change some rules and adapt to the changes in the game now the way other Pro leagues have adapted.
There's no logical reason to change anything. Leave the game alone. It is not broken.
Quote:
In comment 14013235 markky said:
Quote:
run the base path in either direction (counter clockwise or clockwise). but if you change directions half way through an inning then runners on base can only advance if forced by a subsequent runner.
but seriously, you can't restrict where teams put their fielders. that's ridiculous. the batters have to adjust.
i rarely watch baseball on tv (maybe 3 games this year?) but I somehow caught both of the Sox grand slams over the last 3 days.
Baseball surely could restrict where teams put their players.
The NBA has put in rules like no hand checking that help Defenses. The NFL put in rules favoring the Offense, making the game harder on Defenses. Even the NHL put in rules to do away with the trap,and put in the goal line Trapazoid so goalies couldn't play the puck as much.
There's no logical reason why MLB can't change some rules and adapt to the changes in the game now the way other Pro leagues have adapted.
There's no logical reason to change anything. Leave the game alone. It is not broken.
It might not be broken but it's showing cracks. Why wait til it is broken when the cracks can be fixed?
The other sports adapted and their games are more exciting for it. MLB needs to be of the same mindset IMO.
No shift equals more base runners. More base runners equals more scoring opportunities. More scoring opportunities equals a more exciting game IMO.
To me the shift has harmed the game more than it's helped, and putting some restrictions on it isn't impossible or a bad thing to consider.
People who say that hitters should just hit the other way aren't recognizing that when you are pitched inside it's really hard to do that. There is no doubt that sometimes a hitter has that opportunity, or the opportunity to bunt. And I've often screamed for hitters to do so in situations calling for it. (E.g., down 2 runs, bottom of the 9th, take the damn base if it's give to you.)
But quite often even the best hitters won't be able to go the other way on tough pitches. And when there are line drives over the infield on those pitches and someone's thrown out at 1B by someone playing in short right, that just feels unfair to me.
I am assuming that the extra time to track the pitch, especially on fastballs, would help hitters, and that you'd see many more balls hit into play. However, we might discover that instead, the extra distance makes curveballs and sinkers and cutters even nastier.
As much as it would challenge pitchers, it strikes me as the least disruptive rule change that would make the biggest difference. You could probably move it back farther than that.
Baseball rules were codified in 1845. 5'-8" was a decent height then. I think if you did the math and figured the likely release point of a 5'-8" pitcher compared with the release point of a 6'-4" pitcher today, who has longer arms, longer legs and takes a bigger stride forward, you'd find the ball is leaving the pitcher's hand much closer to the hitter than when the rules were established.
The other thing I wish they'd do: Make gloves much smaller, especially for outfielders.
I am assuming that the extra time to track the pitch, especially on fastballs, would help hitters, and that you'd see many more balls hit into play. However, we might discover that instead, the extra distance makes curveballs and sinkers and cutters even nastier.
As much as it would challenge pitchers, it strikes me as the least disruptive rule change that would make the biggest difference. You could probably move it back farther than that.
Baseball rules were codified in 1845. 5'-8" was a decent height then. I think if you did the math and figured the likely release point of a 5'-8" pitcher compared with the release point of a 6'-4" pitcher today, who has longer arms, longer legs and takes a bigger stride forward, you'd find the ball is leaving the pitcher's hand much closer to the hitter than when the rules were established.
The other thing I wish they'd do: Make gloves much smaller, especially for outfielders.
You think that would be the least disruptive? After pitching their whole lives from one distance, changing it would be no small thing to adjust to. It might kill some careers. Expect the union to raise holy hell if they tried.
Changing the strike zone or changing the ball would be less obtrusive.
Quote:
It might not be broken but it's showing cracks. Why wait til it is broken when the cracks can be fixed?
The other sports adapted and their games are more exciting for it. MLB needs to be of the same mindset IMO.
No shift equals more base runners. More base runners equals more scoring opportunities. More scoring opportunities equals a more exciting game IMO.
To me the shift has harmed the game more than it's helped, and putting some restrictions on it isn't impossible or a bad thing to consider.
If it isn't broke (it isn't), you don't try to fix it. You don't try to head off something that isn't there.
On one hand people want to dull the ball (less homers), make umpires call the real strike zone (bigger and higher) so there is less hitting. On the other hand, people want to kill the shift (increase hitting marginally), re-lower the mound and increase hitting.
yatqb, if you watch the pitching against the shift, the pitchers just pitch normal to the batter. They try to get the lefties to rollover outside pitches to induce grounders, which tend to roll weakly up the middle or to 2nd base..
Inside pitches tend to travel a long way.
I don't like the shift, but I also don't want to change rules that will necessitate more changes down the road when the next Billy Beane shows up.
Sorry, but a 2-1 nail biter is easily as exciting as a 11-10 slug fest.
Quote:
In comment 14013241 section125 said:
Quote:
It might not be broken but it's showing cracks. Why wait til it is broken when the cracks can be fixed?
The other sports adapted and their games are more exciting for it. MLB needs to be of the same mindset IMO.
No shift equals more base runners. More base runners equals more scoring opportunities. More scoring opportunities equals a more exciting game IMO.
To me the shift has harmed the game more than it's helped, and putting some restrictions on it isn't impossible or a bad thing to consider.
If it isn't broke (it isn't), you don't try to fix it. You don't try to head off something that isn't there.
On one hand people want to dull the ball (less homers), make umpires call the real strike zone (bigger and higher) so there is less hitting. On the other hand, people want to kill the shift (increase hitting marginally), re-lower the mound and increase hitting.
yatqb, if you watch the pitching against the shift, the pitchers just pitch normal to the batter. They try to get the lefties to rollover outside pitches to induce grounders, which tend to roll weakly up the middle or to 2nd base..
Inside pitches tend to travel a long way.
I don't like the shift, but I also don't want to change rules that will necessitate more changes down the road when the next Billy Beane shows up.
Sorry, but a 2-1 nail biter is easily as exciting as a 11-10 slug fest.
So you like the shifts and it's impact on the game?
I'm not suggesting heading off something that isn't there. The shift is here and unless they do something to limit it, it's not going anywhere and personally I think it's hurt the game and made it less fun to watch.
I agree with you a 2-1 nail biter is exciting. I just prefer that to be because of two great pitchers dueling than guys getting hits taken away because of a shift. The game was fine and plenty exciting to me before all these shifts and I'd just like to see the game somehow work back towards how it was before.
I'm not advocating anything major like moving the mound,changing the ball,or strike zones. Just nudge it a little back to the way it was. Maybe limit the amount of infielders on one side of the field. Don't allow a SS to be the third man on one side or something like that.
If the NBA can not allow defenders to make camp in the lane, surely MLB could do something to limit shifts. Not all rule changes are a bad thing. Some actually help and improve the game.
If the shift is on and they pitch inside, do what Buttermaker told Olgivy to do, lean into one for the team...
Quote:
So you like the shifts and it's impact on the game?
I'm not suggesting heading off something that isn't there. The shift is here and unless they do something to limit it, it's not going anywhere and personally I think it's hurt the game and made it less fun to watch.
I agree with you a 2-1 nail biter is exciting. I just prefer that to be because of two great pitchers dueling than guys getting hits taken away because of a shift. The game was fine and plenty exciting to me before all these shifts and I'd just like to see the game somehow work back towards how it was before.
I'm not advocating anything major like moving the mound,changing the ball,or strike zones. Just nudge it a little back to the way it was. Maybe limit the amount of infielders on one side of the field. Don't allow a SS to be the third man on one side or something like that.
If the NBA can not allow defenders to make camp in the lane, surely MLB could do something to limit shifts. Not all rule changes are a bad thing. Some actually help and improve the game.
I don't see limiting where a fielder can play as a minor tweak. That is as big a change as lowering the mound. I'd wait it out a few years and see if the game can correct itself it usually does.
Would you get rid of relievers and closers because they limit the amount of runs scored (note: the Yanks are something like 52-2 when they lead in the 8th, iirc)? That would jack up scoring. Relievers have killed off scoring more than the shift.
Is baseball going to knee jerk react to every trend?
Please, don't compare MLB to the NBA which can't even follow/enforce its own rules (see travelling, fouls, etc). Basketball is unwatchable. No defense; the great players have their own rules, etc.
I didn't mind the Sanchez mound visit rule, mainly because it seemed Sanchez would come out and whatever they discussed backfired anyway and it slowed the shit out of the game.
The one necessary change to me is making the NL implement the DH. Screw the pitch clock.
I get you don’t want/need it from your POV, but it’s definitely worth considering and I don’t see it as a major change at all.
Pretty close to sacred in my mind. I don't mind tweaks. I also don't like the shift. But I also don't want to limit where a fielded can play. When a defense leaves a whole side of the field open, the players should just take what is given.
How about rule changes in the NFL? Replay etc. Games need to be tweaked every now and then, and to me Baseball isn't above some tweaking. Hell, they put in replay like other sports have so no reason they can't explore tweaking the shift.
Baseball was played for years with defenders in certain areas. I don't see how a move to bring the game closer to that is a "major change". Even if they don't want to do away with the shifts completely, maybe something like limiting the amount of times it can be used in a game. Very similar to the "Sanchez" mound visit limit we have now.
To me saying no changes or tweaking at all is close minded and will only help to keep the game from being as great as it can be. Baseball has implemented changes before, eg, lowering the mound, the DH, Division setups, Playoff formats, Wild Cards etc so it's not like it would be stepping out of its comfort zone.
Like I said, if other major sports can make some changes to improve their game, so can MLB.
Quote:
but I’m not everyone. I don’t personally want the shift gone but I’m up for modifying it. Baseball isn’t some holy sacred game that cannot be altered.
Pretty close to sacred in my mind. I don't mind tweaks. I also don't like the shift. But I also don't want to limit where a fielded can play. When a defense leaves a whole side of the field open, the players should just take what is given.
The game has had infinitely more impactful changes over the years. If this was the same game as it was 100 years ago I get not changing a thing, but that isn’t the case. The mound has changed several times, instant replay, no blocking the plate, and tons of others.
I get you don’t want/need it from your POV, but it’s definitely worth considering and I don’t see it as a major change at all.
So we disagree on major and minor. Limiting where a fielder can play is a major change. Tantamount to drawing circles on the field and saying stand here.
The trend to swing for the fences/pulling the ball had a lot to do with the shift. Teix was a perfect example. Early in his career he hit to all fields and had a .300 BA. He shifted to trying to hit HRs after he came to the Yanks. Early in one season he decided to go back to all fields to defeat the shift(because of his pull stats), then a month or so into the season said screw that, I don't want to do that and went back to swinging for the fences.
Right now strikeouts are through the roof. It doesn’t bother me, persay, but it shows me that hitting it away from a shift isn’t anywhere as easy as many make it seem. And how many times would that even need to successfully happen to get he switch to stop?
I don’t see it, batters aren’t going to be able to do what’s being suggested in mass. Maybe a few, but not enough to naturally fix the shift. I’m open to waiting another year or two but I suspect we will see minimal difference.