During a Zoom call with reporters, Rockies manager Bud Black suggested the possibility of teams losing their DH upon pulling their starting pitcher from the game, per Marc Topkin of the Tampa Bay Times. The rule change’s purpose would be to deter the use of openers, while keeping some National League strategy in the game in the event that MLB decides to keep the universal DH. That said, Black’s idea could be considered even more outside-the-box than the opener itself, and it doesn’t seem likely to gain much traction. Besides, opener deterrence isn’t necessarily all that high up on the league’s to-do list. Limiting shifts, however, does appear to be gaining in popularity, notes Topkin. Forcing teams to keep two players on each side of the second base bag and keeping infielders on the infield dirt are two ways in which the league could decide to stymie current shifting strategies. Elsewhere…
- The Angels and catcher James McCann did indeed have mutual interest before the Mets inked their backstop of choice to a four-year deal, per MLB.com’s Rhett Bollinger (via Twitter). The Angels have been one of the more aggressive teams so far this winter. With many holes to fill, it’s no surprise that they would check in on a cheaper catching option than superstar free agent J.T. Realmuto.
- A few catchers have come off the board already, increasing the likelihood that the Angels enter 2021 with Max Stassi and Anthony Bemboom as their catching tandem. That would be fine as far as manager Joe Maddon is concerned, notes Maria Torres of the Los Angeles Times. The veteran Stassi would figure to get the first crack at starter reps after slashing .278/.352/.533 across 105 plate appearances last season. Bemboom had a fine showing in 2020, though the 30-year-old has never received more than 60 plate appearances in a season. The Angels are said to be at least exploring bringing in veteran Kurt Suzuki, who is just a year removed from helming a World-Series-winning staff in Washington.
i kinda like Bud’s thinking here. i still prefer to see the SP hitting, but his proposal is a nice middle ground proposal (meaning its likely just to be more unpopular given the polarizing nature of the DH)
it is time for the league-wide dh. there is simply too much risk for pitchers to bat.
im sure the pitchers who like hitting would totally agree with you.
to like hit and being able to hit are 2 different things.
I’m just curious (since I am pro-DH), why is it that you want the DH in the NL? Is it just strategy? Idk, I just see more pros than cons, but I’d like to know why you, yourself want to keep it.
I like the universal DH because it benefits my team lol… but mainly because there’s no need to add more injury risk for pitchers, plus they are essentially wasted outs, and it blocks hitters who aren’t able to field well (in general or because of age) from having jobs
Do you mean the ones who hit .150?
Do you not capitalize because you think it’s cute or something?
And that would be what small percentage? Besides, the game is for the fans, not SPs. Who the heck wants to see pitchers hit?
Plenty of NL fans such as myself want to see the pitcher hit. You may disagree with that, but pretending the opposing opinion doesn’t exist is just foolish.
league wide dh should have been started before roster changes, if they were going to implement the dhl
It’s more risky for a pitcher to get hit by a comebacker to the mound than getting hit as a batter. There’s 9 positions on the diamond. Every position should hit. If you (MLB) wants to have a universal DH, simply add it to the lineup. Some of you will call this idea juvenile, dumb, etc but it could (would) satisfy both sides of the situation.
No, adding a DH on top of requiring pitchers to hit would not be a compromise. Most fans of the universal DH(myself included) are in favor of it just because pitchers suck at hitting so much, not because we want to add a new position to the game. Requiring pitchers to hit would be very unfavorable for fans of the DH.
But more pitchers do not hit then ones that do. How often have you seen any reliever hit. Only starters hit so this craziness that pitchers hit is untrue. If you say pitchers should hit then make every reliever. Set up man and closer hit of just get rid of pitchers hitting all together.
Let’s get rid of weak hitting catchers, too. And then defensive infielders. While we are at it, let’s get rid of any hitter with an ops under .600.
The bottom line is, pitchers don’t hit because their teams don’t LET them hit. It starts in college, even high school aged travel ball. Why, because they allow these kids to throw too many breaking pitches too soon.
Growing up, pitchers were shortstops when they didn’t pitch and were typically the best athletes in the team.
Hell, more pitchers get hurt pitching than hitting, maybe they shouldn’t be allowed to pitch, either!
Example: Over his career Tom Glavine struck out 20% of his at bats, had a 101/329 BB/K 93 runs scored and 90 rbi’s 246 hits incl 28 xbh, .246 babip. That’s better than some of today’s position players. Check out Adam Wainwright, Zack Greinke for some other examples of players who took pride in their hitting and being a true ballplayer. These same guys took/take pride in fielding their position as well.
Black’s suggestion would not mean pitchers would be hitting, it would mean that pinch hitters would. It would also mean much more strategy being used.
Yes, there are a few that can hit. No one denies that. Teams have the option of letting them hit. A vast majority are more like Joaquin Andujar, who struck out almost every time up, and actually spent half a season on the dl of the A’s, because he hurt himself taking bp while in a league with the DH. If the Angels want to let Ohtani hit, great! Let the manager decide. But to let 150 pitchers hit because a dozen can hit like Mendoza, is not a compelling reason.
Joaquin Andujar, one of my favorite all time players, is a bad example. Ever actually see him hit? He didn’t even try to hit properly but rather swung out of his shoes every swing. Very entertaining, but not surprising he got himself hurt that way, nor is it surprising that he whiffed so much.
my dad was telling me in the 80’s when he was with stl andujar would swing for the fences every at bat regardless of the situation.
It’s true. It was almost comical how hard he swung.
So Andujar was basically Javier Baez without the hand-eye coordination?
Baez without the arm guard.
Using the logic of the DH crowd, the best solution (logical extreme) would be to have each team have a defensive squad that takes the field and an offensive squad that hits. Be just like football, a game filled with specialists. Players could go both ways, but over time specialization would kick in and players would focus on only one aspect of the game. No more power hitters embarrassing themselves trying to field. You would get the “best” of both worlds. It would be as exciting as t-ball when your kid isn’t playing.
“I hit big or i miss big”
Oh sure, let pitchers throw at guys without ever having to step up to the plate themselves.
Again, this pitchers-not-hitting goes back to girls’ softball where the entire game hinges on one player dominating and most high school teams only having one pitcher. How about the ‘flex’ player?
Pitchers need to hit because it’s just baseball. What’s next, a designated fielder AND pitcher?
Or the batter is too slow so he is allowed the same designated runner any time he gets on?
Here’s an idea. Why not bat 10 like slow pitch softball?
Why pitch at all? Let the hitter T it up? Hold on, we have a pull hitter up. Let’s replace that fielder on that side with a designated fielder who can field but never had to hit.
Why can’t a team do that now? Let Bumgarner hit in the AL and use the dh for the catcher?
The slippery slope theory. Good application of it, Jim. MLB is doing everything it can to change the game so low-attention span viewers, aka millennials, don’t get bored. The instant gratification generation could never handle a pitchers duel.
Stop messing with baseball. It’s fine.
The rule is extreme. I don’t have an issue with the opener, especially since it’s often only employed if the team is down a starter or two. I’d rather see an opener than a AAAA pitcher who will likely get shelled. Most teams still use at least four starters anyway, even with the opener.
yeah see, i see the opener as more a roadblock for a rule then something to target for elimination. i have nothing against it, but in the absence of the existence of the opener if be all for the rule.
I like the idea of position less pitching staffs. Openers clearly work or teams wouldn’t be doing it.
I would like for the DH to be at the discretion of the home team
That is a terrible idea. Your starter is getting hit hard and up to 75 pitches in the 3rd inning. Not only are you losing, but now they take away one of your best hitters.
How about every pitching change they take away a defender? Put in a reliever… take away your left fielder.
If pitchers really like batting, become an excellent hitter so you can be the regular DH. Or learn a defensive position.
Actually Black’s proposal is exactly what I’ve been suggesting all along as a compromise as someone who’s not pro-DH. When the starter leaves, you can double-switch the DH into the field if you want to keep their bat in the line-up. From there on, it’s the NL game. Relievers would rarely ever bat because of pinch hitting, just like now.
But it’s not just like the NL-game, because it disproportionately affects teams that have to pull their starters early in the game. Then one team has to have its pitcher bat and/or use up its bench players as pinch hitters, while the other team has a full line-up of batters and maintains its pinch hitting/bench options deeper into the game.
In games where one team’s starter has a bad start, that team is likely to be behind and then put at an offensive disadvantage for the rest of the game. And if a starter gets injured early, their team will be similarly disadvantaged for no good reason.
I don’t get why occasional “openers” or bullpen games need to discouraged to begin with, and certainly not in a way that will mess with other games in this way.
By “disproportionately”, you mean “losing”? They can choose to keep their starter in if they want and keep the DH in effect. It’s another strategical decision on the manager; keep the starter in and thus the DH or go to the bullpen and your bench. It’s on them to decide.
Also, I would say they DH would probably be allowed to continue to be used in the event of an injury.
God bless you Bob Gibson! You good at knocking em back when they are crowding the plate with nonsense rule changes like lowering the mound cause no one could hit you.
A pitcher is a position. Pitchers used to fielding their position a lot better than they do now. When you dumb down the game,you get the situation we’re in now.
Wouldn’t that require the pitchers to actually be able to hit first?
So when the home team uses an opener,the DH bats whenever as you just list the previous nights starting pitcher as the DH. You could have the “DH” bat 9th and get two innings out of your opener.
Being an agent is the easiest job in the world when repping an opener.
Except designations of two way players would prohibit this. The one exception here would be say Ohtani was a RP, and he was designated as the DH, if he found his way into the game as a reliever he would be allowed to continue as the DH. Under this suggestion all DH privileges would be lifted once the SP has been pulled. It’s not even remotely as simple as you attempt to explain here
I know purists hate the idea of anything but pure competition driving any changes in which the game is played (as if that has ever been the case), but please please please ban the shift. That tiny little thing has done more to ruin the watchability of this sport than anything since the steroid era. The radical downgrading of pulled ground balls as valued outcomes of AB’s has made the game boring and repetitive. And opposite field ground balls are hard to hit for biomechnical reasons, not because hitters don’t want to.
Ban the shift (I’d prefer the “three defenders in the outfield maximum” rule to the “two infielders on each side of 2B” version). Get tough on foreign substances to increase spin rate. Easy peasy.
Truth be told, I’ve always been a “hit ’em where they ain’t” guy, as far as the shift goes, but they broke the game. Sure, dudes should be able to hit, shift be damned, but they can’t. Look at batting AVGs. Maybe they might have to litigate some offense back into this thing.
i get the logic and the strategy if the shift, but a SS to the right of 2nd isnt a SS anymore. the positions are just arbitrary anymore.
Positions are already arbitrary?
they really aren’t
The shift cost the Angels at least 5 games (which is a lot in a short season). I hate seeing a routine GIDP to SS and there isn’t anyone in the normal spot.
If batters would learn a basic thing like place hitting, the shift could be put out of business. However, all these guys think they can pull every pitch into the stands. I am very against banning shifts and for hitters learning to hit.
@Arnold Ziffel it’s so insulting and disgusting the way you talk like a professional athlete who has played more hours of this game than you ever could imagine, that they dont know the very most basic elements of the game. Of course they ALL know “a basic thing like hitting” but also, there’s absolutely nothing “basic” about hitting.
You need to stop talking about baseball, you have absolutely no clue about any aspect of the game. Go watch 10,000 hours and come back. Baby brain take.
If there’s 3 fielders on 1 side of the infield and the 3B is playing SS, it’s common sense to “hit’em where they ain’t”. But not today’s players. Why not take the hit (& possibly extra bases) if they’re going to give it to you?
Because what you are suggesting a hitter do, essentially aim their hit, isn’t as easy as you think it is. It’s not a simple matter of choice.
Prospectnvstr
Rod Carew and Ted Williams couldn’t do it, but sure, today’s players can.
Ted Williams couldn’t do it against pitcher throwing in the 80s, what chance do you think today’s players have against pitchers throwing in their 90s.
This also isn’t like golf clubs. It’s hard enough to work on one swing, you want batters to work on two.
Rod Carew, one of the greatest hitters alive hit ZERO HRs in 1972 and won the batting crown. Hitters don’t have two swings.
You’re living in fantasy land. You want something to be true, therefore it is. We’ll it’s not.
Pitchers can’t hit, batters can’t change their swing at will.
It’s not about changing swings. It’s about having the ability to take a certain pitch in a certain location to a certain part of the field. If we are taking hit and run and you must execute on one play, you’d be correct. In an at bat, you are not. For a guy who’s claimed to watch baseball for 100 years you seem to be a little lost.
i remember writing ban the shift and got rode out of here. welcome aboard
Ugh. Rule change du jour. Please stop.
Any batter that faces a shift can’t be considered a professional hitter.
Currently I consider mcneil (nym), lemahieu (nyy) and fletcher(last) as the only professional hitters in mlb.
There are a lot of good hitters,mostly aaa hitters and some aa hitters in mlb.one of the reasons why mlb is losing viewers.
Mlb is trying to make it easier for lesser players to succeed.
Trout would like a word.
Mookie might also.
So would Ted Wiliams and Rod Carew.
I know for a fact that players would still hit better with shifts than you would without them. Quit whining
Exact opposite. The shift just makes the game boring, because it reduces the number of hits, which leads to less scoring and less drama. Watching players strike out all the time and swing for the fences is softball. I find it far more maddening than the opener, which just means not having to watch bad starting pitchers, since most teams still let quality starters begin games. All the rule will do is force players to stay at their positions, and most sports have rules against illegal formations.
3 outcomes baseball is horribly boring. Who’s more exciting to watch, Ichiro or Adam Dunn?
A 500 foot homer > Ichiro slapping 10 dumb singles as he stands on first base while not ever winning a title.
3 true outcomes = win
singles hitters = lose
Nothing is more boring than watching three outcome baseball. Strikeouts aren’t even as interesting because they happen all the time. Stolen bases, legging out doubles, great defensive plays by infielders, double plays are all what made baseball an interesting, dynamic game. Ending the shift won’t cure all of this, but it will reintroduce rallies and defensive prowess into the game, and force pitchers to adjust as well. Going back to a dead ball would also help.
One player can’t bring a title. This has been proven over and over again in baseball. Ted Williams constantly beat the shift and wasn’t a prolific power hitter and never won a title. He never eclipsed 200 hits in any season. Pete Rose, Rod Carew, Lou Brock and Ichiro are all players who made the game fun to watch. They may have hit singles but when they got on base, you never knew what they were going to do. Sitting and watching guys swing for the fence and strike out over and over again is a much more boring game to watch.
I don’t think that’s the reasoning behind the uptick in strikeouts/can’t hit against the shift. It’s because of all the Ivy League data crunching, launch angle ,pinheads in suits making the all calls in the front office.
Don’t forget exit velocity along with the launch angle. They add up to HR’s. That adds up to larger salaries! They stick those stats on the score board & mention them during the televised games as well.
The reason MLB is losing viewers is because it is sooooooooo long. Life long fan done watching on TV. Why does every batter have to step out, that is just a starter to their silliness
eliminating that wolnt do anything. the game inherently slow. you cant sell people with short attention spans on baseball no matter what you try.
Yep it is just got slammed.
With a lack of capitalization or any attempt at punctuation, your constant commenting on every post wolnt ever be readable.
Malarky. If you read baseball history, you will find nine inning games taking less than an hour we’re not uncommon a hundred years ago. Games have gotten longer for many reasons including both how the game is played and how it is presented. For how the game is played, watch old film on how long it takes between pitches. Not only does the batter not step out, but the pitcher doesn’t wander around the mound, the catcher doesn’t wait for signals from the dugout, and the pitcher-catcher dialogue is shorter. For how the game is presented, the time between innings was shorter as they did not have to get in commercials for radio and television broadcast. If you cut the between innings down to thirty seconds, you cut cut at least thirty-two minutes from the game.
Shaving that 3-5 extra seconds off each at bat isn’t going to speed anything up. If every batter took 5 extra seconds to get ready and you took that out, assuming that all 18 hitters got at least 5 plate appearances in the game, you’d be shaving off 90 seconds.
18 player x 5 AB/player x 5 seconds/AB = 450 seconds.
But that’s still only 7.5 minutes, which I agree won’t make much difference in attracting/retaining fans.
Could be more if and when they implement pitch clocks.
It’s not about the time; it’s about the pace
COMMERCIALS are the culprit & that’s the FACT! That won’t change either, the television industry pays MANY of baseballs’ bills.
I find soccer boring. Most games are 1-0, 2-1 events. Yet, they are not having attendance problems. The problem is baseball plays more games, but charges the fans like each is a rare event, like the NFL. Baseball games used to be affordable. The family could go to several games a year, even if you were not earning 6 digits. No more. If MLB wants to see attendance and viewership go up, require teams that are regularly drawing less than 75% capacity to drop prices until they achieve that goal. What they lose in ticket price will likely be offset by concessions. Too many games being played before empty seats, even before covid. Making it affordable will create more fans than any rule change.
Short sighted argument. Tampa has a location problem. Dropping ticket prices will not solve their problem. Very bad idea.
Ratings were high in a time scoring wasn’t very high. Action and entertainment was still there. Close games, close calls. High scoring games are not bringing fans to the tv screen. Aces do. Element of surprise does. The unknown brings intrigue and curiosity. Baseball needs more of that back.
What might bring fans back to baseball is games where you don’t have to wait three to ten minutes for the batter to make contact.
Fans don’t consume one game at a time anymore. Fans don’t watch games from first pitch to last pitch anymore. I love the game. In the early 70s, blink and you might miss something. Today you can go to the fridge, make a sandwich, come back to the game, and not miss a thing.
Today’s game is almost unwatchable.
I watch from first pitch to the last.
I’d love to know your definition of “professional hitter,” because I think that take is absolutely ridiculous.
Professional hitter: a guy who is willing to hit a baseball away from a shift. A guy who isn’t shifted because they use the entire field. A guy with plate discipline who knows how to make contact. A guy who will make contact in situations dictating it. A guy that does not strike out and can hit .300 with some power. A guy who will prolong at bats behind in the count. A guy who will approach an at bat based on the situation. Do you need more?
Actually, I think the definition of professional hitter is “someone who gets paid to hit.” They’re all professionals.
No, I don’t need more.
But I would like to know how players like Soto, Trout, Freeman, Rendon, Mookie, etc. aren’t included in your definition. Over the last 2 years, the only one that has K’ed over 20% of the time was Trout, and that was 20.9%. They all have BB/K over 0.8, which is significantly better than DJ and McNeil (0.58 and 0.56; Fletcher is at 0.84). All but DJ go oppo about a quarter of the time (DJ is in a league of his own at 36.1%).
So what’s the difference between the guys on your list and mine? Besides the fact that the guys on my list do everything your guys do while hitting for significantly more power.
All I did was answer your question. Either you agree or disagree. I did not provide any names because you didn’t ask.
You’re right. I saw that you responded and assumed you were the one that wrote the initial post saying “I consider mcneil (nym), lemahieu (nyy) and fletcher(last) as the only professional hitters in mlb,” hence the reason I didn’t ask. My bad.
All good Priggs.
Any batter that steps in a MLB batters box is getting paid to do so, therefore anyone with a PA a “professional hitter”. Nothing of what you said is based in any kind of reality. It’s time to stop thinking like this, its of no value to anyone, let alone yourself.
Bud Blacks idea is a bonehead one. Just silly.
Just because it’s an outside the box idea doesn’t make it “bonehead”. Outside the box ideas can easily lead to very very good offshoot ideas.
let me guess, you’re one of those pro-DH fans that cant comprehend why many NL fans dont want the DH?
me personally i don’t want to see the dh but i can accept that fact that it’s coming but i think i can get behind bud black’s rule.
Let me guess- you missed the day in english class where they covered capitalizing sentences?
Loosen up on the “check swing” calls.
To me, it’s really a guessing game 70% of the time for the home plate and 1st/3rd umps.
Seems like alot of hot heads get ejected when it goes against them.
Maybe they should just come up with a definition of a swing first… It’s a guessing game 100% of the time because there is no definition. It’s absolutely ridiculous.
Maybe they should call every check swing a strike? When the batter starts the bat head toward a pitch, it’s a strike. Will the hitters become MORE disciplined & thus, better hitters? It’s a crazy thought.
Give me one reason why the use of openers should be deterred. They don’t slow down the game any because they get switched between innings 1 and 2, they implement for strategy (what the NL apparently wants), and they are really just pitchers no funny stuff. They go out, pitch one inning, then get pulled. Simple. That just gives teams less freedom.
Of all the big rule changes from the 2020 season, the universal DH is the only good one. The rest stink. No interest in seeing pitchers be overmatched in the box ever again.
I like Black’s idea, I HATE the idea of limiting shifts. Batters need to make their own adjustments
You do realize players play a certain position and it’s sectioned off on the field for a reason, right?
Keep the shift. If you can’t hit against it, well then too bad. The opponent shouldn’t have to accomadate for your weaknesses.
Yeah, I am still against limiting the shift, but there is one main reason for that: The shift kills itself. And I think it will actually be a dying trend this decade. The reason being is that I have seen so many teams do all these crazy shifts on guys like Gallo who is extreme pull to the right side, so they put most their defenders on the right side and Gallo just slap taps one to the left and gets a double most time. Those teams end up shifting less, and then boom, a drop of dawn and the shift is gone.
BTW, I have my starting pitchers article set and ready to write, and I will say that Musgrove is one of the 5 guys on it…
@Rangers29 – The shift works, otherwise teams wouldn’t be using it so much. Sure, you might have seen a guy go the opposite way and get a hit every once in awhile, but on average a properly utilized shift will save a lot more hits than it gives up.
It works right now, don’t get me wrong I think the success rate is very good in terms of using it.
Now, if I’m not mistaken, recently in the past decade or two, you’ve had hitters catching up to pitchers in terms of development. With the advancement of spin rate, velocity, and tunneling, hitters are just a step behind pitchers in terms of new techniques. Yes, hitters have launch angle and exit velo that advance their game, but there is a bread basket of different pitchers who all advance in their own ways, ways in which hitters slowly catch up to. I think hitters over the next couple of seasons will be more immune to the shift because they’ll know better bunting skills (eww, just hit dingers), better slap hitting, or just being more defensive and walking. But I bet that hitters will overcome the shift in a few years and then another advancement will be made. It’s a continuing cycle.
LInk that when you get it done. I do not have comment notifications on.
Gallo’s 0.181 batting average in 2020 suggests he wasn’t particularly succesful at beating the shift.
Gallo was very successful at beating himself in 2020 though.
It’s not Gallo’s job to beat the shift though, it’s his job to hit the ball in the air, as far as he can with his elite strength and bat speed.
I’m pretty sure his job is to get on base and drive in runs. That can also be done by going oppo (probably more successfully), especially if he has elite strength and bat speed.
Agreed. Learn to use the whole field instead of deadpulling everything. The defenses job is to keep you from getting hits, not make it easier.
Like John Goodman said in The Babe “Hit ’em where they ain’t”
Ok but using the whole field means a .750 OPS, deadpulling is .950. Why do you want players to have worse numbers, when numbers are popular because of fans like you in the first place? Can’t have it both ways.
I don’t recall saying what numbers are popular because of “fans like me”. However using the whole field makes sense if you are constantly staring at a shift. If the complaint is the shift leads to more outs/fewer hits/less offense then you have to try to hit the ball where no one is standing with a glove
You act like beating the shift is easy, I can assure you, it is not. A lot of the time the hitter has no choice to do this.
Trying to become a spray hitter when you literally never have been one in your decades of playing the game will result in lesser performance, 100% of the time. You are ignoring this.
Maybe I’m spoiled by the fact that i watched David Ortiz, Mo Vaughn, Wade Boggs, Mike Greenwell and others routinely pepper the green monster at Fenway rather than hit into double plays and five man shifts
It’s not about whether the shift is easy to beat or not. It’s about how you approach the shift. If a hitter has the choice of pulling the ball, does the defense not have the choice to adjust to that tendency?
Even if said hitter has played all their life being a pull hitter, it’s still a choice made on their own behalf to pull the ball regardless of the reasoning behind it. If a team is using the shift against the aforementioned player, then tough luck.
Change is inevitable, so expecting teams to let you pull the ball without any sort of strategy employed against you by the defense is, IMO, amusingly foolish.
You’re absurdly comparing the choice to begin the play standing in one spot or another with the “choice” to hit the ball in one spot or another. Those choices are outrageously un-equal. One is a piece of cake, the other barely possible.
Did I say anywhere in my comment that they were of equal difficulty? If that’s what you got from my comment, then that’s how you interpreted it. In hindsight, however, saying something so…vague when trying to make specific points was probably a means for time to be wasted for me and perhaps yourself. Consider it word spam that I was working out of my system and didn’t feel the need/felt it was worth it to formulate into a worthwhile comment.
Now, on the actual discussion:
If the shift is to be cut down on, then perhaps specific guidelines as to how far a fielder can be shifted (depending on how many are being shifted at once) and maybe other limitations?
Whatever the case, I’ve wasted enough time discussing a matter that I am unlikely to have any actual impact on nor will personally benefit from, so I bid all of thee adieu.
Wee Willy Keeler coined that phrase supposedly, not Babe Ruth.
I like it. I miss the days when starting pitchers were competitive and actually wanted the ball for more than the requisite five innings. Anything to try and bring us back to that is a good thing
Another way to beat the shift is by hitting to the opposite field. Novel approach, I know!!!
Every year a couple rules are tinkered. Add up a bunch of years and you have a kid of rule changes. Haven’t made the game better, necessarily.
Let teams decide what defense they want to deploy. It’s up to the hitter to adjust. Once again, another rule catering and favouring HITTERS. No love for pitchers. They’ll just continue to go down to injury while we look the other way.
Enough tinkering. Stop it.
I am in support of the shift, and I think it’s good thing for the advancement of analytics into the sport, but the DH in the NL helps pitchers too. People think it doesn’t, but (here’s a secret) the majority of pitchers don’t like to hit because (here’s a secret) they don’t do it well. You don’t spend your entire career being a PO and then get up to the highest level of the game to start hitting. Two completely different skill sets.
“People think it doesn’t, but (here’s a secret) the majority of pitchers don’t like to hit because (here’s a secret) they don’t do it well.”
People think it doesn’t, but (here’s a secret) the majority of hitters don’t like to bunt because (here’s a secret) they don’t do it well.
Never bunt. Hit dingers.
Here’s another secret ( hitters that get to hit every 5 days generally don’t hit well either!)
Rangers29 it’s nice that you want the DH position in both leagues but that really wasn’t where I was going. If you go back over the last decade and see the rule (and league) changes that have been implemented there is a recurring theme:
Player safety, boost hitters.
The only boosting of pitchers has been a lovely trip to Dr Andrews. Aces equal ratings. Long overdue for MLB to help pitchers be better, work longer and stay healthier. Lift the mound, push the fences back, put higher seams on the baseball to increase grip, start with that and go from there.
So hitters, who if they hit at 30% rate are considered good, actually need less help you say? 30% is too much for you?
Miser mentality. Learn to love joy.
I really hope they eliminate the shift. It takes away too many hits and makes games boring. Also, even though I don’t think Bud Black’s idea will gain much traction, I think it would be a nice compromise between the DH fans and the DH haters, because you would never have to see a pitcher hit, but you would still get to watch the strategy implemented late in the game that DH haters are so adamant about.
Talented hitters can beat a shift when they choose
Maybe hitters need to stop swinging for 450ft with 2 strikes if they want to complain about how hard it is to get a hit
The league telling teams “you can’t play baseball a specific way” is kinda BS
It’s like they don’t want a game with strategy
Hey, so fastballs are getting harder to hit. How about any pitch in the upper part of the strikezone faster than 95 MPH is a ball. It’s not fair that some batters can’t catch up to the high heat and the pitcher absolutly dominates them. They should have a chance to hit it.
How about we just play tee ball?
MLB hitters can hit a high fastball if they aren’t swinging as hard as they possibly can…
If you Mathis in one season (200+ plate appearances OPS+ under 60), you have the option to hit off a tee for 1 game every series.
hey should decrease the size of the strikezone. how are you supposed to hit a ball at your knees. actually force pitchers to throw the ball through the zone rather then try and throw it in lame spots really fast that anyone who isnt predicting it isnt able to do anything about.
Ikr? We should go back to when batters told the pitchers what to throw and where. Maybe the Astros were right all along.
There is an argument that shrinking the strike zone would in fact be better for the game:
blogs.fangraphs.com/two-easy-ways-to-make-baseball…
I can’t wait til everyone understands that having at least 9 hitters, 9 defenders and 9 pitchers per game is the future and the more old people stand in the way the worse the quality of product will be on the field.
MANY hitters couldn’t hit the FB. They went home from the Minors, not to the ML’s. If they were lucky enough to get to the Major League, they didn’t stick around very long.
Stopping the shift sounds great!
Bud Black needs to concentrate on turning the Rockies into a pile of rocks…..
put me down for another “guys need to learn to hit the ball elsewhere’ camp. If the league wants more offense, consider messing with the mound instead?
I support shifting because its essentially identifying and using an opponents weakness against them. make them get better.
on the other hand, if they think offense in general is down, then i support doing something to generally boost offense.
i dunno, it makes sense in my head anyways
There have been more strikeouts by hitters than base hits the last 3 years running. The only times it’s happened in ML history! I’d say the offense is down. ( shifts also have something to do with it)
Home runs and runs are still high. Offense can’t be down.
The NFL, NBA and NHL change rules over a cup of coffee on Wednesday morning; “pass interference” has now become a function of who the official is. So why does changing MLB rules seem like such a sacrilege?
Of course we’re ignoring the MAIN cause of boring baseball; the super ball. Get a baseball that used to be used, and that’ll throw launch-angle theology and its accompanying nonsense out the window. And there will be more action. 36% of batter appearances resulted in in of the three outcomes last year; and you wonder why the kids would rather watch “Saved by the Bell” reruns.
Universal DH? Of course; would you tell the NFC team to leave their punter home during the Super Bowl? Or do away with it…make a universal “something”.
Bud Black? Has always been a thinking man, in a sport that doesn’t have many. But his suggestion seems a bid wacky. Forbidding the shift is also a tad wacked out. There are better solutions.
7-inning Double Headers. YES! Extra Inning Rule? YES! Do they “alter” longitudinal statistics. Of course they do; so do night games and eliminating the spitter. Those stats are silly anyway.
if younger fans prefer the DH then where are the overwhelming stats showing AL teams attract younger fans better then NL teams?
To be fair, that would be a very, very hard subject to try and calculate. You have market sizes, blackout restrictions not allowing in some fans, and actually trying to poll all the young people too. It’d be ludicrous to think that you could even fathom that kind of poll imo. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t, but who really knows?
DarkSide: Of course there are none; I’m not sure younger fans like it at all (used to it maybe, since even high school teams have it). Again, whatever they do with the DH, make it universal.
It’s not fair to “tax” a team like the Pirates for keeping a Josh Bell to play about 15% of the time. It’s regressive, and like everything else, disproportionally affects small market teams.
Like the pitcher and catcher, each position player should have a circle they must stand inside. The hitter has to hit the ball to alternate sides of the field each at bat. So if he hits a ball to the right side, next at bat he has to hit the ball to the left side. Otherwise, it’s a foul ball. No more shift, everyone hits to all fields. Boom.
Teams used to undervalue guys like Joey Gallo because of OBP, slugging, etc. But at what point do we get to where we undervalue guys like David Fletcher, Bryan Reynolds and Donavan Solano? Not necessarily power hitters, but guys who drive the gap, rack up doubles and singles. I get you need some power in the line-up, but I feel we’re reaching the point where the guys we once considered overrated are beocoming underrated.
I think we’re well past that point already
I have no problem with the opener. I would rather have a starter go 7 innings, but it took some real guts to try it and it seems to work. It really drains a bullpen, but teams like the Rays are able to move guys from AAA back and forth enough to cover the wear and tear.
I like the shift also… if you don’t like it, hit it the other way.
Here we go again with Manfred who wants to shorten game times but add action even though the two contradict eachother.
@mlb1225 – Manfred is in favor of more action and less downtime. It’s not so much that he wants to see quicker games, he just wants to see less downtime in games.
For example, the three batter rule was supposed to limit the number of pitching changes in a game. This would eliminate downtime, but have no impact on the amount of action in a game. A rule to increase offense would increase the action in a game, without increasing the amount of downtime.
so if you have a guy come in and throw 12 balls to walk the bases loaded because you can’t pull him that’s action?
Trust me, I hate seeing 3 pitchers in an inning. but i think forcing strategy is ridiculous
New idea: Make bat corking and aluminum bats legal. More offense right? Why not let players use roids’? More offense right?
But in order to do that, pitchers need to be able to cheat too, so let grip substances legal. There you go MLB, problem solved.
What a stupid idea.
Just market the players individually again, like they always used to up until the 00s. Trout’s a nobody in this era only, in the 80’s everyone on the planet would have a Trout jersey.
You can blame the east coast bias of the media for that. ESPN who regularly had east/west double headers in the 90’s now barely acknowledge Baseball exists on the west coast. MLB Network doesn’t do much to help either. If MLB wants more exposure for west coast teams in the east coast market they either need to do away with unbalanced schedule so teams can make two trips to each city in their league each season or have earlier start times for west coast games which will anger the west coast fan bases who can’t get off of work in time for a 4pm game in Anaheim
trout is also a humble individual who chooses not to be an arrogant cocky POS. he could market himself if he wanted to
I have an idea, how about hitter just learn to hit to the other side of the field and they will stop shifting.
That idea has already been squashed. They simply try to hit the ball over the wall instead.
Speaking of which, maybe they should just make the home run an out instead. The sport is already borderline unwatchable; it’s not like it would make things worse.
The only rule change I want is a change in the unwritten rules — if somebody goes yard, go ahead and flip your bat. Heck, use it as a pretend telescope if you want.
And if a pitcher strikes out somebody? Pull out those six shooters cowboy!
The whole Stoic approach to the game is what will kill it. If you want politeness and quiet, switch to golf.
Politeness and quiet isn’t want people want who hate bat flips, miserably bad take
MLB could easily lean into making the game more entertaining by marketing the celebrations. Baseball is also not a contact sport, fighting is so dumb – there should be no anger associated with sports, just reveling in the feats of these great athletes. 100% of the “unwritten rules” are worthless to the game and have held it back for far too long.
stop making rules for the sake of trying to force things to happen. if a manager wants to burn a pitcher by having him open a game, who cares? I think the strategy is stupid, but Im not a manager. if you want to burn all your pitchers in one inning, then that’s your problem to deal with. at what point will the ridiculousness stop? pretty soon we wont have any games, just simulated results based on estimated stats. what a joke this game is becoming
They’re not trying to change the rules for the sake of forcing things; they’re trying to change the rules because attendance is down by over 11 million people since its peak in 2007 and will continue to decline because the sport is becoming less and less enjoyable to watch.
Bingo Sadler. The game has to figure out a way to reconnect with the fans. I’m one of those 11 million. Sure pre-Covid I went to the occasional game. But I used to be a season ticket holder. Sure, I’ll watch an inning or two here and there, but hardly ever watch a full game.
People can type away all they want on how easy it is to just hit the ball where the shift is. Yet the shift has made the game boring. Past boring in fact. People can type away about how pitchers have always hit, and why mess with the history of the game. Yet watching pitchers hit is boring. Two easy fixes to make the game more enjoyable to watch, and people defend and defend and defend something that makes the game lose fans. Sport is killing itself with its refusal to make the game fun.
MLB needs to asked up the game, but they could do it without significantly affecting the spirit of the games and this is where Manfred and the Players Union have both monumentality failed. Simplify it all.
1. Batters may not step out of the box between pitches that aren’t foul balls or passed balls. You take more than one foot out, it’s a strike.
2. Put a strict 18 second clock between pitches. Simple enough.
There, the game goes by fast. As far as the shift goes, bunt. Getting on base increase the limit of runs scored. Works for both scouting and number crunchers.
Inputs better than article
Jim stem
Bobgibsonfan
Arnoldziffel
Mlb1225
Oddvark
Rsox
Anthony4412
Mickey’s
Birdman1182
Good posts
Teams play the shift because a player has shown a tendency to hit balls to particular spots on the field. MLB is considering some sort of ban on shifts because they view it as unfair. If that’s the case, then why don’t they force pitchers not to throw certain pitches hitters have shown they have trouble hitting? Isn’t that from the same line of thinking? Batter usually hits a grounder to the 2B side of the infield, put another guy over there. Batter usually can’t hit curveballs, keep throwing curveballs. If you change the rules to stop one thing, why not the other?
No one considers it “unfair”. The idea is that good hitting, ie pulling the ball, hitting it hard should be rewarded. A line drive hit is the batter’s success. A dribbler or bloop to the opposite field becoming a hit is luck. The idea of those who want to ban the shift is to better reward talent. Or will the game be more fun to watch when power hitters all start slapping the ball the other way or bunting? I’m not all in on a ban on the shift, but if you’re going to oppose the ban, at least get the other side’s argument right instead of building a straw man to more easily burn down.
Well, that’s where you’re wrong. Rob Manfred was quoted as saying exactly this — Google it. In some of his earliest interviews as commissioner when he was asked about defensive shifts Manfred stated they were creating an “unfair competitive advantage.” I’d say that sounds like somebody saying defensive shifts were exactly what I claimed those in favor of making rule changes were saying.
Hitters have hit line drives directly at fielders since the beginning of time and they’ve been around as long as the game has existed — just ask Ted Williams about them. This has nothing to do with “rewarding better talent” as you suggest. This is complete BS as better talent knows how to beat a shift. The idea around banning shifts is strictly about generating more offense. Again, I give you the words of Commissioner Manfred who has stated he’s interested in “injecting additional offense into the game” by limiting defensive shifts among other things. Perhaps you are the one who should spend some time learning what is actually being argued here.
Fair enough, but I’m not talking about Manfred, whom I despise and have no respect for his opinion on anything, but rather I’m referring to the fans here and on other sites. Even still, “no one” might be a bit strong. My point is, don’t tear down the easy bit of nonsense, address the rational argument instead, and there is a rational argument for banning the shift.
Manfred doesn’t like defense or pitchers having any advantage. This is dangerous to the future of all pitchers taking the mound. This needs more attention and should be addressed. If Manfred isn’t going to help reduce injuries on the mound or support the pitcher position, he needs to go. He and his staff are directly hurting them with rule changes giving hitters an unfair advantage.
Good post misterb71
Length of games is all about TV commercials minimum time between innings is like 7 minutes. Every pitch change has a minimum number of minutes for 1 reason commercials Everything is about TV dollars. and how to get more the same for all sports. If you go to live games watch how much time is wasted standing around waiting for commercials to finish.
Go all in DH, or no DH at all. Make it an even playing field for everyone all 162 games.
Good post larry48
I think Bud Black’s idea is a good start. The starting DH belongs to the starting pitcher. If the pitcher has to be taken out that pitcher’s designated hitter has to be replaced too. This brings in strategy because if the pitcher is struggling in an inning but the DH is batting up next inning now that gives the manager a dilemma. (I would add upon injury of the pitcher the starting DH would now belong to that replacement pitcher and whenever he’s replaced then so is the starting DH) Overall it would definitely keep some strategy in the NL and bring back strategy to AL teams.
It’s call strategy, do risk taking your pitcher out when he’s pitching good but doesn’t have a hit or put a dh who doesn’t play a position while a pitcher sits a long time without being loose. It’s a hand on hand thing. NL makes a manager job much harder to think than AL. More complete games happens more often in the NL than American League because the pitcher is always loose. It’s sad that the pitcher is a better bunter than most major league hitters that can’t even bunt. There’s no strategic moves you can do in AL compare to the NL.
The shift is ____.
If the goal is to reduce the number of pitching changes in a game, then the proposed rule will have the exact opposite effect.
Black’s idea is…dumb.
Angels need to sign Yadi.
When baseball fans value getting on base over a home run then you will see a shift in the game. I like to see the batter make the pitcher work. Adjust during the at bat and run it up. I hate the Yankees but I appreciated how there wasn’t an easy out. I hate 4 hour games so I’m down with no dh if a pitcher could at least look like a hitter. It’ll all be ok though for a dying game it sure does make up a lot of tv during the year. No worries it will be around forever for everybody to complain and be nostalgic about.
You like to “see the batter make the pitcher work and run it up”. And a sentence later “I hate 4 hour games”
“I love the ocean”…….. ” man I just hate water”
JT Realmuto & the term Superstar? HUH? WTF?
I’m sorry, have I been following a different JTRealmuto? The one I’ve seen is a solid ball player. But WhyTF are journalists calling him a superstar?
He’s not even close. These journalists are officially of their rockers and making Tim McCarver look like a baseball historian
Short answer, yes, you must have been following a different JT Realmuto.
Over the last 3 years, JTR and Grandal have been the 2 most valuable catchers in baseball, and it hasn’t even been close. They accounted for 12.3 and 11.6 fWAR, respectively, and the next highest was 5.1. JTR’s Offensive Runs Above Average was damn near double the next closest catcher, and his Defensive Runs Above Average was in the top 4. He has been nothing short of spectacular. If you don’t see that, you either aren’t following him as closely as you think, or you don’t understand how bad the position is. He might not be a “superstar” depending on your definition, but he is absolutely a star.
This may be the dumb millennial in me, but I love Bud Black’s proposition. There’s very little incentive anymore to keep full-time starters in existence apart from aces. I could see the next analytic shift resulting in some, if not many, teams completely eliminating starting pitchers within a decade. I find something grotesque in that.
I also like the sometimes-DH rule as it preserves the primary upside of NL-style baseball, the pinch hitter. I’d be curious to hear the reasons people oppose all of this (other than it being “weird” which, let’s face it, lots of things in baseball are).
When will Angel’s front office realize they have to overpay to get someone to play for the angels. The angels are a second .tier team, If you can’t trade or sign for one of the ace’s this year you will never sign a good pitcher.
When will Angel’s front office realize they have to overpay to get someone to play for the angels. The angels are a second .tier team, If you can’t trade or sign for one of the ace’s this year you will never sign a good pitcher. Angel is going to stand pat once again and lie and say the offered so and so so much money.
The Angels have Pujols’ contract coming off the books next year. Isn’t it time to do something purposeful for that rotation?
Trade for either Luis Castillo or Sonny Gray to show the free agents they are serious. Get aggressive with one of Bauer or Tanaka.
Mike Trout deserves better.