Shifts could be endangered

[Tnetennba]

Shifts don't really need to be fixed IMO, even as boring as it can be watching certain players predictably hit into them.  Terrible balls & strike calls, blatantly inconsistent strike zones, and lengthy replay reviews do.  I'd rather see that addressed before any tweaks to shifting.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Shifting is just the playing smart defense. It has always been that way. With power hitters OF ers move back with singles hitters they moved in . You don't think the Of ers shifted on Babe Ruth to the  right ? Basically shifting less is just dumb baseball. You have reams of data telling you where hitters hit the ball. Of course you are going to shift. It would be like telling a pitcher he cannot pitch away from a pull hitter. You play the game according to the strengths and weaknesses of your opponent . It's called strategy. That is inherent in any sport . Deal with it .

Edited October 24, 2020 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[Sarava]

Shifting has always happened, but it's spiraled out of control in recent years. I guess I'll be the lone one in support of this if it happens. I've always found it lame to stack one side of the infield. Put the onus back on the pitcher to not let the hitter get hard contact.

[pcq]

If shifting is such a big deal then the hitters should adjust. 

[Jake]

Trying to solve a non-existent problem and by doing so, you just greatly incentivize one-dimensional hitters that the same sort of people can't stand.

I don't know how many times I have to say it, there's been a significant change in the game in the past 10 years and that's the size of the strike zone. It's gotten a lot bigger, especially on the bottom of the zone, because the umpires have gotten better at calling it according to the rulebook. They should switch the rulebook strike zone back to what it was before mid-90s, which defines the bottom of the zone as at the top of the knee. The reason the rule was changed was because umpires weren't calling the low strike properly so changing the definition made them call it as if the rule was the top of the knee. But now they call it correctly and the zone has expanded downwards. Make pitchers attack hitters more and you'll see a significant reduction in strikeouts and a more exciting game.

Unlike the 3-batter rule, also a fairly significant change to the rules IMO, there is really no justification for banning the shift besides a very specific opinion about the aesthetics of the game. And unlike the 3-batter rule, banning the shift helps promote more specialized/less well-rounded players. And banning the shift of course won't shorten games; it will probably lengthen them by making it easier to hammer a grounder through the infield. Allowing shifts adds an advantage for hitters who use all parts of the field and further incentivizes teams to have well-rounded defenders who can be shifted around the field.

[SCCWS]

1 hour ago, Jake said:

Trying to solve a non-existent problem and by doing so, you just greatly incentivize one-dimensional hitters that the same sort of people can't stand.

I don't know how many times I have to say it, there's been a significant change in the game in the past 10 years and that's the size of the strike zone. It's gotten a lot bigger, especially on the bottom of the zone, because the umpires have gotten better at calling it according to the rulebook. They should switch the rulebook strike zone back to what it was before mid-90s, which defines the bottom of the zone as at the top of the knee. The reason the rule was changed was because umpires weren't calling the low strike properly so changing the definition made them call it as if the rule was the top of the knee. But now they call it correctly and the zone has expanded downwards. Make pitchers attack hitters more and you'll see a significant reduction in strikeouts and a more exciting game.

Unlike the 3-batter rule, also a fairly significant change to the rules IMO, there is really no justification for banning the shift besides a very specific opinion about the aesthetics of the game. And unlike the 3-batter rule, banning the shift helps promote more specialized/less well-rounded players. And banning the shift of course won't shorten games; it will probably lengthen them by making it easier to hammer a grounder through the infield. Allowing shifts adds an advantage for hitters who use all parts of the field and further incentivizes teams to have well-rounded defenders who can be shifted around the field.

Not sure what the impact on time does w shifting. Obviously shifting has increased considerably and so has the length of a game.

Through the first two weeks of the 2020 season, the average length of a nine-inning MLB game is 3:07, up two minutes from 2019 and up 11 minutes since 2015. If that current pace of play continues, it would set a new nine-inning record. Despite a number of rule modifications and no fans in attendance, the pace of a baseball game is as slower than ever.

The World Series games have gone 3:14, 3:24 and 3:40.  Certainly the advertisers are enjoying the long games. 

[iWiN4PreP]

This is beyond absurd. I hope it never comes to fruition. 

[Balta1701]

3 hours ago, iWiN4PreP said:

This is beyond absurd. I hope it never comes to fruition. 

I want to see how they could possibly define this. "The shortstop must play a position set to the left side of a line drawn between the pitching mound and 2nd base and extended out to center field, but no further back than 14 feet past the baseline and no farther from said line than 17.6 feet". Not arbitrary at all.

[ChiSox1917]

Manfred continuing to ruin the game.  The guy hates baseball.  The only thing he should be doing is figuring out the next expansion teams/cities.

I would be in favor of moving the fences back 15 feet and getting rid of the rule for standardized fence lengths. Lets get some more wild polo grounds type dimensions, or parks that have right and left fields and different lengths. Bring some more strategy back into lineup constructions based on the park.  
 

 

[ChiSox1917]

7 hours ago, SCCWS said:

Not sure what the impact on time does w shifting. Obviously shifting has increased considerably and so has the length of a game.

Through the first two weeks of the 2020 season, the average length of a nine-inning MLB game is 3:07, up two minutes from 2019 and up 11 minutes since 2015. If that current pace of play continues, it would set a new nine-inning record. Despite a number of rule modifications and no fans in attendance, the pace of a baseball game is as slower than ever.

The World Series games have gone 3:14, 3:24 and 3:40.  Certainly the advertisers are enjoying the long games. 

Just watched a 4.5 hour game that was an all time great.

[chetkincaid]

I’m all for eliminating the shift. Baseball needs more scoring to draw in casual fans. I know old timey baseball purists hate rule changes but they keep the game updated to compete with the NBA and NFL. Casual fans don’t want to see a pitcher’s duel. 

[JoshPR]

Manfred wants to limit defensive shifting but did nothing against the cheaters.... Go figure

[SCCWS]

9 hours ago, ChiSox1917 said:

Just watched a 4.5 hour game that was an all time great.

It was a great game , Unfortunately the viewership has plummeted to mostly us die-hards.  With game times getting worse,  Manfred is also looking into adding recliners for the coaches in the dugout. 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

1 hour ago, SCCWS said:

It was a great game , Unfortunately the viewership has plummeted to mostly us die-hards.  With game times getting worse,  Manfred is also looking into adding recliners for the coaches in the dugout. 

You put it on non pay TV and viewership would be higher. Just because people don't want to pay for it doesn't mean there  isn't interest in it. It's supposed to be America's game let America watch it for free. You get bombarded during a game with commercials telling you what you should buy. I have to buy a TV to watch anything .I have to pay a monthly subscription to watch cable or premium TV. American's are poor and in debt because they are immersed in this "buy" culture. They cant cook, they won't read, they can't grow their own food, they can't start a fire without matches because no one teaches how to just survive . Very few have actual skills. If you want something you buy it, steal it or take it violently. America's enemies just have to figure out how to turn our electricity off and we will all, freeze, starve or kill each other. Ha ! Oops old man yells at cloud . Never mind we're all good . I'm gonna sit in my recliner have a beer and watch the old boob tube and get fat and stupid.

[southsider2k5]

13 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

You put it on non pay TV and viewership would be higher. Just because people don't want to pay for it doesn't mean there  isn't interest in it. It's supposed to be America's game let America watch it for free. You get bombarded during a game with commercials telling you what you should buy. I have to buy a TV to watch anything .I have to pay a monthly subscription to watch cable or premium TV. American's are poor and in debt because they are immersed in this "buy" culture. They cant cook, they won't read, they can't grow their own food, they can't start a fire without matches because no one teaches how to just survive . Very few have actual skills. If you want something you buy it, steal it or take it violently. America's enemies just have to figure out how to turn our electricity off and we will all, freeze, starve or kill each other. Ha ! Oops old man yells at cloud . Never mind we're all good . I'm gonna sit in my recliner have a beer and watch the old boob tube and get fat and stupid.

This series has been on free TV.

[The Hawk]

8 hours ago, chetkincaid said:

I’m all for eliminating the shift. Baseball needs more scoring to draw in casual fans. I know old timey baseball purists hate rule changes but they keep the game updated to compete with the NBA and NFL. Casual fans don’t want to see a pitcher’s duel. 

Rules changes shouldn't be about changing the basics of the game and eliminating shifts does that.  I remember the shift that they did on Ted Williams. Williams ignored it because he was great enough not to worry about it. No hitter since was as good as Ted Williams, I can see players not wanting to change their swings but that hardly is required. This is understanding how to intentionally hit the ball the other way to help your team. The woe is me, I hit the ball hard right at someone, its unfair stuff is pathetic.

[greg775]

1 hour ago, The Hawk said:

Rules changes shouldn't be about changing the basics of the game and eliminating shifts does that.  I remember the shift that they did on Ted Williams. Williams ignored it because he was great enough not to worry about it. No hitter since was as good as Ted Williams, I can see players not wanting to change their swings but that hardly is required. This is understanding how to intentionally hit the ball the other way to help your team. The woe is me, I hit the ball hard right at someone, its unfair stuff is pathetic.

Hawk, players will not try to beat the shift by hitting the other way. It's against baseball's personal unwritten rules. Players are trying to hit home runs not singles. So they will not plop a bunt down or try to slap singles to beat the shift. It's a disgrace to see a lefty hitter plop a single to the left side when there's one guy standing at the traditional SS position and three guys on the right side of the infield.

[The Hawk]

On 10/24/2020 at 7:04 AM, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Players don't try to beat the shift because it would involve them changing their swing and approach; Ryan Howard wasn't going to lay down a bunt and forgo trying to do damage with his power. 

Chitown has really inflated the difficulty of bunting by world class hitters who make contact with the ball while their bat is moving. If I could bunt 90+ MPH pitches consistently, so can world class hitters even if they haven't practiced. The fact is, they don't want to and it's because it would limit the damage they can do.

   I'm sort of old school when it comes to hitting and I think that hitters that cannot work on hitting the ball the other way to beat a shift or laying down a bunt once in awhile to get on base are hurting not only their team but all their own growth as a player. Looking at Jose Abreu and James McCann as well as the young Eloy, it just further tells me that my opinion is a correct one.

[The Hawk]

4 minutes ago, greg775 said:

Hawk, players will not try to beat the shift by hitting the other way. It's against baseball's personal unwritten rules. Players are trying to hit home runs not singles. So they will not plop a bunt down or try to slap singles to beat the shift. It's a disgrace to see a lefty hitter plop a single to the left side when there's one guy standing at the traditional SS position and three guys on the right side of the infield.

  I don't know what the "rules" are, Greg. All that I know is that I personally love to see guys like Abreu and McCann and Jimenez intentionally beat the shift and try to drive runs in or get a runner on base in a tight game. And if a Left fielder, a First Baseman, and a Catcher can do it, then so can other players. I'm leaving out Anderson and Grandal in the kudus list, also. Hell, I am talking about five guys now that are legit ALL-STAR major league players, right? Maybe some other players and teams should be doing a similar thing before even thinking about banning shifting in baseball.

[ChiSox1917]

9 hours ago, greg775 said:

Hawk, players will not try to beat the shift by hitting the other way. It's against baseball's personal unwritten rules. Players are trying to hit home runs not singles. So they will not plop a bunt down or try to slap singles to beat the shift. It's a disgrace to see a lefty hitter plop a single to the left side when there's one guy standing at the traditional SS position and three guys on the right side of the infield.

There is no unwritten rule not to hit the ball where players arent. What the hell are you talking about?

[The Hawk]

On 10/24/2020 at 8:57 AM, SouthWallace said:

Shifts don't really need to be fixed IMO, even as boring as it can be watching certain players predictably hit into them.  Terrible balls & strike calls, blatantly inconsistent strike zones, and lengthy replay reviews do.  I'd rather see that addressed before any tweaks to shifting.

Speaking of bad calls. Did anyone see that of all bleeping umpires, Laz bleeping Diaz is on that WOrld Series crew. I don't know where on the rotation that piece of scum is, but can you imagine if his sorry behind is behind home plate in the 6th or 7th game of the series?

[Stinky Stanky]

I'm an old dinosaur and I love the shifting.  It works, duh.  Do we need to say more?  Like make a rule that a fielder has to stand where he has the least chance of catching a baseball?  Now, that's messing with the game we love.

[pcq]

On 10/25/2020 at 10:27 AM, The Hawk said:

Rules changes shouldn't be about changing the basics of the game and eliminating shifts does that.  I remember the shift that they did on Ted Williams. Williams ignored it because he was great enough not to worry about it. No hitter since was as good as Ted Williams, I can see players not wanting to change their swings but that hardly is required. This is understanding how to intentionally hit the ball the other way to help your team. The woe is me, I hit the ball hard right at someone, its unfair stuff is pathetic.

I knew Ted from Korea. They don't make them like that anymore. 

[The Hawk]

3 minutes ago, pcq said:

I knew Ted from Korea. They don't make them like that anymore. 

Wow. That's great. He flew fighter jets in Korea, right?

[pcq]

2 hours ago, The Hawk said:

Wow. That's great. He flew fighter jets in Korea, right?

Saw you during The War On Christmas.