Rules rules rules

[Bellhorn04]

So here is my question about any new rule regarding teams shifting. If you are a diehard when it comes to an analytical approach to baseball and the use of advanced stats and metrics is your game, why do so many people have a problem with where teams choose to place their players on the field? To me it seems that is simply a team taking advantage of available data to give them a legal edge over their opponents. Personally I could care less where a team chooses to put their players.

 

My basic answer would be that people are not as simple as they're sometimes made out to be.

 

I am interested in some of the analytical stuff. I like WAR. But some of the analytical stuff goes way beyond what I'm interested in.

 

As for the shifting, I don't like what it does to the game and I'm glad about the rule change.

 

Something else I will mention-Theo Epstein himself was probably one of the driving forces behind the change.

 

Like I say, people aren't that simple.

[moonslav59]

Doesn't it seem a tad hypocritical for the people who take their analytics or data or whatever seriously to be opposed to any new rule such as this?

 

How so?

[cp176]

In "care" I mean "want to get rid of." I don't think analytical people are bothered by shifting and understand why it happens.

 

I'm not sure that I phrased this correctly. I'm an analytical person in general but no amount of data scrutiny would make me want to see rules limiting teams from favoring shifts. It has always been part of the game.

[moonslav59]

I'm not sure that I phrased this correctly. I'm an analytical person in general but no amount of data scrutiny would make me want to see rules limiting teams from favoring shifts. It has always been part of the game.

 

I said I'm leaning against the rule, so how am I hypocritical?

 

Do I need to be firmly against it?

[cp176]

How so?

 

 

Analytical data is used to help with the placement of fielders in positions to limit an opponents offensive production. How can anyone who supports the use of such data to do this ever support a rule to limit its use without being hypocritical?

[cp176]

I said I'm leaning against the rule, so how am I hypocritical?

 

Do I need to be firmly against it?

 

 

Did I call you hypocritical?

[Bellhorn04]

Analytical data is used to help with the placement of fielders in positions to limit an opponents offensive production. How can anyone who supports the use of such data to do this ever support a rule to limit its use without being hypocritical?

 

Theo Epstein explained it. He admitted that some of the analytics have made the game less fun to watch. It wasn't anything intentional, it just happened.

[cp176]

My basic answer would be that people are not as simple as they're sometimes made out to be.

 

I am interested in some of the analytical stuff. I like WAR. But some of the analytical stuff goes way beyond what I'm interested in.

 

As for the shifting, I don't like what it does to the game and I'm glad about the rule change.

 

Something else I will mention-Theo Epstein himself was probably one of the driving forces behind the change.

 

Like I say, people aren't that simple.

 

Am I hearing you say that some of our advanced metric data collecting zealots shouldn't be criticizing someone who doesn't want to robotic umpires? lol Some times there is a method to someone's madness.

[cp176]

Theo Epstein explained it. He admitted that some of the analytics have made the game less fun to watch. It wasn't anything intentional, it just happened.

 

 

And i truly believe that anytime you take a human element away from the game it becomes less enjoyable to watch. I don't need it to be perfect.

[moonslav59]

Did I call you hypocritical?

 

Umm... it seemed that way, since I am into data and am opposed to this rule change.

 

You wrote, in response to my post, Doesn't it seem a tad hypocritical for the people who take their analytics or data or whatever seriously to be opposed to any new rule such as this?

[moonslav59]

And i truly believe that anytime you take a human element away from the game it becomes less enjoyable to watch. I don't need it to be perfect.

 

The game will still be full of mistakes- just less by the umps, who if they do their jobs right, should never be "part of the game" itself.

[moonslav59]

And i truly believe that anytime you take a human element away from the game it becomes less enjoyable to watch. I don't need it to be perfect.

 

I do agree that long replay delays are not very enjoyable, but I prefer waiting to watching my team lose on a bad call or two.

 

robo umps will be unnoticeable and quick.

[cp176]

Umm... it seemed that way, since I am into data and am opposed to this rule change.

 

You wrote, in response to my post, Doesn't it seem a tad hypocritical for the people who take their analytics or data or whatever seriously to be opposed to any new rule such as this?

 

I just can't understand how anyone who is into the data aspect as some seem to be here, how they could not favor using the data to encourage shifting.

[cp176]

The game will still be full of mistakes- just less by the umps, who if they do their jobs right, should never be "part of the game" itself.

 

This is where I disagree with you. And I think that is ok. Umpires and referees in general are big part of the games we watch and play. I like that. i can live with the few games lost because of what I might think are bad calls.

[Hugh2]

Red Sox are stashing fast guys like Duran and Franchy in Woo right now, in anticipation of this industry adjustment.

 

Wait... when they shift in the outfield, do they just get in the way, or do they have to stop the ball, too?

 

I don't think that's why they got Franchy and Duran. Franchy was a high reward low risk guy who may amount to nothing but has crazy tools and Duran was a draftee. If anything Duran is worth less as a defender now because he's not a good defender.

 

if anything, this might be why the Sox went back to drafting all up the middle players.

[moonslav59]

I just can't understand how anyone who is into the data aspect as some seem to be here, how they could not favor using the data to encourage shifting.

 

OK, but you said "opposed to the rule", which means you want to have shifting be legal. You want teams to be able to use data to shift players on D..

[cp176]

OK, but you said "opposed to the rule", which means you want to have shifting be legal. You want teams to be able to use data to shift players on D..

 

Of course I do. Shifts have been around a while. What data have you seen that has been gathered to support robotic calling of strikes and balls. I guess if I thought that bad calls were just running rampant in the game, maybe I would change my mind. You have to understand that the world I operate is in imperfect and for the most part I still like it.

[Bellhorn04]

Of course I do. Shifts have been around a while. What data have you seen that has been gathered to support robotic calling of strikes and balls. I guess if I thought that bad calls were just running rampant in the game, maybe I would change my mind. You have to understand that the world I operate is in imperfect and for the most part I still like it.

 

Don't even need data, really, just reading the game threads here is enough.

[mvp 78]

I'm not sure that I phrased this correctly. I'm an analytical person in general but no amount of data scrutiny would make me want to see rules limiting teams from favoring shifts. It has always been part of the game.

 

I agree that it has always been a part of the game. I agree that it's absurd that anyone who truly values data and advanced metrics would be bothered by shifting. Teams are trying to win by having the other team score fewer runs, right? So if one guy can't hit the ball to the left of 2b, why put anyone over there?

 

Shifting doesn't bother me. Shifting doesn't impact my enjoyment. I don't think it has hurt the game in the least. The only people that are bothered by it are curmudgeons IMO.

 

Too much is made about the beauty of the game, Babe Ruth, dirt lots and Cracker Jack by losers like George Will. These people should be blasted into the sun because they are making the game worse not better IMO.

[mvp 78]

I don't think that's why they got Franchy and Duran. Franchy was a high reward low risk guy who may amount to nothing but has crazy tools and Duran was a draftee. If anything Duran is worth less as a defender now because he's not a good defender.

 

if anything, this might be why the Sox went back to drafting all up the middle players.

 

Up the middle guys are just usually the most athletic guys. A lot of the guys drafted get moved off SS/CF early on regardless.

[Bellhorn04]

notin made a good point, they instituted a change this year that allows catchers to give pitchers signs electronically. Has anybody really noticed this or found that it detracts from their enjoyment of the games? I haven't heard much.

 

By the same token, I think once robo calls are in place no one will notice that much either.

[Bellhorn04]

Up the middle guys are just usually the most athletic guys. A lot of the guys drafted get moved off SS/CF early on regardless.

 

What is up with that new sig line LOL?

[mvp 78]

What is up with that new sig line LOL?

 

I thought you'd be old enough to get that reference?

[mvp 78]

notin made a good point, they instituted a change this year that allows catchers to give pitchers signs electronically. Has anybody really noticed this or found that it detracts from their enjoyment of the games? I haven't heard much.

 

By the same token, I think once robo calls are in place no one will notice that much either.

 

Posters said that Eck tried to rant about it this week. I guess it went nowhere.

[moonslav59]

Of course I do. Shifts have been around a while. What data have you seen that has been gathered to support robotic calling of strikes and balls. I guess if I thought that bad calls were just running rampant in the game, maybe I would change my mind. You have to understand that the world I operate is in imperfect and for the most part I still like it.

 

You missed the point, but no bother.

[Hugh2]

Up the middle guys are just usually the most athletic guys. A lot of the guys drafted get moved off SS/CF early on regardless.

 

Exactly, but the Sox went crazy with up the middle this last year

[sk7326]

I do agree that long replay delays are not very enjoyable, but I prefer waiting to watching my team lose on a bad call or two.

 

robo umps will be unnoticeable and quick.

 

Right - the idea of the automated strike zone is that it's like the line calls in the US Open. There is no "challenging" to be done. The home plate umpire (who still has to be there to cover things like check swings and plays at the plate) gets a buzz from the system if the pitch is a strike. Now, the problem with it - at least from the data from the Arizona Fall League, was that they were calling way too many balls. But that's fixing the tolerances. (the thickness of the strike zone borders)

 

I think TV broadcasts and Statcast have made this inevitable. I mean, just the idea that national broadcasts have strike zones superimposed each at bat, and that Statcast tells you where every pitch landed ... and we just all collectively go "moops" when Angel Hernandez misses call after call (and then throws a tantrum when a player points this out) is just bonkers.

[sk7326]

I agree that it has always been a part of the game. I agree that it's absurd that anyone who truly values data and advanced metrics would be bothered by shifting. Teams are trying to win by having the other team score fewer runs, right? So if one guy can't hit the ball to the left of 2b, why put anyone over there?

 

Shifting doesn't bother me. Shifting doesn't impact my enjoyment. I don't think it has hurt the game in the least. The only people that are bothered by it are curmudgeons IMO.

 

Too much is made about the beauty of the game, Babe Ruth, dirt lots and Cracker Jack by losers like George Will. These people should be blasted into the sun because they are making the game worse not better IMO.

 

Shifts have been around since baseball was invented so whatever.

 

Now to me - the big issue with entertainment in baseball is that so few balls are put in play in general ... and none of these rules (even the shift ones) REALLY impact that to me.

[Bellhorn04]

Shifts have been around since baseball was invented so whatever.

 

Now to me - the big issue with entertainment in baseball is that so few balls are put in play in general ... and none of these rules (even the shift ones) REALLY impact that to me.

 

Some say more shifts led to more guys swinging for the fences and that led to more strikeouts.

[mvp 78]

Exactly, but the Sox went crazy with up the middle this last year

 

They've already moved most of the SS's they drafted off position.