The Shift

[Irrelevant Dude]

Up until this year, my opinion has always been that MLB should not legislate defensive positioning, meaning teams should be able to shift however they want. I have thought that hitters can and should adapt to counter the shift and hit the ball into the large open spaces on the field. Upon further review, I'm not sure MLB has the luxury of waiting for hitters to adapt, when it isn't inevitable that will ever happen.

 

With batting averages trending down over recent years, I think the game is suffering notably from a lack of sustained offense. There are certainly other factors involved (increased reliance on home runs, increased strikeout rates, etc.), but the shift is also playing a big part in taking singles away from hitters. I think MLB should consider doing something, if not multiple things, to get the ball in play and to provide more positive results when the ball is put into play. One of those changes could be a ban on the shift, enforcing that there must be 2 infielders on each side of the field, and that they can't play behind second base. The shift has revolutionized defense. When only a handful of teams were doing it, it was innovative and somewhat interesting. Now that shifting has been adopted all across MLB, I just don't think the results are good for the game.

 

This may be an overreaction due to an unusual outlier season, and/or an overreaction due to a historically bad Cubs offense, but I don't know how much of an outlier this season really is. I'm willing to wait and see if offenses bounce back next year, but I am certainly open to changes now or in the near future. Banning the shift would be much less offensive to me than the 3-batter rule for pitchers or the runner on second base in extra innings. Will the shift be addressed by MLB at some point or is it here to stay?

[Andy]

I couldn't hate the idea of banning the shift more. If offenses continue to be as bad as they are this year, teams will have no choice but to tweak their strategies, and the issue should take care of itself. However, the utter nosedive across MLB leads me to believe the drop has more to do with the shutdown benefiting pitchers more than hitters, rather than some cliff we've gone over with respect to the shift.

[Backtobanks]

Up until this year, my opinion has always been that MLB should not legislate defensive positioning, meaning teams should be able to shift however they want. I have thought that hitters can and should adapt to counter the shift and hit the ball into the large open spaces on the field. Upon further review, I'm not sure MLB has the luxury of waiting for hitters to adapt, when it isn't inevitable that will ever happen.

 

With batting averages trending down over recent years, I think the game is suffering notably from a lack of sustained offense. There are certainly other factors involved (increased reliance on home runs, increased strikeout rates, etc.), but the shift is also playing a big part in taking singles away from hitters. I think MLB should consider doing something, if not multiple things, to get the ball in play and to provide more positive results when the ball is put into play. One of those changes could be a ban on the shift, enforcing that there must be 2 infielders on each side of the field, and that they can't play behind second base. The shift has revolutionized defense. When only a handful of teams were doing it, it was innovative and somewhat interesting. Now that shifting has been adopted all across MLB, I just don't think the results are good for the game.

 

This may be an overreaction due to an unusual outlier season, and/or an overreaction due to a historically bad Cubs offense, but I don't know how much of an outlier this season really is. I'm willing to wait and see if offenses bounce back next year, but I am certainly open to changes now or in the near future. Banning the shift would be much less offensive to me than the 3-batter rule for pitchers or the runner on second base in extra innings. Will the shift be addressed by MLB at some point or is it here to stay?

 

They really need to find hitters that can adapt. These guys have been playing baseball all of their lives and many of given up trying to make contact

so they can swing for the fences. It's fun watching the towering homers, but MLB has gotten to the point where there are very few pure "hitters" instead of sluggers. Making contact seems headed for extinction while we watch games with 10+ strikeouts and wait for the occasional HR.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

It's definitely not about the value proposition of hitting for power v. contact or about half the league throwing 95 with 90 mph wipeout sliders, nope it's a character flaw

[Irrelevant Dude]

It's definitely not about the value proposition of hitting for power v. contact or about half the league throwing 95 with 90 mph wipeout sliders, nope it's a character flaw

Doesn't the shift play into that value proposition though? Why hit for contact if someone is going to be positioned where you are likely to hit the ball? That pushes hitters even further into selling out for power.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

It's definitely not about the value proposition of hitting for power v. contact or about half the league throwing 95 with 90 mph wipeout sliders, nope it's a character flaw

Doesn't the shift play into that value proposition though? Why hit for contact if someone is going to be positioned where you are likely to hit the ball? That pushes hitters even further into selling out for power.

 

I'm not talking about the shift, I'm talking about mister 'if they'd stop swingin for the fences they wouldn't strike out so got dang much' up there.

 

Ultimately, I think there needs to be more balls in play. Banning the shift, deadening the ball, and lowering or deepening the mound are all tools at your disposal to do that without going too far in the other direction.

[Derwood]

Doesn't it feel like most major sports tend to lag on rules changes when on the field/court play has changed the game? I'm thinking about how long it took for the NBA to adopt zone defense, or the NHL to allow two-line passes, etc.

[chopsx9]

It drives me crazy that there doesn't seem to be more of an effort to hit against the shift - maybe there has been - I primarily watch Cubs games; so maybe there's more of it going on than I'm seeing. If the shift is going to stay more players have to learn how to do it - the shift is used because it works. If hitters don't adapt the result is the definition of insanity. In hitting against the shift the real goal isn't necessarily to get a hit in that at bat - I mean it is but the ultimate goal is to get them to stop shifting as much against you. Earlier this year Cubs are down by 3 in the 9th , Baez is on first, Rizzo is at the plate and the the 3rd basemen would need need a telescope to see the 3B bag and Rizzo rolls over on a pitch to the 2B. I know railing on a single AB is silly but still.

 

That being said I really wouldn't have a problem if players had to play their positions - SS has to be on the 3B side of the 2B bag, 3B has to be within 20ft - or whatever of 3rd etc, etc. A pitcher has to toe the rubber, a batter has to be in the batters box, base runners have to stay in baseline - there are plenty of sports where players have designated spots where they have to be when play starts - A wide receiver can't start the play standing in the opponents end zone; you can't serve in Tennis from a foot behind the net. I would even argue that the only reason there isn't a specific rule is that nobody ever thought it would be necessary - I think you could even argue that enforcing it would be in keeping with the spirit of the game.

[Cubswin11]

If it was so easy to “just hit it the other way” against the shift more guys would do it. Hitting a baseball is very hard and has never been harder with the velo and movement in the game today.

 

I’m for limiting the number of infielders on being on either side of 2B. Just limit it to 2 players on either side of 2B, you want to put your 2B in short RF still that’s fine but then there’s a big hole up the middle and towards tradition 2B area, etc. OF can’t come past a certain point in either or something as well. As long as it’s not a possible 9th inning/extras game tying or winning run scenario.

[Sammy Sofa]

Yeah, it'll take the baseball equivalent of a generational shift before you'll see serious adjustment to the defensive shift. Expecting guys who have been playing pro ball for years and years to "just change" isn't realistic; it's already far too late for most of them to change their hitting approach enough to account for such a drastic and effective defensive switch. Banning just seems like sour grapes; change will come, but its going to take time.

[Andy]

Yeah, it'll take the baseball equivalent of a generational shift before you'll see serious adjustment to the defensive shift. Expecting guys who have been playing pro ball for years and years to "just change" isn't realistic; it's already far too late for most of them to change their hitting approach enough to account for such a drastic and effective defensive switch. Banning just seems like sour grapes; change will come, but its going to take time.

If it's going to take time, Manfred won't wait for it.

[chopsx9]

Expecting guys who have been playing pro ball for years and years to "just change" isn't realistic; it's already far too late for most of them to change their hitting approach enough to account for such a drastic and effective defensive switch.

Well virtually every player has had to make adjustments multiple times throughout their career and let's be honest it's not like we've suddenly added field goals to baseball and are asking players to learn to kick a football. And nobody is "expecting" them to do it - players who can't adapt are going to start losing their jobs - just like one-dimensional players have harder time keeping a job, loogys now are a thing of the past This is just another development via analytics which will start to thin the herd of those that ignore it.

[Backtobanks]

If it was so easy to “just hit it the other way” against the shift more guys would do it. Hitting a baseball is very hard and has never been harder with the velo and movement in the game today.

 

Nobody is denying that hitting a baseball is very hard, but these are elite athletes that have been doing this all of their lives and probably made contact, hit the other way, and hit for a high average for many of those years. Look at how many players have changed their swing the last few years to hit more HRs to the detriment of average and contact.

[Sammy Sofa]

Expecting guys who have been playing pro ball for years and years to "just change" isn't realistic; it's already far too late for most of them to change their hitting approach enough to account for such a drastic and effective defensive switch.

Well virtually every player has had to make adjustments multiple times throughout their career and let's be honest it's not like we've suddenly added field goals to baseball and are asking players to learn to kick a football. And nobody is "expecting" them to do it - players who can't adapt are going to start losing their jobs - just like one-dimensional players have harder time keeping a job, loogys now are a thing of the past This is just another development via analytics which will start to thin the herd of those that ignore it.

 

No, most hitters in baseball most certainly do not start becoming spray chart artists, or even just start regularly pulling the other way, multiple times throughout their careers.

[CubinNY]

With basically every pitcher throwing the equivalent of spitball to get a better grip and spin rate, I think there are other, smaller things that may make a bigger difference. It doesn't matter where the fielder is standing when there are fewer balls batted in play.

 

Lowering the seams on the baseball, banning foreign substances used to maintain grip, even moving the mound back a few inches seems like smaller tweaks that would get more bang for the buck.

[squally1313]

With basically every pitcher throwing the equivalent of spitball to get a better grip and spin rate, I think there are other, smaller things that may make a bigger difference. It doesn't matter where the fielder is standing when there are fewer balls batted in play.

 

Lowering the seams on the baseball, banning foreign substances used to maintain grip, even moving the mound back a few inches seems like smaller tweaks that would get more bang for the buck.

 

Yep, assuming you don't go back to last year or the steroid years where there were 5 bombs a game. Figure out a way to get more balls in play, and the the league wide BABIP going from .300 in 2000 to .291 this year (.298 last year) won't be as big of a deal.

[Rex Buckingham]

Pretty sure even struggling hitters don't want all grip enhancing substances banned. Too many balls flying arlund at 95+. They want pitchers knowing where they're going.

[CubinNY]

Pretty sure even struggling hitters don't want all grip enhancing substances banned. Too many balls flying arlund at 95+. They want pitchers knowing where they're going.

I don't know that is much of a fact vs. lore spread by broadcasters.

[stitchface]

babip going from .300 to .298 hardly seems like a problem. in other words, banning the shift won't matter. balls not put in play seems far more problematic because not only is there less scoring, there is also less action.