southsider2k5 Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/...fensive-shifts/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Oh great...they thought this guy was the best for this role? You are going to outlaw how a team positions its defenders? Good gravy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGajewski18 Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Dumbest thing i've read today.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jan 25, 2015 -> 12:17 PM) Dumbest thing i've read today.... Make that two of us. Â I know it was just a suggestion and an extremely dumb one at that but what is Manfred thinking? Shifts are a part of baseball's strategy. WTF!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxfest Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Not caring for Manfred already, I can see why JR did not want him getting the commish job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southwest Sider Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 This idea is going to be very unpopular, but i actually appreciate that its been brought up. Im going to play devils advocate here, but ive actually thought of this myself... Â Extreme defensive shifts to me seem ridiculous. To me, the whole idea of a 3rd basemen is that hes covering the area around 3rd base. To see a 3rd basemen literally playing 2nd base, and a short stop playing.... 1st and 1/2 base and your 2nd basemen playing right field... when theres already someoene playing right field just seems ridiculous to me. I appreciate the strategic aspect of shifts and since theyre legal i expect them to be deployed... but let me just say i dont hate this idea as much as everyone else will. Â You fill out your lineup card for the umpires to inform them that such and such player is playing 3rd base. To me, having that player literally play 2nd base seems like it should be illegal and warrant a lineup switch. I mean, if a manager really wanted to, he could place any player in any part of the field. Need your right fielder around 3rd base? Ok go for it. Need your 1st basemen to cover 3rd for some reason? Ok. Not that those things would ever happen... but the point is that they can legally move players into other fielding positions without having to change your lineup. That just doesnt seem right. Â Excited to read some responses. Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 QUOTE (South Sider @ Jan 25, 2015 -> 01:37 PM) This idea is going to be very unpopular, but i actually appreciate that its been brought up. Im going to play devils advocate here, but ive actually thought of this myself... Extreme defensive shifts to me seem ridiculous. To me, the whole idea of a 3rd basemen is that hes covering the area around 3rd base. To see a 3rd basemen literally playing 2nd base, and a short stop playing.... 1st and 1/2 base and your 2nd basemen playing right field... when theres already someoene playing right field just seems ridiculous to me. I appreciate the strategic aspect of shifts and since theyre legal i expect them to be deployed... but let me just say i dont hate this idea as much as everyone else will.  You fill out your lineup card for the umpires to inform them that such and such player is playing 3rd base. To me, having that player literally play 2nd base seems like it should be illegal and warrant a lineup switch. I mean, if a manager really wanted to, he could place any player in any part of the field. Need your right fielder around 3rd base? Ok go for it. Need your 1st basemen to cover 3rd for some reason? Ok. Not that those things would ever happen... but the point is that they can legally move players into other fielding positions without having to change your lineup. That just doesnt seem right.  Excited to read some responses.  It does bug me when a lefty batter crushes a "routine single" to RF and the 2B is out there to throw him out. I also don't like it when the ball is crushed up the middle, only to have a middle infielder standing there to make the play. Those are the two plays that kinda bug me.  On the other hand, it's been said time and time again that baseball is a game of adjustments. So hit the other way and lay down more bunts if you have to. Eventually the game will adjust back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 In other sports news, Roger Goodell has announced that NFL teams will no longer be allowed to play "nickel" and "dime" formations on defense. On every play a team must have 4 down linemen, 3 linebackers, and 4 defensive backs no matter how the offense lines up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kev211 Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Oh my god this is stupid. It would ruin the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 next will be the suicide bunt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenryan Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Gary Bettman and Roger Goodell is going to love this new MLB commish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Teams are no longer allowed to make double plays or triple plays either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (South Sider @ Jan 25, 2015 -> 01:37 PM) This idea is going to be very unpopular, but i actually appreciate that its been brought up. Im going to play devils advocate here, but ive actually thought of this myself... Extreme defensive shifts to me seem ridiculous. To me, the whole idea of a 3rd basemen is that hes covering the area around 3rd base. To see a 3rd basemen literally playing 2nd base, and a short stop playing.... 1st and 1/2 base and your 2nd basemen playing right field... when theres already someoene playing right field just seems ridiculous to me. I appreciate the strategic aspect of shifts and since theyre legal i expect them to be deployed... but let me just say i dont hate this idea as much as everyone else will.  You fill out your lineup card for the umpires to inform them that such and such player is playing 3rd base. To me, having that player literally play 2nd base seems like it should be illegal and warrant a lineup switch. I mean, if a manager really wanted to, he could place any player in any part of the field. Need your right fielder around 3rd base? Ok go for it. Need your 1st basemen to cover 3rd for some reason? Ok. Not that those things would ever happen... but the point is that they can legally move players into other fielding positions without having to change your lineup. That just doesnt seem right.  Excited to read some responses.  I picked a kid off in college with a center fielder coming in to take the throw at 2nd. Maybe that was illegal as well. He was in the infield after all. Who cares where the position players play. I have played games where we have brought in an extra infielder late late in the game because if the ball leaves the infield you are going to lose anyway. It is up to the coaches to put the players where they believe they will be effective in fielding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 It would be one way to increase runs scored without changing too much. Without PEDs and home runs down, the ,league will need to do something to increase runs scored. The average fan likes higher scoring games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 25, 2015 -> 11:12 PM) It would be one way to increase runs scored without changing too much. Without PEDs and home runs down, the ,league will need to do something to increase runs scored. The average fan likes higher scoring games. Â Exactly what I was coming to post. They want to increase scoring, and this is far less drastic than lowering the mounds or changing the baseballs or bats. Although, those changes probably wouldn't even be noticed by the average fan either. Â I don't really mind if they eliminate shifts. It will make the game more exciting for those casual fans who think games can be boring. Another positive would be it will help with defensive metrics because the thought now is that some shifts more hurt or help players unfairly in the defensive systems due to them being out of position. Â Keep shifts or get rid of them, I won't really be affected either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (flavum @ Jan 25, 2015 -> 01:45 PM) It does bug me when a lefty batter crushes a "routine single" to RF and the 2B is out there to throw him out. I also don't like it when the ball is crushed up the middle, only to have a middle infielder standing there to make the play. Those are the two plays that kinda bug me. Â On the other hand, it's been said time and time again that baseball is a game of adjustments. So hit the other way and lay down more bunts if you have to. Eventually the game will adjust back. Â Maybe that lefty batter should stop hitting the ball directly at where the 2B is standing? If we want to reward "routine singles ", why even have defenders? Just have zones painted on the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 26, 2015 Author Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 25, 2015 -> 02:06 PM) In other sports news, Roger Goodell has announced that NFL teams will no longer be allowed to play "nickel" and "dime" formations on defense. On every play a team must have 4 down linemen, 3 linebackers, and 4 defensive backs no matter how the offense lines up. Â Only there are rules about exactly how many guys have to be on the line of scrimmage etc in the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 07:12 AM) Only there are rules about exactly how many guys have to be on the line of scrimmage etc in the NFL. Â The rules are in place on both sides of the ball, so it doesn't give the offense an unfair advantage. If the offense has 5 wide receivers and you know they are gonna throw, then you are allowed to cover those guys. The MLB Commish thinks that's wrong and you shouldn't be allowed to cover where you know the ball is going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 26, 2015 -> 07:20 AM) The rules are in place on both sides of the ball, so it doesn't give the offense an unfair advantage. If the offense has 5 wide receivers and you know they are gonna throw, then you are allowed to cover those guys. The MLB Commish thinks that's wrong and you shouldn't be allowed to cover where you know the ball is going. I agree. Shifts also open up a huge portion of the field that guys making millions should be able to exploit. They do that a few times, shifts go away. Â Banning them would be stupid. Would every fielder have to play straight up? I don't think many realize the "shift" a middle infielder goes through with a runner on 1B. Would that be eliminated, therefore making DPs obsolete? Edited January 26, 2015 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I thought the coolest thing about baseball was that, aside from the pitcher and catcher, you could theoretically play the remaining 7 guys any way that you wanted to. Â Consider me in the group that hates this idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 QUOTE (South Sider @ Jan 25, 2015 -> 01:37 PM) This idea is going to be very unpopular, but i actually appreciate that its been brought up. Im going to play devils advocate here, but ive actually thought of this myself... Extreme defensive shifts to me seem ridiculous. To me, the whole idea of a 3rd basemen is that hes covering the area around 3rd base. To see a 3rd basemen literally playing 2nd base, and a short stop playing.... 1st and 1/2 base and your 2nd basemen playing right field... when theres already someoene playing right field just seems ridiculous to me. I appreciate the strategic aspect of shifts and since theyre legal i expect them to be deployed... but let me just say i dont hate this idea as much as everyone else will.  You fill out your lineup card for the umpires to inform them that such and such player is playing 3rd base. To me, having that player literally play 2nd base seems like it should be illegal and warrant a lineup switch. I mean, if a manager really wanted to, he could place any player in any part of the field. Need your right fielder around 3rd base? Ok go for it. Need your 1st basemen to cover 3rd for some reason? Ok. Not that those things would ever happen... but the point is that they can legally move players into other fielding positions without having to change your lineup. That just doesnt seem right.  Excited to read some responses.  If a player like Ortiz or Dunn hits a ball regularly to a very defined part of the infield and outfield, why shouldn't the team be allowed to defend that? I just don't get it. Sometimes those extreme shifts get burned by good hitters that go the other way or even weak ground balls that go where the 3b used to be, and turn into doubles.  Forcing teams to play defense a certain way is pretty crappy if you ask me  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 RECALL VOTE!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 STUPID. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 This is basically akin to telling NBA teams they can't press teams that have poor ball handlers or they can't play a zone against a poor shooting team or telling a defender he can't shade to the ball handler's dominate side and make him go to his weak hand etc... Â It's ridiculous. I understand the end game he's going for with increased scoring, but this is not the way to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I'm not a fan of the idea . . . but something to think about  This is like telling pitchers they don't have to hit and hire someone to hit for them who doesn't have to play the field.  Well now that we sound like a bunch of NL fans . . . I like a commissioner that will consider anything, it doesn't mean it will actually make the rules book.  Parallels I see are we have off-sides in hockey and soccer. My guess the idea springs from a desire to see more scoring, the same tree that brought us the fruit of the DH. For the same reason we like the DH others would like the no shift rule.  How about no intentional walks? Four consecutive pitches outside the strike zone results in a two base walk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.