Devers

[Bellhorn04]

Fair point. Personally, I really dislike all of the extreme shifting, and moving defenders based on the count.

 

That said, it works.

 

I'm starting to really dislike the trend of baseball toward a game of LaunchBall. More home runs and much more strikeouts. Which arguably started as a response to all the shifting.

 

At the end of the day about the same number of runs are scored as before, but the nature of the game is different.

[Kimmi]

I'm starting to really dislike the trend of baseball toward a game of LaunchBall. More home runs and much more strikeouts. Which arguably started as a response to all the shifting.

 

At the end of the day about the same number of runs are scored as before, but the nature of the game is different.

 

I'm not a fan of LaunchBall, but I don't have a problem with the analytics behind this one. It's one of those trends in baseball where the pitchers will have to make adjustments to what the batters are doing. Also, I think the juiced baseballs are more to blame here than anything else, which I do have a problem with.

 

I don't like the shifts because I don't like players playing out of what we have typically considered their position. To me, it feels like changing the basic structure of the game, whereas launch angle doesn't.

 

It's the same reason why I don't like instant replay and robot umps.

[mvp 78]

Devers won player of the month for June.

[mvp 78]

ok so, i know nobody will probably agree with me but hasn't devers' defense been kinda iffy to a point to consider looking for another 3rd baseman?i think if there was any chance on trading devers and getting beltre back i might do it....i know beltre is aging but i think he can play defense...and still has a bat....and hit well in boston...nunez ain't bad but i think beltre has always been a very solid all around player

 

lol

[mvp 78]

Posted on March 11th:

 

His defense is fine and getting better.

 

[YastrzemskI]

Devers won player of the month for June.

 

Where would the Red Sox be without this kid and his enthusiasm this year.. scary. Good solid contact hitter with some pop. His defense has improved nicely as well. 22 years old. Awesome.

[moonslav59]

I've always been high on Devers, but he has impressed even me, this year!

[mvp 78]

I've always been high on Devers, but he has impressed even me, this year!

 

[cp176]

I believe in using anything available to help your team win within reason of course but some of the current trends that are driven by statistics really have not done anything to improve attendance in the game today. I realize that it is unlikely that we are going back anytime soon but for some the game was much more interesting just a few short years ago. There are lots of reasons for attendance drop-offs of course that have nothing to do with the stats. As a matter of fact though - what do the "stat geeks" suggest the future interest in the game will be? there must be reliable analytical evidence to shed light on where this game is heading.

[cp176]

I believe in using anything available to help your team win within reason of course but some of the current trends that are driven by statistics really have not done anything to improve attendance in the game today. I realize that it is unlikely that we are going back anytime soon but for some the game was much more interesting just a few short years ago. There are lots of reasons for attendance drop-offs of course that have nothing to do with the stats. As a matter of fact though - what do the "stat geeks" suggest the future interest in the game will be? there must be reliable analytical evidence to shed light on where this game is heading.

 

So I'm not surprised that the statistical gurus here aren't responding to my question so I will lob you another one. If you eliminate the first inning, what becomes the position in the batting order from which the most production comes? Now remember - eliminate the first. After the first inning , what do the stats say becomes the guy with the most at bats as well as the position in the batting order from where the most RBI's come from? Production to me equates to the most RbI's. I don't care how they are produced.

[jad]

It's always been this way in the history of the game only because everyone accepted it as the way it should be.

 

It doesn't mean it's correct.

 

So I'm not surprised that the statistical gurus here aren't responding to my question so I will lob you another one. If you eliminate the first inning, what becomes the position in the batting order from which the most production comes? Now remember - eliminate the first. After the first inning , what do the stats say becomes the guy with the most at bats as well as the position in the batting order from where the most RBI's come from? Production to me equates to the most RbI's. I don't care how they are produced.

 

I'm wondering why this is a difficult problem to solve w/ a computer, and I've asked it several times. Simply take a lineup--and a large sample of games (50? 100?) where those 9 guys play. Enter the results of what they did. Which order produces the most runs? (There's a fairly large number, but it shouldn't be overwhelming ... 9! = 9 factorial?). (I think the condition 'exclude the first inning' might well make it more difficult to figure--it certainly wouldn't simplify things. And you would want that anyway, since you're trying to find out if there's any particular order that maximizes runs. Not sure you could come up with a general rule based on one team, but you could determine what to do with the guys you normally play).

[cp176]

I'm wondering why this is a difficult problem to solve w/ a computer, and I've asked it several times. Simply take a lineup--and a large sample of games (50? 100?) where those 9 guys play. Enter the results of what they did. Which order produces the most runs? (There's a fairly large number, but it shouldn't be overwhelming ... 9! = 9 factorial?). (I think the condition 'exclude the first inning' might well make it more difficult to figure--it certainly wouldn't simplify things. And you would want that anyway, since you're trying to find out if there's any particular order that maximizes runs. Not sure you could come up with a general rule based on one team, but you could determine what to do with the guys you normally play).

 

The reason that I suggested eliminating the first inning is simply because I think that it could skew overall results. I still like my best hitter third or fourth I guess and to date I have seen no clear definitive evidence to prove that what I like is antiquated old school and simply done because that is the way that it has always been done and that is that. That is horribly condescending to my way of thinking. I think that it is fairly obvious that in the first inning the number 3 guy is often coming to the plate with no one on base. I like him getting to the plate in the first inning with any chance of having runners on ahead of him. when do people think the highest pressure situations occur in most games? when are your best hitters likely to hit better - first time - second time - or third time through? There are lots of little pieces of information that could be thrown in. for the record, I really could give a s*** where any manager decides to bat his better hitters. What I have tough time with is anyone definitively claiming that they are right about anything simply because they have completed some statistical information. Most normal people realize that numbers can be interpreted in many different ways. You find that the stats to support your statements. It doesn't mean that you are always right. I consider it a very narrow way way to look at anything. My stats say so, so it must be right - ********!

thank you for responding to my questions. In many cases it isn't the statistical evidence that bugs me but simply the way it is presented by the people doing the presenting. FTR - I happen to like the way Moon presents his material. It serves a purpose as opposed to trying to prove a personal point.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm going to start up a new thread on the batting order just for you, cp. By tonight.

[notin]

So I'm not surprised that the statistical gurus here aren't responding to my question so I will lob you another one. If you eliminate the first inning, what becomes the position in the batting order from which the most production comes? Now remember - eliminate the first. After the first inning , what do the stats say becomes the guy with the most at bats as well as the position in the batting order from where the most RBI's come from? Production to me equates to the most RbI's. I don't care how they are produced.

 

While I’ve never seen a simulation or study that eliminates the first inning, essentially every study you do see highlights the top 4 spots as being the most productive. A big part of that is they obviously see the most plate appearances.

 

John Dewan (of Baseball Prospectus and The Fielding Bible) in 2006 promoted the traditional view of best hitters batting 3rd and fourth, with the caveat that the third spot go to the faster hitter. The prominent new method (new in application, but actually pretty old) is the Markov model, which has the best hitter hitting second to maximize plate appearances. This model also recommends the pitcher bat 8th (which I don’t like) and the best base stealer bat 5th or 6th ( which makes a ton of sense to me). Why risk stealing in front of the better hitters? Steal bases in front of the hitters less likely to string together singles or hit an XBH.

 

And no one has ever found any way to justify the notion that protection in a lineup works.

 

A lot of this can be found via simple Google searches. Admitting it’s not always the most exciting reading...

[Maxbialystock]

I'm not a fan of LaunchBall, but I don't have a problem with the analytics behind this one. It's one of those trends in baseball where the pitchers will have to make adjustments to what the batters are doing. Also, I think the juiced baseballs are more to blame here than anything else, which I do have a problem with.

 

I don't like the shifts because I don't like players playing out of what we have typically considered their position. To me, it feels like changing the basic structure of the game, whereas launch angle doesn't.

 

It's the same reason why I don't like instant replay and robot umps.

 

Pretty close to my own philosophy, which means you are a traditionalist. I say that while also believing that the very rare occurrence of bringing in an outfielder to be a 5th infielder is pretty neat. What I dislike about those shifts is they are utterly mechanical and driven by stats. Indeed, the commentators now regularly spout more and more new stats about how hard a home run was hit, etc which mostly bore me. And this is coming from someone who actually likes stats and is always looking for a new statistical angle.

[mvp 78]

Launch, shifts and robot umps are fine. I just don't like the current instant replay model. Having a coach hold up the action while reviewing whether or not he wants to challenge is dumb as hell. They need to shorten that process.

 

Shifting has happened since before most of us were born. It IS traditional. It's the game you grew up with.

[notin]

Launch, shifts and robot umps are fine. I just don't like the current instant replay model. Having a coach hold up the action while reviewing whether or not he wants to challenge is dumb as hell. They need to shorten that process.

 

Shifting has happened since before most of us were born. It IS traditional. It's the game you grew up with.

 

 

Shifting has been around longer than many realize. The “Williams Shift” was created and even named that looooong before Ted Williams played. (It was created to stop 1920s slugger Cy Williams.)

 

The frequency with which it’s deployed is annoying, but it’s a defensive strategy. They happen and just because we’ve seen them all our whole lives doesn’t mean they were never new additions to the game. There was a time when “double play depth” was the hot new trendy thing too...

[Bellhorn04]

Launch, shifts and robot umps are fine. I just don't like the current instant replay model. Having a coach hold up the action while reviewing whether or not he wants to challenge is dumb as hell. They need to shorten that process.

 

Shifting has happened since before most of us were born. It IS traditional. It's the game you grew up with.

 

Defensive shifting on every play is not something we grew up with.

[sk7326]

Defensive shifting on every play is not something we grew up with.

 

The shifting has gotten more precise. What I find interesting is that - longer term - you'd think that there would be a real market for an Otis Nixon of yore - who can make slap contact into the vacated SS or 3B hole and get on base that way. That seems like a natural counter which has not been deployed as much as one would think - at least not yet.

[notin]

Defensive shifting on every play is not something we grew up with.

 

 

And it will go away as soon as some of those stubborn lefties learn how to go the opposite way.

 

Or take advantage of it another way. Like dropping down a bunt once in a while...

[mvp 78]

Defensive shifting on every play is not something we grew up with.

 

It's a strategy that has been around for decades and decades. If one team just tried bunting every time they were up, it would still be a traditional play just used more frequently.

 

The idea that baseball today is any less traditional than it was in 1960whatever is just flat nonsense.

[Bellhorn04]

And it will go away as soon as some of those stubborn lefties learn how to go the opposite way.

 

Or take advantage of it another way. Like dropping down a bunt once in a while...

 

In theory that would be great. In reality the general response is LaunchBall.

[notin]

It's a strategy that has been around for decades and decades. If one team just tried bunting every time they were up, it would still be a traditional play just used more frequently.

 

The idea that baseball today is any less traditional than it was in 1960whatever is just flat nonsense.

 

 

The idea that stats and metrics are ruling the game and changing how it’s played is also a tradition, not a departure from tradition...

[Bellhorn04]

It's a strategy that has been around for decades and decades.

 

How often did you actually see the radical shifting though? I'm not talking about the existence of that strategy as an option, but the actual use of it. And now of course it's based on sophisticated analytics.

[notin]

In theory that would be great. In reality the general response is LaunchBall.

 

Not really. Launch Ball plays into that strategy (and is more of a developmental technique than a deployable strategy).

 

Once teams figure how to defend Launch Ball or beat the shift, they will fade away like other fads. Like stolen bases and hit and run plays...

[Bellhorn04]

Not really. Launch Ball plays into that strategy (and is more of a developmental technique than a deployable strategy).

 

But Ted Williams refused to go the other way when they shifted him.

 

And it didn't change Big Papi's approach much either. An occasional bunt that we all enjoyed, that was about it. And it didn't seem to hurt his numbers continuing to smash the ball to right.

[notin]

But Ted Williams refused to go the other way when they shifted him.

 

And it didn't change Big Papi's approach much either. An occasional bunt that we all enjoyed, that was about it. And it didn't seem to hurt his numbers continuing to smash the ball to right.

 

And for those guys, Launch Ball was natural. But for the Jackie Bradley / Mitch Moreland types, they will need to adjust somehow...

[sk7326]

But Ted Williams refused to go the other way when they shifted him.

 

And it didn't change Big Papi's approach much either. An occasional bunt that we all enjoyed, that was about it. And it didn't seem to hurt his numbers continuing to smash the ball to right.

 

I think with both of them - since they were looking to hit fly balls anyway, they looked at the shifts are relatively unimportant.

 

What I wonder is whether the shifts will open up a chance for speedy slap hitters again. The problem is that to get to those slaps and to set the defense to shift on you, you have to be able to turn on inside stuff with at least SOME authority.

[OH FOY]

Wish a Defense like a shift, would be used in Football. Haha They run 80% of their plays to the left, so we will have the whole Defense lined up their Right, and leave the other side of Field Open. Imagine the scoring.

[OH FOY]

You bunt, simple. John Smoltz was talking about this the other day. Players are idiots, want to get paid because the LONG Ball pays. Smart Manager would sit your ass down, if they are giving you a hit, and not taking advantage of it. Too much stats. Edited June 4, 2019 by OH FOY!