Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 122
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,320
    Quote Originally Posted by Dugmet View Post
    The hit and run probably disappeared b4 your time. It was not unusual to see at least 2 attempts per game.

    Players practiced hitting the other way to take advantage of either the SS or 2Bman moving to take the throw at 2B from the catcher.

    It’s a skill MLB players absolutely can practice and become good at.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Agreed, same as bunting or anything else. The game has phased it out because of small parks/pitching styles have turned power hitting into the MLB version of what NBA's massive rules changes turned the 3 ball into.

    However I think the resurgence in classic power pitching (pitchers that pitch high in the zone with a 12-6 curve) over the fad of pitching at the knees has begun to limit it to a degree, along with ditching whatever tight balls they used last year. All the real fun in baseball you only see in college anymore, and even there it's way less than it used to be.

    I hear sports radio morons saying 'baseball needs more home runs to attract millenials' and I just want to wring their pudgy necks. The very last thing millenials are likely to do is watch the same 3.5 hour home run derby night after night, at the expense of stolen bases and hit and runs and bunts for hits.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    23,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Crovash View Post
    Bunt singles don’t put dollars in the bank or chicks in the sack.
    i think you've hit on something important. there is no reason to believe baseball players are going to work hard at developing a skill when it goes against what gets rewarded. and i don't mean just financially, although that is for sure a legit reason. guys like Tony Gwynn and Ichiro Suzuki who utilize every inch of the field and displayed remarkable control of the bat and strike zone and gained our admiration for it are always put down in the conversation of all-time greats, for what? because we've gained all this insight into the value of run creation and the bottom line is if they were starting their careers today we'd be critiquing the fact that they sell out their power for soft line drive singles into left field, and if it wasn't us critiquing them it would be their own hitting coaches. because that's how our understanding of the game has changed. there are too many factors that support loading up and letting it rip to expect players to turn back the clock here IMO.
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,852
    DO NOT BAN THE SHIFT! Make the players beat it. Stupid Manfred.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    East of the Sun, West of the Moon
    Posts
    27,089
    Quote Originally Posted by Walter_White View Post
    DO NOT BAN THE SHIFT! Make the players beat it. Stupid Manfred.
    Actually MLB is being smart about it. Teams have been aggressively employing the shift for a number of years now and players have NOT taken it upon themselves to beat the shift.

    Manfred in fact stated “...The hope always is the game is going to self-correct," Manfred said. "People said, 'They're going to learn to hit the other way. They're going to bunt.' We haven't seen those changes."

    Baseball is concerned about the product on the field. More players are striking out = less action on the field and longer ABs with no action — unless you are rooting for Ks.

    Holding open discussions about how to improve the entertainment value of the game on the field is what a commissioner should be doing.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Baseball Maverick: How Sandy Alderson Revolutionized Baseball and Revived the Mets
    I am that Daddy Cool

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Phanland
    Posts
    6,718
    Quote Originally Posted by Zmaster52 View Post
    I disagree. Pitchers are paid to pitch, hitters are paid to hit, defenders are paid to defend, and a 3Bman is paid to play the hot corner, not shallow right field.

    That’s just me but I’m not a fan of it.
    If every hitter learned how to use the entire field, you’d get want.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    4,791
    Plain and simple .Learn to hit the other way
    "Just because the path is well beaten. That doesn't mean it's the right way to go"

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Dugmet View Post
    Actually MLB is being smart about it. Teams have been aggressively employing the shift for a number of years now and players have NOT taken it upon themselves to beat the shift.

    Manfred in fact stated “...The hope always is the game is going to self-correct," Manfred said. "People said, 'They're going to learn to hit the other way. They're going to bunt.' We haven't seen those changes."

    Baseball is concerned about the product on the field. More players are striking out = less action on the field and longer ABs with no action — unless you are rooting for Ks.

    Holding open discussions about how to improve the entertainment value of the game on the field is what a commissioner should be doing.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Okay so how are you going to limit the shift? How much player movement will constitute an illegal shift? It's stupid. If hitters can't adjust then that's their problem.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    23,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Walter_White View Post
    Okay so how are you going to limit the shift? How much player movement will constitute an illegal shift? It's stupid. If hitters can't adjust then that's their problem.
    i think the answer to start with is fairly obvious. if they do something it will invariably have something to do with keeping the left side of the infield on the left side of the infield and same with the right. i don't exactly get the objection to that.
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn New York
    Posts
    18,420
    If hitters don’t adjust or ‘self correct’ would you be in favor of it?

    Problem is, teams have lots of players who have been around forever. They play their certain style of baseball and are then asked to adjust at 31/32...it’s pretty obvious they’re not going to adjust.

    The only way you’ll beat this is within the next 10 years, you teach your young guys to go the other way or beat the shift in the minors but it isn’t all that easy because minors focus on player devlopment and a lot of guys don’t actually bunt (or whatever) in the minors.

    In other words, baseball will be an all or nothing sport until most of rhe guys who were around before the ‘saber revolution’ are retired...if we’re being honest.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    53,568
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    i think the answer to start with is fairly obvious. if they do something it will invariably have something to do with keeping the left side of the infield on the left side of the infield and same with the right. i don't exactly get the objection to that.
    Because you are creating a new rule to limit a progressive action in the sport.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zmaster52 View Post
    If hitters don’t adjust or ‘self correct’ would you be in favor of it?

    Problem is, teams have lots of players who have been around forever. They play their certain style of baseball and are then asked to adjust at 31/32...it’s pretty obvious they’re not going to adjust.

    The only way you’ll beat this is within the next 10 years, you teach your young guys to go the other way or beat the shift in the minors but it isn’t all that easy because minors focus on player devlopment and a lot of guys don’t actually bunt (or whatever) in the minors.

    In other words, baseball will be an all or nothing sport until most of rhe guys who were around before the ‘saber revolution’ are retired...if we’re being honest.
    You are a professional hitter, in a sport where you have to play 20+ years of making adjustments. This isn't any different.

    You spend your entire career making adjustments. At every level that you progress.

    If you don't make adjustments, you get filtered out.

    I don't understand the objection to that.

    It may take some time because in baseball, people are stubborn. But it will happen.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn New York
    Posts
    18,420
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    Because you are creating a new rule to limit a progressive action in the sport.



    You are a professional hitter, in a sport where you have to play 20+ years of making adjustments. This isn't any different.

    You spend your entire career making adjustments. At every level that you progress.

    If you don't make adjustments, you get filtered out.

    I don't understand the objection to that.

    It may take some time because in baseball, people are stubborn. But it will happen.
    Your last sentence is exactly my point. People are stubborn. Guys like Jay Bruce for instance has been around for like 13 years and he can’t hit the ball the other way, either by design or by choice. He clearly hasn’t made the adjustment (along with hundreds of other guys) because he’s used to having success playing the way he always has.

    My point is, until the guys like Bruce retire AND minor league teams are taught to improve their overall skill set, baseball will be an all or nothing sport amongst the 30 and older crowd.

    It’d be nice if people could adjust but if nobody does, what then? Attendance is still falling, less balls are being put in play coupled with less hits on hard contact because of convenient fielder placement.

    Aka baseball has become even less about action. Few people hit singles and doubles now, the three true outcome approach is ridiculously frustrating and flawed but that’s another topic.

    I’d like to see people adjust, I just don’t think they will

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    23,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Zmaster52 View Post
    If hitters don’t adjust or ‘self correct’ would you be in favor of it?

    Problem is, teams have lots of players who have been around forever. They play their certain style of baseball and are then asked to adjust at 31/32...it’s pretty obvious they’re not going to adjust.

    The only way you’ll beat this is within the next 10 years, you teach your young guys to go the other way or beat the shift in the minors but it isn’t all that easy because minors focus on player devlopment and a lot of guys don’t actually bunt (or whatever) in the minors.

    In other words, baseball will be an all or nothing sport until most of rhe guys who were around before the ‘saber revolution’ are retired...if we’re being honest.
    not even. players sell out to pull more than they ever did. data supports it.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    23,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    Because you are creating a new rule to limit a progressive action in the sport.



    You are a professional hitter, in a sport where you have to play 20+ years of making adjustments. This isn't any different.

    You spend your entire career making adjustments. At every level that you progress.

    If you don't make adjustments, you get filtered out.

    I don't understand the objection to that.

    It may take some time because in baseball, people are stubborn. But it will happen.
    I suppose. I guess my response to this is that I have little doubt the creators of the game would have made a rule if they thought it would ever be changed in this way. they probably assumed, and IMO rightfully so, that by naming the positions the way they did that it was pretty clear where the 3rd basemen was intended to play in the field.

    So had the original rules explicitly stated that the third basemen stations himself to the right of the shortstop on the left side of the infield you would take a different tune? I find that hard to believe.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    53,568
    Quote Originally Posted by Zmaster52 View Post
    Your last sentence is exactly my point. People are stubborn. Guys like Jay Bruce for instance has been around for like 13 years and he can’t hit the ball the other way, either by design or by choice. He clearly hasn’t made the adjustment (along with hundreds of other guys) because he’s used to having success playing the way he always has.

    My point is, until the guys like Bruce retire AND minor league teams are taught to improve their overall skill set, baseball will be an all or nothing sport amongst the 30 and older crowd.

    It’d be nice if people could adjust but if nobody does, what then? Attendance is still falling, less balls are being put in play coupled with less hits on hard contact because of convenient fielder placement.

    Aka baseball has become even less about action. Few people hit singles and doubles now, the three true outcome approach is ridiculously frustrating and flawed but that’s another topic.

    I’d like to see people adjust, I just don’t think they will

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    I suppose. I guess my response to this is that I have little doubt the creators of the game would have made a rule if they thought it would ever be changed in this way. they probably assumed, and IMO rightfully so, that by naming the positions the way they did that it was pretty clear where the 3rd basemen was intended to play in the field.

    So had the original rules explicitly stated that the third basemen stations himself to the right of the shortstop on the left side of the infield you would take a different tune? I find that hard to believe.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    They didn't name the positions They just had infielders and outfielders for the first 75ish years or so.
    And I'm 99% certain that in cricket, they just have zones for fielding. Not set spots, but I'm not the most familiar with cricket.


    They did this against Ted Williams and Cy Williams, and it worked on Ted temporarily (Cards limited him in the 46 series, but then in 1947 he started to beat it when teams started doing it regularly against him).

    For those curious, when it was created. It was supposed to be a psychological gimmick that would 'psych' the hitter out and get him uncomfortable. That's because the expectation was that a good hitter would learn to beat it eventually. Today, our 'good' hitters don't hit like guys like Ted Williams and Tony Gwynn do (going with the pitch).


    Baseball is the slowest evolutionary sport out there. The old school 'masters' of the game hate and resist change everywhere it exists.

    10 years ago, there were a handful of 3 outcome hitters in the big leagues (Adam Dunn, Carlos Pena, Jack Cust, etc). That's when guys like Joey Gallo and Jay Bruce started to be developed for the game today. Today, every team has multiple 3 outcome guys on their roster and in their system.

    Hitters have to adjust for every era. The game is littered with three outcome players. If the concern is the action on the field and getting guys to hit the ball the other way, and keep it in play. Then the shift is a great thing. It is going to force young players to learn to hit the other way and in 5-10 years, those kids will be entering the big leagues with the ability to spray the ball around the field.

    Baseball is incredibly cyclical. This, like most things with baseball, will work itself out.
    Last edited by Jeffy25; 06-26-2018 at 02:08 PM.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    5,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    I suppose. I guess my response to this is that I have little doubt the creators of the game would have made a rule if they thought it would ever be changed in this way. they probably assumed, and IMO rightfully so, that by naming the positions the way they did that it was pretty clear where the 3rd basemen was intended to play in the field.
    Like Jeffy said, the positions weren't named, they just kind of developed naturally. Outfielders are obvious, but the number wasn't always 3, they would sometimes use 11 man defenses with 5 guys in the outfield.

    The shortstop was originally a kind of middle man for the outfielders because the balls were too light to throw all the way from the outfield to the infield, so they'd have a permanent relay man. Once the ball got heavier and outfielders could start throwing it to infielders themselves, the shortstop moved to its present location.

    They literally created a position to cover the gap between 2nd and 3rd because that's where the majority of balls hit by right handed hitters end up. The SS position is the ultimate shift.

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •