OrangeWhoopass.com Forums

General Discussion => Talk Zone => Topic started by: Nate Colbert on December 05, 2018, 01:29:43 pm

Title: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Nate Colbert on December 05, 2018, 01:29:43 pm
or so says Jayson Stark (https://theathletic.com/694910/2018/12/05/stark-what-would-happen-if-baseball-killed-the-shift-support-for-the-idea-is-building-inside-the-game/?source=dailyemail):

Quote
At last month’s owners meetings, baseball’s competition committee gave the commissioner “strong” backing to try to “put something in place” to limit shifts, according to sources who spoke directly with members of the committee. So next up, it’s time to run this – and more – past the players’ union.

He quotes a front office person saying it's a slam dunk as far as getting approval from the players.

Also says pitch clock likely to be...pitched as well to the union.

Totally unknown as to what the new shift rules might look like but Stark thinks the most likely approach would be a rule requiring two infielders on each side of 2nd base.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: BudGirl on December 05, 2018, 01:47:11 pm
I disagree with the shift banning.  That just means hitters need to adjust.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: BUWebguy on December 05, 2018, 02:04:13 pm
Keith Olbermann's response (https://twitter.com/KeithOlbermann/status/1070323090679324672):

Quote
“The shift” has been around since 1875. So naturally ban it, which will require some equivalent to an illegal defense rule, which will mean more replays, which will mean - what? Outs overturned? Which will mean LONGER DAMN GAMES.

I hadn't thought about that possible income -- guys waiting as close as possible to whatever line is drawn, then trying to run over to the other side. Could MLB end up with its own version of offsides and false starts? Will that be reviewable?
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Bench on December 05, 2018, 02:13:16 pm
Keith Olbermann's response (https://twitter.com/KeithOlbermann/status/1070323090679324672):

I hadn't thought about that possible income -- guys waiting as close as possible to whatever line is drawn, then trying to run over to the other side. Could MLB end up with its own version of offsides and false starts? Will that be reviewable?

It sounds stupid and frankly I am surprised that it would be a "slam dunk" with the players.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: JimR on December 05, 2018, 02:38:58 pm
Total bullshit.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: moriartp on December 05, 2018, 02:54:29 pm
Counterproductive nonsense. I guess a simple "two infielders each side of second" rule wouldn't cause too much of a problem, but that's mostly because it wouldn't make too much of a difference.

But really, it's hard to express how dumb this is. If you want more action on balls in play, un-juice the ball. When you make it too easy to hit a home run, everyone swings for a damned home run.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: doyce7 on December 05, 2018, 02:56:51 pm
Some guys suck at hitting the other way so ban shifts
Some guys suck at making free throws, make fouls an automatic 2 points
Soccer needs more scoring so hitting the post or crossbar is now a goal


You don't make rule changes because players suck at something. Make the players adjust/work hard to get better.

Just my 2 cents

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: BudGirl on December 05, 2018, 03:35:21 pm
Some guys suck at hitting the other way so ban shifts
Some guys suck at making free throws, make fouls an automatic 2 points
Soccer needs more scoring so hitting the post or crossbar is now a goal


You don't make rule changes because players suck at something. Make the players adjust/work hard to get better.

Just my 2 cents

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk



The NFL may not do much right, but they did good by moving the extra point back.  That's changed so many games now.  It was easy so they made it harder.

Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: HudsonHawk on December 05, 2018, 06:03:51 pm
Some guys suck at hitting the other way so ban shifts
Some guys suck at making free throws, make fouls an automatic 2 points
Soccer needs more scoring so hitting the post or crossbar is now a goal


You don't make rule changes because players suck at something. Make the players adjust/work hard to get better.

Just my 2 cents

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

This is a great strategy until people start changing the channel.  You have to balance your sense of purity with professional baseball's primary purpose, which is to entice viewership and make money.  Not that I advocate banning the shift, but rules have changed many times over the years with that in mind.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Col. Sphinx Drummond on December 05, 2018, 06:34:54 pm
When you add beans to chili, it is no longer chili. If you change the game than it ceases to be the game.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: austro on December 05, 2018, 06:54:30 pm
Keith Olbermann's response (https://twitter.com/KeithOlbermann/status/1070323090679324672):

I hadn't thought about that possible income -- guys waiting as close as possible to whatever line is drawn, then trying to run over to the other side. Could MLB end up with its own version of offsides and false starts? Will that be reviewable?

It will be as stupid and as inconsistently enforced as the old NBA "illegal defense" rule.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: VirtualBob on December 05, 2018, 11:28:35 pm
When you add beans to chili, it is no longer chili. If you change the game than it ceases to be the game.
See hitter, designated
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Lefty on December 06, 2018, 12:51:38 am
Total bullshit.
Succinct and true.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Lefty on December 06, 2018, 12:53:19 am
It will be as stupid and as inconsistently enforced as the old NBA "illegal defense" rule.
I'm thinking more of the "illegal shift" penalty in football.  Do they have to be set until the pitch is released?
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Col. Sphinx Drummond on December 06, 2018, 07:48:25 am
See hitter, designated
The pitcher is not banned from hitting.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Fredia on December 06, 2018, 03:31:48 pm
and now on yahoo..https://www.yahoo.com/sports/banning-defensive-shifts-lazy-solution-non-existent-problem-mlb-040622844.html
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: VirtualBob on December 07, 2018, 01:36:38 pm
The pitcher is not banned from hitting.
No, but the pinch hitter is allowed to come to the plate multiple times over multiple innings without affecting the pitcher's ability to stay in the game.  Thus, a "change".
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Navin R Johnson on December 08, 2018, 11:59:12 am
Speaking of rules, was chatting with someone who thinks there a possibility of some tech getting introduced into the game. As in a way for pitchers and catchers to communicate without having to worry about other teams stealing signs.

She said that all teams are using tech to steal signs.  It’s becoming a real issue.  She said at least one of Maldanados passed balls In the playoffs was due to a cross up, because the signs have become so ridiculous due to knowing other teams are using new means to steal signs.

Said it could well be addressed at the winter meetings.   Had this conversation about a month ago, but hadn’t heard or read anything about that since.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: das on December 08, 2018, 12:58:23 pm
Speaking of rules, was chatting with someone who thinks there a possibility of some tech getting introduced into the game. As in a way for pitchers and catchers to communicate without having to worry about other teams stealing signs.

She said that all teams are using tech to steal signs.  It’s becoming a real issue.  She said at least one of Maldanados passed balls In the playoffs was due to a cross up, because the signs have become so ridiculous due to knowing other teams are using new means to steal signs.

Said it could well be addressed at the winter meetings.   Had this conversation about a month ago, but hadn’t heard or read anything about that since.

Verlander mentioned it around a month ago as well. He used the NFL quarterback analogy. Said it would make the game safer (crossups), shorten the game (less mound visits) and would help stop the spying shenanigans.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Lefty on December 08, 2018, 01:29:23 pm
Verlander mentioned it around a month ago as well. He used the NFL quarterback analogy. Said it would make the game safer (crossups), shorten the game (less mound visits) and would help stop the spying shenanigans.

I love this idea.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: BlownRanger on December 10, 2018, 09:18:25 am
Heard part of a Reid Ryan interview on the radio this morning.  Surprised to hear he's a strong proponent of the "Start Extra Innings With a Runner on 2nd Base" rule.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: toddthebod on December 10, 2018, 09:46:56 am
Reid Ryan was on MLB Network Radio on Sunday.  He pretty much said that baseball needs to give fans what they want, whatever they want.  So if fans want more offense, then MLB should do what they can do.  He was also very supportive of the pitch clock and the extra innings rule that puts a runner on second. 
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: chuck on December 10, 2018, 09:50:05 am
Reid Ryan was on MLB Network Radio on Sunday.  He pretty much said that baseball needs to give fans what they want, whatever they want.  So if fans want more offense, then MLB should do what they can do.  He was also very supportive of the pitch clock and the extra innings rule that puts a runner on second.

That's a perfect attitude for someone who works at Nordstrom.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: juliogotay on December 10, 2018, 10:09:45 am
That's a perfect attitude for someone who works at Nordstrom.

And I would not invest in Nordstom.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: das on December 10, 2018, 10:17:08 am
Reid Ryan was on MLB Network Radio on Sunday.  He pretty much said that baseball needs to give fans what they want, whatever they want.  So if fans want more offense, then MLB should do what they can do.  He was also very supportive of the pitch clock and the extra innings rule that puts a runner on second.

We see this in the tech business sometimes.  CX/UX run amok.  The notion of giving people what/anything they want leads to horrible customer experiences.  "I want salty, greasy food delivered to my laz-y-boy 3 meals a day and chocolate cake for my two snacks" leads to poor outcomes.  Because, you know, the customer dies pretty quick. 

A very valuable part of good CX/UX is letting the product experts have a viable voice in the product construction and delivery.  Without that expertise to compliment customer desires, you get descending gibberish for a product.

Edited to add; all you have to do is look at contemporary news outlets to see a good analog of this progression.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: TerryPuhl21 on December 10, 2018, 11:56:35 am
Reid Ryan was on MLB Network Radio on Sunday.  He pretty much said that baseball needs to give fans what they want, whatever they want.  So if fans want more offense, then MLB should do what they can do.  He was also very supportive of the pitch clock and the extra innings rule that puts a runner on second.
Reid was really talked about pretty harshly after his interview was over, and then again just a few minutes ago on Steve Phillips show, for suggesting that teams should be compensated when their front office personnel is raided by another team. He made that comment when discussing Elias, Fast and Sig. The overwhelming feeling was that if Houston wanted to keep those guys they should have paid up, and that their absence was really going to be felt by Jeff and the organization, so much so that it could be impacting what moves the Astros do or don’t make this off season.

As for Reid’s comments about rule changes, sure, I love the game as it is but most these things are not deal breakers for me personally. Half the stands empty when a game goes into extra innings. While I love an 18 inning game, most can’t hang with that, either in person or on tv. Starting the 11th with a runner on second base to help end the game sooner and preserve pitcher’s arms is understandable and not a detriment to the game in my opinion. The NFL and NHL have each altered the OT for regular season play. It didn’t destroy those sports.

I do disagree with some of the shift banning talk. Telling a team where they can and can’t play their defensive players seems like a step too far. I MIGHT be willing to live with all infielders on the dirt but you could align them anyway you want, but again, I’d prefer for the hitters, who are supposed to be professionals, learn how to hit the other way.

I love the pitch clock. When you see some of our guys come up from the minors, like C Perez, and they are used to that and pitch with that quicker pace, I love it.

DH?? I could live with it either way but please make a decision. Both leagues need to play by the same rules!!!! Could you image flipping a coin before the super bowl to determine home team and that coin toss determined whether or not one team could use their running back?? Sorry Rams. You lose the toss so Todd Gurley can’t play. I still find it hard to believe this was ever allowed in baseball. The players union will never allow it to be done away with so the NL needs to get on board. DH today please so we can play by the same rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: JimR on December 10, 2018, 12:04:25 pm
You are fucking crazy for agreeing with the 11th rule. Fucking crazy.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: TerryPuhl21 on December 10, 2018, 12:17:17 pm
You are fucking crazy for agreeing with the 11th rule. Fucking crazy.
I don’t say it was my preference, just that I could live with it. An 18 inning game is fine with me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Astros Fan in Big D on December 10, 2018, 04:15:39 pm
They'll start this nonsense in the 11th, then move it to the 10th when tv numbers don't look like they want.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Tom Servo on December 10, 2018, 04:48:35 pm
Back to the shift banning, I saw an interesting take on it from Twitter:  Grounding out into the shift is the penalty for selling out for power in the age of the launch angle craze.  If you ban the shift, you take that penalty away, thus increasing selling out for pull power.  This will further increase strikeouts and reduce balls in play.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: juliogotay on December 10, 2018, 05:09:34 pm
Things are good in the game and the business of baseball. No rule changes are necessary. In fact, they are a dumb idea. And catering to the whims of fans is really scary to me.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Col. Sphinx Drummond on December 10, 2018, 05:53:01 pm
They'll start this nonsense in the 11th, then move it to the 10th when tv numbers don't look like they want.
First they came for...
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: doyce7 on December 10, 2018, 05:57:55 pm
Back to the shift banning, I saw an interesting take on it from Twitter:  Grounding out into the shift is the penalty for selling out for power in the age of the launch angle craze.  If you ban the shift, you take that penalty away, thus increasing selling out for pull power.  This will further increase strikeouts and reduce balls in play.
This, is a great point

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Astros Fan in Big D on December 10, 2018, 08:05:56 pm
Back to the shift banning, I saw an interesting take on it from Twitter:  Grounding out into the shift is the penalty for selling out for power in the age of the launch angle craze.  If you ban the shift, you take that penalty away, thus increasing selling out for pull power.  This will further increase strikeouts and reduce balls in play.

Just how many times can Joey Gallo strike out?
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: juliogotay on December 10, 2018, 08:15:01 pm
Just how many times can Joey Gallo strike out?

Not enough as far as I'm concerned.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: austro on December 10, 2018, 08:44:26 pm
Just how many times can Joey Gallo strike out?

Are you familiar with the Ackermann function?
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: VirtualBob on December 10, 2018, 09:23:31 pm
"I want salty, greasy food delivered to my laz-y-boy 3 meals a day and chocolate cake for my two snacks" leads to poor outcomes.  Because, you know, the customer dies pretty quick.

This puts a whole new spin on maximizing customer life time value.
Title: Re: Shift-Banning Proposal Gaining Momentum
Post by: Astros Fan in Big D on December 10, 2018, 10:09:11 pm
Are you familiar with the Ackermann function?

I also would have accepted "How many ABs does he have?  That many."