Forum
Forum Navigation
Around the League...non Padres
#111 · January 6, 2019, 2:54 pm
Quote from dusty on January 6, 2019, 10:34 amI’ve been as traditional as anyone. I believe in the double switches, pitchers hitting, etc. But I have to say I think MLB needs to adopt 1 set of rules and ways for both leagues. I think they need to do whatever it takes to respark interest in the game. I recently went to a Nationals Marlins game in DC this past summer and man it was by far the most boring game I had ever been to regardless if it was the lowly marlins. A game that has become nothing but strikeouts and homeruns has become a game where there isn’t much anticipation of a stolen base a hit and run, etc. MLB needs to scale back the shift too. At least until the ball leaves the pitcher’s hands require there be at least two players on each side of second base.
Double switches are interesting strategic element of (NL) game. P's hitting are NOT: Pads P's had a collective BA <.100, 11 RBI, 2 2B, 1 HR last year. Genetic freaks like Otani aside, the time has simply come to stop having P's hit. Hope they tie DH to SP somehow (as per prior posts) or end of game NL strategy will be lost, which is not good for baseball.
The shift makes logical sense, but it's simply subtracting too much offense from the game. Rules changes in NFL, NBA always favor offense over defense. MLB has to move in that direction. I agree with your idea, and would go even further; midline painted on field; 2 INF each side of line through the pitch (can't go over till ball is in play?). Right now it's way too hard for even elite hitters to put the ball in play on the ground & have a chance.
#112 · January 6, 2019, 4:01 pm
Right now it's way too hard for even elite hitters to put the ball in play on the ground & have a chance.
I respectfully can not disagree with this statement more. I do not consider you an elite hitter if you CAN NOT beat the shift! You mean to tell me I can give you 65 ft from the line to the closest defender and you cant get a hit. PLEASE, if they would have employed the shift against T Gwynn, he would have hit .450!!
#113 · January 6, 2019, 4:22 pm
Quote from Booster SD on January 6, 2019, 4:01 pmRight now it's way too hard for even elite hitters to put the ball in play on the ground & have a chance.I respectfully can not disagree with this statement more. I do not consider you an elite hitter if you CAN NOT beat the shift! You mean to tell me I can give you 65 ft from the line to the closest defender and you cant get a hit. PLEASE, if they would have employed the shift against T Gwynn, he would have hit .450!!
Shifts wouldnt work against Carew, Brett, Gwynn, Boggs, etc... imagine a shift against Wiggins... he could bunt for 100 hits a year.... all of these guys would be played straight up... same with Rickey Henderson.. you shift left he bunts right.. you shift right he bunts left.. I mean it was hard enough to throw him out at 1B on a ball hit right or left of any infielder.. How about Pete Rose?
#114 · January 6, 2019, 5:39 pm
I like the idea of requiring 4 players to remain on the INF dirt .... basically get rid of the short right fielder. What that does is cut down the range of the INF on hard hit balls allowing the hitters to get rewarded more for hard contact. Also it forces the CF/RF to play further in and expands the OF gaps again allowing hard hit balls to the OF to have a better chance to fall for hits rewarding the good hitters for solid contact.
As one of the talking ex-players on MLB network said ... he doesn't go to games to watch sluggers like Harper roll singles to LF. The other (forgot which ex-ML hitter) basically said even if he wanted to while playing he could not consistently be effective going the other way ... too much muscle memory built into his (and most players) approach to change (effectively).
Part of what makes the game great is the mix of the singles hitters and the power hitters combining to put players on base and sluggers hitting doubles / triples / home runs to create action. Do think the league needs to allow the sluggers to be successful while keeping the ball in play because now the "elevated launch angle" to generate HR is flat out boring with the 3 "natural" outcomes.
With all due respect to all the "super star" single hitters ... they really are the exception even among singles hitters and a sport based on them may be interesting to the more "sophisticated" fan .... the average and occasional fan (the backbone of the sports survival) more than likely will not be entertained. Probably should say the same about doubles switches, etc. ... just not understood or of interest to the "average fan" who just wants to drink beer, talk, and see players running the bases and hard hits.
I might not like some of the change options but will compromise if they lead to more action in the form of baserunners actually running (walks are not action) and fielders running to make plays.
So, I am OK with the DH and would even support unlimited DH usage (basically create an offensive and defensive unit). Put the best defensive unit for the 8 field postions (think highlight reel stuff that come from great defensive plays) and with the 4 remaining position players DH for the weakest hitters. So the sport gets the best hitters vs. the best fielders ... that should be positive with the best vs. the best. Football went through this transition more than a half century ago (at one point players had to go "both ways" before it evolved) ... results worked for football now the #1 sport.
#115 · January 6, 2019, 6:17 pm
Quote from fenn68 on January 6, 2019, 5:39 pmAs one of the talking ex-players on MLB network said ... he doesn't go to games to watch sluggers like Harper roll singles to LF. The other (forgot which ex-ML hitter) basically said even if he wanted to while playing he could not consistently be effective going the other way ... too much muscle memory built into his (and most players) approach to change (effectively).
Yeah, I listened to a couple of those idiots that said if they eliminated the shift that the over rated Harper would have an extra 7-13 singles over the season. If Harper was a real hitter he would figure out how to lace the ball down the 3B line and then he could have 7- 13 extra doubles. And if Harper wants to be paid like he is the best player/hitter in baseball (which he is not in any way) he should be able to figure out how to lace a ball down an open line for an oppo field double.
#116 · January 6, 2019, 7:31 pm
Wee Willie Keeler would have killed any shift......"Hit it where they ain't"
The art of hitting is actually becoming a lost art.....hitting behind a runner, hit and run, run and hit, driving pitches foul line to foul line...how the bunt for a hit, sacrifice, squeeze and launch angle ?......I was teaching that in the 90's
98% of the players in the league would have never gotten through a full BP
#117 · January 6, 2019, 11:54 pm
Homeruns inspire awe, but they're quickly forgotten. A man on base makes the entire inning important. Banning the shift is stupid.
You want more offense then fix the god awful balk and pickoff rules to increase the value of speed. Kershaw should have never been allowed to stutter his motion once he begins to move forward.
#118 · January 7, 2019, 7:37 am
One factor that complicates the whole shift discussion is the emergence of the new, young, analytical front offices. Although we old dudes who embrace baseball the way it was played may want the game to revert ... the new analytics seem to move the front offices in the opposite direction. Not necessarily all that good for fan entertainment but ... per their analytics ... better strategy for winning.
The extensive use of the shift just reflects the reality how the hitters hit. However, a lot of the analytics suggest the team is better off powering through the shift to deliver more HR / doubles / triples as a way to produce runs than taking that power hitter and having him slap a single the opposite way then requiring anther 2 hits to get a score. Not pretty but apparently to some statistically valid. I do also buy into the fact that the T.Gwynn, Rod Carew, et.al. are the Hall of Fame exceptional hitters that even non-power hitters can't replicate (and also would not be shifted in the same way) ... and getting most LHH to modify their strengths (pulling with power) to roll the odd single would likely hurt their overall swing and overall production. Most hitters are just not that good. In a sense, the shift wins if the hitter tries to beat the shift by going the other way. So maybe not the fans but the front offices and hitters are aligning more with the current approach.
All interrelates with the dreaded "3 natural outcomes" being statistically more geared to winning and therefore having no problem with the strikeout - base on balls - home run.
The issues may be more how MLB develops a structure that neutralizes the negative fan appeal of analytical strategy. Winning boring is losing in a sense if the business is keeping a 30 team fan base engaged (and spending money).
Side: same analytics have killed stolen bases ... some stat showed attempting a steal is only valuable if the success rate is something like 85-90% ...not achieved by many.
Analytics are killing the fan appeal of baseball (at least for we old guys).
#119 · January 7, 2019, 8:00 am
In the on-going absence of any impactful baseball news .... another issue is rising for MLB consideration to, in part, stimulate news / interest in baseball in the off-season. Clearly the MLB Winter Meetings were (again) a dud for generating fan buzz (not helpful for team marketing departments). Consider replacing an "open season" on trades with a trade window (let's say Dec 1 - Jan 15).
The winter has changed ... started with the agents (see Boras) who were more than willing to hold out on their top players signing until very late. Other agents started to follow that strategy and with more FA being held ... ripple effect on trades waiting to see how the FA fell. Then over the past couple of years the "new analytical GMs" saw the value of waiting to return the pressure on the FA to drive contracts down ... moving to shorter terms which evolves into more FA giving the GMs a greater advantage especially since not being emotional probably see more FA as interchangeable parts. Result ... very little action via trade / FA. Boring!
So, the suggestion in developing "trade windows" (not dissimilar to what is done in European Soccer). Create that window (Dec 1 - Jan 15) to make trades prior to the season would not only get action when the sport needs the interest but should also accelerate the FA action ... agents not wanting homes lost to trades vs. signing their guy.
Have a second trade window mid-season (July 1 - July 31).
GMs / agents (as most people) work better under the pressure of a deadline.
#120 · January 7, 2019, 10:30 am
I heard that back in the day, there was a trade deadline when trading between leagues, so there is precedents for something like this. So you could have a trade period, then a FA period after that. Perhaps you go with a open trade period from the start of the GM Meetings to the end of the Winter Meetings. Then you can have a FA period from the start of the Winter Meetings to say Jan 15th. Then to not allow any transactions until the start of Spring Training.