Dave Dombrowski

[Spudboy]

"hit 'em where they ain't" -- Wee Willie Keeler, over 100 years ago.

 

I had heard that was from Dizzy Dean. Hmm.

[notin]

I've heard that before too. I didn't buy it then and I don't buy it now - in certain situations.

 

Going back to my JBJ example, if a team can induce JBJ - a .<.250 hitter to bunt and be successful at a .500 rate unreasonable since the is playing in ss hole jbj has proven that he can winning>

 

You have to bear in mind that the shift was not for guys like Bradley. It was for guys like Ted Williams. Getting Ted Williams to bunt had to be a victory...

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

You have to bear in mind that the shift was not for guys like Bradley. It was for guys like Ted Williams. Getting Ted Williams to bunt had to be a victory...

 

Ted would never hit to the opposite field unless it was an accident. His theory of hitting was to pull everything. It's just surprising he didn't face the shift even earlier in his career. In fact, it might be that it was only the Guardians under Cronin that implemented the shift against him.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

A manager would never employ the shift against hitters like Brett and Boggs. One was coached by Charlie Lau and the other by Walt Hriniak, who both believed strongly in hitting to the opposite field. Edited August 11, 2018 by SPLENDIDSPLINTER

[notin]

Ted would never hit to the opposite field unless it was an accident. His theory of hitting was to pull everything. It's just surprising he didn't face the shift even earlier in his career. In fact, it might be that it was only the Guardians under Cronin that implemented the shift against him.

 

Boudreau, not Cronin..Cronin never managed the Guardians...

[notin]

A manager would never employ the shift against hitters like Brett and Boggs. One was coached by Charlie Lau and the other by Walt Hriniak, who both believed strongly in hitting to the opposite field.

 

I believe you mean should never. I bet we have a manager or two that would employ it against them. And possibly against Tony Gwynn...

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

Boudreau, not Cronin..Cronin never managed the Guardians...

 

You're right. My bad.

[notin]

You're right. My bad.

 

We can let it go, since you probably watched so few Guardians games back then...

[Kimmi]

I think the Shift has had a bit of a domino effect on the game recent years. There’s not a lot of incentive for a batter to NOT try to hit a HR and bypass it all together. If hitting a baseball isn’t the hardest thing to do in sports, surely it’s still the hardest thing to do in baseball. Squarely. And that says nothing about hitting it where a defender isn’t. And sure, especially if the game is on the line, i’d love to see more batters try and square-up a bunt to defeat a shift, but that seems like a different argument. That’s a rabbit-hole we can go down too. But if the MLB powers that be want a more exciting game then they have to look at creating some defensive rules that limit the shift. Football & basketball have some sort of illegal defense rules. In baseball its f***ing Vietnam out there. And don’t get me wrong, I think the shift has it’s place but without some rules one better get used to the 28HR, .220 BA .290 OBP Type of hitter. If they do it right it could be fun and even more strategic. Until then, I’ll have keep holding down my lunch when I hear how great world cup soccer is. ����

 

I am not a fan of the shift. I think at the very least they need to start with requiring that the SS and 3B be positioned on the left side of 2nd base and the 2B and 1B be on the right side.

[Kimmi]

While I hate the shift, I would hate it more if the Commissioner impose regulations against it. It's a defensive alignment and a strategy. Hitters and offenses need to work around it. What's Manfred going to do after that - make it illegal to choke up on a bat?

 

Pace of play? Go for it! Bring the DH to the NL? Should have been done years ago. But the shift? Get real...

 

And for me, trying to control pace of play by penalizing pitchers or batters for taking too much time would be wrong. I get as frustrated as anyone when a pitcher takes 30 seconds between pitches, but I like the cat and mouse between pitcher and batter. I also like that some pitchers start getting inside their own heads, not that I like it when one of our pitchers does it, but it's part of the game.

[Kimmi]

There seems to be a school of thought that if you bunt and try to go the other way more, you're doing exactly what the defense wants you to do. I dunno the answer.

 

It is advantageous for hitters to drop down a bunt for a base hit now and then, if they can do so successfully. Even for a guy like Ortiz.

 

I think many hitters are opposed to what they feel is 'giving into the defense' and allowing them a victory, so to speak, by getting away from their strength.

[Kimmi]

Some big name hitters have stated that it is far easier to talk about hitting to left against the shift than to actually do it. It seems that pitchers do not like to cooperate.

 

It is much easier said than done.

[a700hitter]

Some big name hitters have stated that it is far easier to talk about hitting to left against the shift than to actually do it. It seems that pitchers do not like to cooperate.

The shift does force the pitcher to pitch to the shift. IMO, it takes away the outside part of the plate at times. I can't see pitchers liking that.

[moonslav59]

The shift does force the pitcher to pitch to the shift. IMO, it takes away the outside part of the plate at times. I can't see pitchers liking that.

 

Most dead pull hitters will pull outside pitches, too. That's why they are called "dead pull hitters."

 

I see pitchers going outside with the shift on- knowing the guy at the plate won't try to go the other way with it.

[a700hitter]

Most dead pull hitters will pull outside pitches, too. That's why they are called "dead pull hitters."

 

I see pitchers going outside with the shift on- knowing the guy at the plate won't try to go the other way with it.

If the spray charts showed every ball pulled by a hitter, I would agree about the 'dead pull' hitter stuff, but there are usually some balls going to the other side of the field -- probably when a pitcher bet him on the outside of the plate with a good pitch.

[moonslav59]

If the spray charts showed every ball pulled by a hitter, I would agree about the 'dead pull' hitter stuff, but there are usually some balls going to the other side of the field -- probably when a pitcher bet him on the outside of the plate with a good pitch.

 

I didn't mean to imply any hitter pulls 100%, and yes most likely any balls that did go the opposite way were outside pitches.

 

My point was, if a batter goes the other way on outside pitches at a somewhat high rate, they would never have a shift put on them. It is batters who refuse or can't go the other way enough (inside or outside pitches) who have the shift placed on them.

[a700hitter]

I didn't mean to imply any hitter pulls 100%, and yes most likely any balls that did go the opposite way were outside pitches.

 

My point was, if a batter goes the other way on outside pitches at a somewhat high rate, they would never have a shift put on them. It is batters who refuse or can't go the other way enough (inside or outside pitches) who have the shift placed on them.

i just think that it takes away from the pitcher the outside pitch to a certain extent, especially when he has 2 strikes on the hitter. If you beat the guy and execute that pitch, you can get screwed. Even batters who refuse to go the other way can get beat and miss hit the ball the other way.

[moonslav59]

i just think that it takes away from the pitcher the outside pitch to a certain extent, especially when he has 2 strikes on the hitter. If you beat the guy and execute that pitch, you can get screwed. Even batters who refuse to go the other way can get beat and miss hit the ball the other way.

 

It happens so infrequently that even if it does happen, it never outweighs the benefits of the shift. Otherwise, they'd stop doing the shift.It's also very dangerous only pitching pull hitters inside. They can then expect it and adjust accordingly.

 

I'm curious to know if pitchers pitch more inside with the shift on than before they started using the shift on a particular player. I would guess, if they do, it won't be by much.

[a700hitter]

It happens so infrequently that even if it does happen, it never outweighs the benefits of the shift. Otherwise, they'd stop doing the shift.It's also very dangerous only pitching pull hitters inside. They can then expect it and adjust accordingly.

 

I'm curious to know if pitchers pitch more inside with the shift on than before they started using the shift on a particular player. I would guess, if they do, it won't be by much.

If good pitcher like Sale gets 2 strikes on a hitter, I would adjust the shift to protect against it.

[moonslav59]

If good pitcher like Sale gets 2 strikes on a hitter, I would adjust the shift to protect against it.

 

But, they don't, because the hitter with the shift on hardly ever hits the opposite way. He either can't (enough) or he won't (out of stubbornness?).

[a700hitter]

But, they don't, because the hitter with the shift on hardly ever hits the opposite way. He either can't (enough) or he won't (out of stubbornness?).

I am talking about an inadvertent ball hit the other way where a good pitcher just destroys the batter on a 2 strike pitch but the batter is good enough to just get some wood on it. I am not talking about consciously going the other way. I am referring to those situations where a hitter is beat on a pitch.

[moonslav59]

I am talking about an inadvertent ball hit the other way where a good pitcher just destroys the batter on a 2 strike pitch but the batter is good enough to just get some wood on it. I am not talking about consciously going the other way. I am referring to those situations where a hitter is beat on a pitch.

 

Yes, I understood what you meant, but those inadvertent balls hit to the opposite field occur so rarely, it's still worth keeping the shift on with zero, 1 or 2 strikes and pitching outside.

 

Hitters with shifts on don't adjust (or can't). That's why there's a shift put on them.

 

 

[notin]

I am talking about an inadvertent ball hit the other way where a good pitcher just destroys the batter on a 2 strike pitch but the batter is good enough to just get some wood on it. I am not talking about consciously going the other way. I am referring to those situations where a hitter is beat on a pitch.

 

If the hitter is not in control of where the ball goes, he is jut as likely to hit into the shift as he is hit against it.

[a700hitter]

Yes, I understood what you meant, but those inadvertent balls hit to the opposite field occur so rarely, it's still worth keeping the shift on with zero, 1 or 2 strikes and pitching outside.

 

Hitters with shifts on don't adjust (or can't). That's why there's a shift put on them.

 

 

i realize that, but I still think that it could make the pitcher pitch to the inner half of the plate to avoid that mistake hit going the other way.

[a700hitter]

If the hitter is not in control of where the ball goes, he is jut as likely to hit into the shift as he is hit against it.

If a hitter gets destroyed on a 2 strike pitch on the outside of the plate, if he makes contact at all, he is more likely to not be able to pull the ball.

[notin]

If a hitter gets destroyed on a 2 strike pitch on the outside of the plate, if he makes contact at all, he is more likely to not be able to pull the ball.

 

Usually he hits a weak grounder up the middle. He might go the other way, but typically with a shift on the pitcher punishes the hitter inside, and the only way to take it the other way is to modify your swing or your timing, both of which put the hitter at a huge disadvantage for even making contact...

[a700hitter]

Usually he hits a weak grounder up the middle. He might go the other way, but typically with a shift on the pitcher punishes the hitter inside, and the only way to take it the other way is to modify your swing or your timing, both of which put the hitter at a huge disadvantage for even making contact...

Exactly my point as you stated "with a shift on the pitcher punishes the hitter inside". The shift takes away part of the plate -- the outside portion -- if the pitcher is going to pitch to the shift. Most of the great pitchers live on the outside half of the plate.

[dgalehouse]

For years , left handed hitters dominated . Not so any more. The shift certainly has something to do with that.

[moonslav59]

For years , left handed hitters dominated . Not so any more. The shift certainly has something to do with that.

 

Good point.

 

There also seems to be more quality LHPs that do well vs righties and lefties.

[notin]

For years , left handed hitters dominated . Not so any more. The shift certainly has something to do with that.

 

I agree, but it is worth noting the shift is geared to and works best against LH power and pull hitters. Against hitters like Wade Boggs and Tony Gwynn - guys who used the whole field - it was like flipping a coin to determine if it would even work. Actually, the shift might have even helped Boggs, who was such a master of hanging back and going the other way when he needed to...