Op Ed on the Shift and its Detrimental Effects

[mytreds]

https://www.si.com/mlb/2021/04/22/ja...ift-the-opener

More evidence that this silliness needs to go. I am glad that the MLB is aware of this and experimenting in the Minors with rules to curb the shift.

Also glad smallball isn't completed dead. I saw a succesful safety squeeze in yesterday's Giant's game. Miracles can happen

[dkgo]

The article never answers the question though of why Jay Bruce deserves to have a professional baseball career if he is unable to adjust his swing in response to the defense. If a basketball player can't drive to his left you don't make a rule that the defender can't guard his right.

Willie Keeler said 120 years ago to "hit 'em where they ain't." That still holds true.

[Izz]

*sigh* The game changes. It always has. The hitters coming through now will learn/are learning how to combat the shift. If they can combat the shift then teams won't use it against them. Ergo, problem solved.

If anything, imo, the use of the shift against pull-heavy hitters can only benefit the game in the long-term, as the next generation will need to use all areas of the park instead of just relying on the pull. *That* will create more balls in play, therefore more entertainment. Restricting the use of shifts is, imo, short-sighted and not in the game's best interests.

[dkgo]

Exactly. A prototypical lumbering, slow, extreme pull-heavy power hitter who is impacted most by the shift is the most boring type of player anyway if you define excitement by putting balls in play, speed on the basepaths, and making athletic defensive plays. Baseball doesn't need a lot of Jay Bruces.

[CONN CHRIS]

Originally Posted by dkgo

Exactly. A prototypical lumbering, slow, extreme pull-heavy power hitter who is impacted most by the shift is the most boring type of player anyway if you define excitement by putting balls in play, speed on the basepaths, and making athletic defensive plays. Baseball doesn't need a lot of Jay Bruces.

I agree with this and hope that MLB doesn't enact a solution in search of a problem, it will self-correct if left alone (and probably in a shorter time frame than I might think).

Opinions such as the one posted do and will sway people though. I have to admit that from a pure watchability standpoint, I do not like the present level of use that the shift has. It's hard to get an impatient public to see that this reaction to extremes in plate approaches might actually bring about more exciting baseball in the future.

[Déjà Bru]

I agree with all of the responses. Perhaps a new generation of ballplayer will emerge, one with more advanced batting skills than evidenced by Jay Bruce.

The problem with guys like him is that it's generally easier to hit home runs to your pull side but that's all that Bruce and his ilk are concerned about. The best hitters, the ones that are NOT shifted upon, know how to punch the ball if necessary — sometimes with power, but with the object of getting on base no matter where nine fielders play.

I'm tired of watching strikeout-groundout-or-homer pull hitters. They're all over baseball but they're being weeded out. A better game will result.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by mytreds

https://www.si.com/mlb/2021/04/22/ja...ift-the-opener

More evidence that this silliness needs to go. I am glad that the MLB is aware of this and experimenting in the Minors with rules to curb the shift.

Also glad smallball isn't completed dead. I saw a succesful safety squeeze in yesterday's Giant's game. Miracles can happen

Is the miracle that they tried or that it worked?

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by dkgo

Exactly. A prototypical lumbering, slow, extreme pull-heavy power hitter who is impacted most by the shift is the most boring type of player anyway if you define excitement by putting balls in play, speed on the basepaths, and making athletic defensive plays. Baseball doesn't need a lot of Jay Bruces.

Well, then they can cut down on shifts by getting rid of the DH.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

I agree with all of the responses. Perhaps a new generation of ballplayer will emerge, one with more advanced batting skills than evidenced by Jay Bruce.

The problem with guys like him is that it's generally easier to hit home runs to your pull side but that's all that Bruce and his ilk are concerned about. The best hitters, the ones that are NOT shifted upon, know how to punch the ball if necessary — sometimes with power, but with the object of getting on base no matter where nine fielders play.

I'm tired of watching strikeout-groundout-or-homer pull hitters. They're all over baseball but they're being weeded out. A better game will result.

Its Dave Kingman's fault.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Its Dave Kingman's fault.

Funny you said that. At one point in my post above, I had a line in there to the effect of "The days of Jose Canseco and Dave Kingman are over" but I deleted it because I did not want to date myself.

[PocketsAintFull]

Of course hitters need to adapt, but it's also fair to question at what point shifts go beyond the 'spirit' of the game - a subjective thing, sure, but 3 OFs & 4 IFs is quite strongly tied to baseball.

Also not sure why the game *shouldn't* have players like Bruce? Surely more variety of player types is a good thing?

[RchW]

Originally Posted by PocketsAintFull

Of course hitters need to adapt, but it's also fair to question at what point shifts go beyond the 'spirit' of the game - a subjective thing, sure, but 3 OFs & 4 IFs is quite strongly tied to baseball.

Also not sure why the game *shouldn't* have players like Bruce? Surely more variety of player types is a good thing?

The shift has been around since the 20's where Cy Williams was the target. It also seems to me that in the 20's if a shift was put on other batters would immediately counter and hit away from the shift. That adaptability is likely why shifts were underused for several decades until a sufficient number of hitters refused to adapt in modern times.

In my opinion if teams, batting coaches and hitters adopted a "break the shift" approach and stuck with it for 2-3 weeks they could dilute shifting enough to create additional risk for the defense. Right now there is little risk which is why the strategy to no surprise is apparently overused.

[swoboda]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

I'm tired of watching strikeout-groundout-or-homer pull hitters. They're all over baseball but they're being weeded out. A better game will result.

Exactly! this is the first time I have said this out loud but I am really starting to lose some interest (maybe 10% so far) in watching today's game. Ks or HRs , Ks or HRs...and man oh man the Ks are really really piling up this year.


Thanks to bio-mechanics, hi tech video/teaching, funneling talented kids into one sport only etc, pitching is now clearly ahead, but hitters know HRs put you in the majors and keep you there so they don't adjust their swings and for this fan it is getting less interesting.


I hate the IF shift, go ahead and try something different, but it will take more than that to bring back the watch-ability of on field play to the level it was yrs ago

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by RchW

The shift has been around since the 20's where Cy Williams was the target. It also seems to me that in the 20's if a shift was put on other batters would immediately counter and hit away from the shift. That adaptability is likely why shifts were underused for several decades until a sufficient number of hitters refused to adapt in modern times.

In my opinion if teams, batting coaches and hitters adopted a "break the shift" approach and stuck with it for 2-3 weeks they could dilute shifting enough to create additional risk for the defense. Right now there is little risk which is why the strategy to no surprise is apparently overused.

I wonder how much pitching dominance comes into play right now in beating the shift? With a higher overall velocity, spin rate, etc. I wonder if batters are struggling to direct the ball as much as they used to. Maybe most batters are in "just get the bat on the ball" mode.

I'll be curious what moving the mound back a foot does in the Atlantic League.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

I wonder how much pitching dominance comes into play right now in beating the shift? With a higher overall velocity, spin rate, etc. I wonder if batters are struggling to direct the ball as much as they used to. Maybe most batters are in "just get the bat on the ball" mode.

I'll be curious what moving the mound back a foot does in the Atlantic League.

There are a lot of HR being hit by non-power hitters. Fair point but I'm inclined to think that it may be hard but not impossible.

[cephasjames]

Originally Posted by RchW

There are a lot of HR being hit by non-power hitters. Fair point but I'm inclined to think that it may be hard but not impossible.

Good point.

[dkgo]

Yep, everyone is a power hitter now just like everyone in the NBA is a 3 point shooter. Look at LeMahieu.

From 2011 to 2017 he hit 34 HR in 827 games. That is his prime age 22-28 seasons playing in Colorado.

Since 2018 he has hit 52 HR in just 343 games.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Funny you said that. At one point in my post above, I had a line in there to the effect of "The days of Jose Canseco and Dave Kingman are over" but I deleted it because I did not want to date myself.

Ha!!!

[PocketsAintFull]

Originally Posted by RchW

The shift has been around since the 20's where Cy Williams was the target. It also seems to me that in the 20's if a shift was put on other batters would immediately counter and hit away from the shift. That adaptability is likely why shifts were underused for several decades until a sufficient number of hitters refused to adapt in modern times..

I would guess it's more to do with the availability of data and the analytical nature of teams these days.

[dkgo]

Maybe he is 130 years old and remembers all the games he saw back then to tell us how the players approached their at bats.