.

Discuss all things Cardinals Baseball
Post Reply
Vidor
You've just been hit by...VidorSmarm™
Posts: 22965
Joined: June 10 10, 7:50 pm

Re: The shift is on.

Post by Vidor »

I'm curious as to the outraged tone at the notion that Rob Manfred might ban or limit shifts. See also the comments here.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/ ... ve-shifts/

Why should we not, say, require that the shortstop always stand to the left of second base and the second baseman always stand on the right? As they have for 150 years or so until just recently?

User avatar
ghostrunner
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 28744
Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm

Re: The shift is on.

Post by ghostrunner »

They've never been required to stand any one place before and shifts have been going on forever, though perhaps more exaggerated lately. I can't think of a good reason to limit strategy especially when it's already within the rules.

The premise that offense is in need of a boost is sketchy to begin with, and premature.

My guess is he was spitballing much more than he should have in this interview and he's paying the price. If internet rage is a price.

I mean, five infielders is basically a shift. Would that get ruled out too? Anyway, it's dumb. Not happening.

dmarx114
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 24006
Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm

Re: The shift is on.

Post by dmarx114 »

Vidor wrote:I'm curious as to the outraged tone at the notion that Rob Manfred might ban or limit shifts. See also the comments here.

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/ ... ve-shifts/

Why should we not, say, require that the shortstop always stand to the left of second base and the second baseman always stand on the right? As they have for 150 years or so until just recently?
Manfred is messing with a fundamental core part of baseball by proposing that the 7 fielders (other than pitcher and catcher) not play wherever they like.

First the ridiculous pitch clock, and now this. Not a good start for the Commish.

Ironically, the pitch clock is being suggested to shorten games (since the thought is that the casual fan can watch for 2:30, but not 2:50). But this proposal of eliminating shifts will increase offense (I guess the casual fan wants more offense), and therefore lengthen the game. So yeah, that doesn't make sense.

If the goal is to increase offense, make PEDs legal.

Freed Roger
Seeking a Zubaz seamstress
Posts: 26227
Joined: September 4 07, 1:48 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: The shift is on.

Post by Freed Roger »

ghostrunner wrote: My guess is he was spitballing much more than he should have in this interview and he's paying the price. If internet rage is a price.
Yeah, probably was just posturing on something he knows will never come to fruition - demo that he is an "out of the box" thinker or whatever.

It's just dumb he picked something so fundamentally wrong to utilize as example of his high-mindedness.


btw - here's our "change a rule" thread, I don't think we came up with anything as goofy as the new commish.
http://gatewayredbirds.com/forum/viewto ... ge+a+rule+

Vidor
You've just been hit by...VidorSmarm™
Posts: 22965
Joined: June 10 10, 7:50 pm

Re: The shift is on.

Post by Vidor »

Well, a fundamental core of baseball is to have two infielders on each side of second base. When you write "6-3" in your scorecard that's supposed to mean something. It shouldn't mean 6 (standing in the 4 spot while 4 is in short right field)-3.

I'm aware that shifts date back at least as far as the 1946 World Series. I think we're all also aware that they have become vastly more common of late.

User avatar
sighyoung
Mayor of GRB
Posts: 37619
Joined: April 17 06, 7:42 pm
Location: Louisville

Re: The shift is on.

Post by sighyoung »

Wow--based on public reaction to Manfred's comments, you can see where the shift hits the fan.

Vidor
You've just been hit by...VidorSmarm™
Posts: 22965
Joined: June 10 10, 7:50 pm

Re: The shift is on.

Post by Vidor »

Image

Freed Roger
Seeking a Zubaz seamstress
Posts: 26227
Joined: September 4 07, 1:48 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: The shift is on.

Post by Freed Roger »

Vidor wrote:Well, a fundamental core of baseball is to have two infielders on each side of second base. When you write "6-3" in your scorecard that's supposed to mean something. It shouldn't mean 6 (standing in the 4 spot while 4 is in short right field)-3.

I'm aware that shifts date back at least as far as the 1946 World Series. I think we're all also aware that they have become vastly more common of late.
the increased use of the shift doesn't bother me. I don't think it takes away from the game. As mentioned, hitters will eventually catch up some & adapt to exploit it.

Also, I don't see the practical way to enforce -and where to draw the line. can 2nd baseman not play deep anymore? If SS plays just to leftfield side of 2d, and moves with the pitch towards right, that isn't much of a difference.

I haven't been following much of the outrage over the commish comments btw. no outrage here, because this rule change is not going to happen.

Vidor
You've just been hit by...VidorSmarm™
Posts: 22965
Joined: June 10 10, 7:50 pm

Re: The shift is on.

Post by Vidor »

Freed Roger wrote:Also, I don't see the practical way to enforce -and where to draw the line.
Easy. Maintain at least two infielders on each side of second base at all times.

Freed Roger
Seeking a Zubaz seamstress
Posts: 26227
Joined: September 4 07, 1:48 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: The shift is on.

Post by Freed Roger »

Vidor wrote:
Freed Roger wrote:Also, I don't see the practical way to enforce -and where to draw the line.
Easy. Maintain at least two infielders on each side of second base at all times.
So a SS can't field a ball on RF side of 2nd. Damn, there goes a nice chunk of the Ozzie highlight reel.

Edit: Ok, I don't see any on highlight reel, but I know it happens.

Post Reply