Fair enough. Team executives probably just miss Buster Olney so much they call him from their wives phones. They’re probably above doing that to sign players.
Let’s hope not. Buster is the type of guy you call from your wives phone because you know he won’t take your wife. Until you find his trade rumors in her DM’s
Buster Olney is a reporter/journalist. There’s a big difference between talking to the media, which admittedly is forbidden, and having discussions with players or their agents.
In other words, he’s a minor rulebreaker, whose actions have zero impact. That’s a far cry from anyone that would be a major rulebreaker, using back channels to do so, that would have a major impact.
What’s naïve is to think teams aren’t weighing risk/reward in regard to breaking the rules. It doesn’t give any team that much of an advantage, but could wind up being very punitive if caught. I can see why you think what you do because people love conspiracy theories.
There isn’t going to be any team/FA signing announced within hours of the lockout ending because that will look extremely suspicious.. And no FA is going to sign with a team, regardless of previous illegal contact, if another team is going to offer a better deal when the lockout ends.
The fact that an executive would take such steps, only to call Buster Olney, tells you these executives are being extremely circumspect. There wouldn’t be much of a penalty if an executive was caught talking to the media. But if contact with a player or agent was revealed, that deal could be voided with additional penalties like cash or loss of draft picks.
Any executive caught would justifiably lose, their job, and could also justifiably be called an idiot, for being so stupid.
Over the years I’ve known some MLB players and managers. As with any industry, back channeling does go on. But it’s mostly a feeling out process – i.e. “these guy’s would be interested in speaking with you when the time is right – please don’t commit elsewhere until we can talk”.
I agree with you in that I doubt a major actor (that was smart enough to become a major actor) would endanger his/her career by blatantly breaking the rules.
As for the Buster Olney and the guy on MLB.TV, they’re really the Hedda Hopper’s and her sister (the Coen Brothers recently made a movie set in 1951 with characters like them), Walter Winchell-type gossip columnists. Who knows who’s using who.
Lockout will be over in a few weeks and there is zero chance that the Mets get both Bryant and Chapman. I know, you expect to be able to trade Cano, Dom Smith, and McNeil for everyone. lol
No talks even scheduled right now, and you think this will over in a few weeks!? While I’m sure everyone would like to see this over on that time table, I think we are in February before this is settled. Also, Chapman AND Bryant is not going to happen in Queens, nor should it from a roster standpoint. Frankly, I’d be surprised if they got either one.
While I doubt the Mets get Chapman and Bryant, I disagree that getting Bryant categorically won’t happen. If the Mets throw enough money at Bryant they can sign him. They probably won’t but I would never say never.,
Regarding the Steve Cohen quote, yeah, they can be worth 5x or more their slot bonus. They can also be worth nothing. A number of 1st and 2nd round picks never sniff the majors. The owners are still getting a good deal, but it’s an investment that has more inherent risk in it than football or basketball because the baseball draft is more of a crapshoot. You also have to wait longer to see that return.
Von, the difference between all of the past years and now, is Uncle Steve is our owner now and he wont accept continual losing like the Wilpons accepted yearly. Mets fortunes are turning around now
I would say the jury is out in what Cohen will or won’t accept. All owners say that. Cohen has never had a winning season as an owner. I’m sure like every other owner he only wants winning seasons. It’s not about what Cohen is willing to accept. It’s about what he’s capable of. He hasn’t shown a capability to do anything as of yet other than sign bad or potentially bad checks. If the Mets win the division next season, Cohen will finally have a leg to stand on. Until then, he doesn’t. So far Cohen’s career has shown he is nothing but a very disappointing owner. Spending money in the offseason doesn’t mean anything until you actually win something because of it. Cohen has yet to do that. Don’t forget that plenty of owners have gone on these spending sprees just to become the laughing stock if baseball. Just like someone did last year after handing out a terrible $341 million contract on top of paying a bum $40 million to be a catcher. I think that guy’s name was Steve Cohen.
The notion that the Mets didn’t spend money or land top free agents is so ridiculously false. I agree Cohen has more money than any precious owner, but that doesn’t always translate to success. I think the Mets are a fine team and organization, but I still see plenty of holes and in 3 years it’ll be scouting and development that matters more than money.
Mr. Cohen is doing the right short-term thing to revive fan interest. But is there any evidence of a team signing multiple veteran name players to FA contracts and having all go through the season uninjured and having good years? Or of building a WS team from FA when they didn’t have a home-grown core of solid players?
He’s headed where the Yankees are. At some point he’ll have a group of guys under contract that are underperforming for what they’re being paid – and that no teams will trade anything of value for their contracts. In Mr. Cohen’s case he’ll either release those players – at which time teams can pick them up for a minimum salary; or have to attach good players to get someone to take their contracts in trade. But that doesn’t help Mr. Cohen get additional draft choices he believes so highly in.
An MLB team has only 26 roster positions. That’s a fundamental truth.
wow i guess all of us Mets fans have no hope according to all of the experts on here lol……we will have 6 picks in the top 100 picks next year in the draft so thats another promise that Cohen made about spending money and building the farm system simultaneously. i am optimistic and we will see this year but Cohen gives us way more hope than the Wilpons ever did. They would spend money in FA but would never compete for rarely the top FAs every year. Cohen will go above and beyond because he is a diehard Mets fan/owner and the Wilpons were businessmen only. LFGM
Von, the Wilpons would always spend on the wrong FAs but would never go over the top to sign someone like Cohen already has. big difference in ownership now
I sincerely wish Mets fans well. The majority of the Wilpon era was a nightmare for Mets fans. The owner and his son wanted the team to go in in different, ever-changing directions. The FO people ran out rosters that looked like they were built by committee, with everyone getting a say in a part of the hodge-podge result.
In general, Mr. Cohen wants high OBP and power pitchers. He’s brought in a GM and manager that have a history of preferring teams like that. Finally the Mets organization has a direction, and Mr. Cohen is to be commended for that.
It should be fun watching things play out. MLB is not logical. Ultimately it’s up to the players on the field….the ball bounces funny…and players do good and bad unexpected things.
You can have plenty of hope. I would too. Hope is different from expectation though. There has to be a track record if success before any expectations of success come. If I were a Mets fan I would be very excited about that team but I would also temper my expectations until they prove they can translate that money to success. There were plenty of fans very excited about the Lindor, Carrasco, McCann moves last season who has expectation bordering delusional. That didn’t work out too well. I think the Mets can be great. A lot of teams can though. Can and will are totally different things. The main thing to keep in mind is that the Mets star, linchpin player is still Lindor. It all revolves around him if this team is going to be a consistent contender with a true core to keep them going. Lindor isn’t the whole core himself but he is the core of the core. If the rest of Lindor’s career is the same as the last 2 years were that’s going to be a problem for the Mets. The highest paid player who is under contract for another decade has to pull his weight for any team to truly be consistently successful. That $341 million has to provide a huge benefit to the Mets. Spending the next decade working around a $341 million contract that is underwater will hurt them a lot more than it will help them.
A lot of people have a hard time believing Scherzer (at his age and extremely bloated salary even the Dodgers knew he wasn’t worth), deGrom after missing the last third of the season with a TJ ligament related injury), Carrasco (missed so much time last year and looked horrible when he was healthy), and Taijuan Walker (looked great at first but his peripherals caught up with him and he looked awful later) have the ability to stay healthy or perform over the stretch of a full season. I will give them the benefit of the doubt. Until they are hurt or terrible I will assume they can get it done. It’s a very high risk/high reward starting rotation though. DeGrom and Scherzer could both miss a lot of time with injury and the rest of them could all end up being terrible. Even though I’m not a Mets fan I think and hope they will be good. It’s not a stretch that it would fly completely off the rails though and the Mets have a history of that happening to them with several different owners.
There is and should be plenty of hope. Every team to wait until they are coming off a division, league or world championship before they have any expectation of true success though. Be excited to hopefully watch your team win. Don’t never expect it until they actually show you that can do it as one cohesive unit.
I don’t think anyone said, or meant, that “…Mets fans have no hope…”. But unless you’re new to baseball, and I would guess not, having a rich owner willing to spend is no guarantee at all.
I agree that Cohen is a big improvement over the Wilpons, but there are plenty of teams out there with wealthy owners wanting to do the right thing, that aren’t winning titles. It’s just a really hard thing to do, even when a lot of things are going right.
Look at all the moves the Padres have made over the past 3 seasons, and all they seem to be able to achieve is a 3rd place finish. The Mets will be in a good place a few down the road with all those draft picks. But not all will be even league average, and you’ll have to wait several years for those that will be any kind of a productive player.
Hammer, i am hopeful but i also have higher expectations that comes along with a wealthy owner. The Lindor trade was a bad trade because we gave up a lot of prospects for 1 year of Lindor and Carrasco. But, i expect a better year from Lindor and McCann and only a handful of players could justify that Lindor contract but he is still a top ss. The Mets will sign or acquire another good starter no doubt about that.. Mets fans are much more optimistic now than pre-Cohen so there is expectations. NY is a tough place to play and handle criticism but it remains to be seen……
tad2b13, i have been a Mets fan since 1984 when Gary Carter was traded from the Expos to the Mets. Spending money doesnt guarantee anything but ask the Rays fans if they would like to have a rich owner right now.? Your chances of success is much better if you can have both a rich owner and a deep farm system with great scouts and smart baseball men throughout the organization. Cohen is investing a lot of money into an analytics dept and the farm system. He is a smart guy who is a huge fan as well…..
I could tell you weren’t new to baseball, and add that I’ve been a baseball fan since the 1950’s. I agree with everything you say. Like the Rays, I’m sure every fan of a lower budget team would love it if they had a wealthy owner like Steve Cohen.
But my point is you can have a rich owner, a deep farm system with great scouts, and smart baseball men throughout the organization, and you still might fall short of a WS title.
Look at the Dodgers. Friedman is one of the very best. They’re willing to spend beyond the CBT threshold. They won 8 straight division titles, 9 straight PS appearances, and they have only one WS title to show for it.
If you’re looking for the Mets to just be competitive, I’d say you’re on the right track. But hoping for WS title is the most you can expect, and expecting one will only lead to disappointment.
Each year I follow 7-8 teams on MLB.TV. That way I see most teams. During the season I’ll change those teams – such as last year when I saw the Phillies bullpen was blowing games and that their #4 and 5 starters were losing control of games before the 5th inning, so I spent time elsewhere.
This year for sure I’ll be watching the Rays and Brewers to start. I’ll probably be watching some Mets and Phillies (their rosters yet to be determined) in the NLE – so I’ll see a lot of the Marlins and Braves as well. Am very interested to see how the Tigers, Guardians, and Royals continue to come out of their rebuilds this year in the ALC. The Blue Jays interest me in the ALE.
I live in the Midwest so I don’t stay up very often to watch much of the Western teams. I did enjoy watching the Giants last year – love their broadcasters. In the ALW I’ve enjoyed watching the Astros for years (they’re not in a western time zone) – I generally like to watch smart teams that play strong fundamental baseball and the Astros may well be at the top of the list there.
I post here about what I watch. I’ll see how things change during the season. It’s not so much being a front runner, as watching teams I like jell during the season. What is obvious during the offseason is mostly proven wrong by the middle of May, early June. And with the endless transactions along with the injuries and unexpected player improvements or deterioration culminating at the trading deadline, the teams I follow will change.
I love seeing FO’s that build and maintain quality teams as well as managers and players that play out a game plan. The Rays are my favorite as I see Kevin Cash playing to win the game in the late innings. It’s no coincidence that last year the Rays did something like have the most come-from-behind victories in MLB after the 6th inning – they’re great at setting up the opposition to get them during crunch time. Similar to watching a great football or basketball coach / team. The Brewers and Guardians do this as well. Not too many other MLB teams do.
tad2b13, i agree 100%, there is so many factors that go into a competitive team and then you have to have some luck and be hot at the right time. to win a WS. I’m not trying to say that the Mets will win a WS but im finally excited that we at least have a chance with a rich owner that will do what it takes to be competitive and have a chance at a title. He acknowledges that it takes a lot more to win than spending a ton of money but he has no choice than to throw a lot of money at the team until some of our current and future draft picks are ready for the majors.
Samuel, thats cool that you are a baseball fan and not just a one team fan. i watch different teams through the season as well but im a diehard Met fan for sure
@tad: I think the Padres are a very good comparison to the Mets. I actually like the Padres roster better than the Mets. I think they can both be good teams but the Padres didn’t even make the playoffs last year. I think the Padres are hopeful but they don’t seem to have nearly as high of expectations as the Mets. That’s kind of surprising to me because the Padres are younger and they have Clevinger coming back on top of what looked like it would be a great roster on paper last season. The Mets have the benefit of not having the Dodgers and Giants in their division but they still have the world champion Braves who have won the division the last 4 years in a row. The Mets also have a tougher lower part of the division. I think the Marlins and Nationals are much better teams than the Rockies and Diamondbacks. That means the Mets won’t get to take as many games off where they win easily as some of the western teams do. To me, the Mets and Padres both have about an equal chance to really contend for a title next year.
@Samuel: I like to do the same thing. The offseason is interesting but a year later it almost always seems like it meant very little when it comes to who actually won. I really love watching teams when they finally jell and function like a family during the season. I love watching teams where the players do it for each other and the end result I more than the sum of the parts. Some of the most boring championships to me were the most recent Yankees championships. It didn’t remind me of fun teams to watch at all. It was like watching a machine that had no feelings. When they needed more runs they bought a machine that could produce more runs. It’s cool when teams do that a little bit but some teams try to construct the roster that way. So boring. It’s hard to root for teams like that. They have less personality. When the Royals won it all it was like watching a family or a little league team of kids who all grew up together. When the Yankees won it it reminded me of watching an assembly line at some kind of factory. It’s so much more fun to win it the first way. Developing a player and watching him turn into what you always hopes is so much more enjoyable than buying another teams already developed player who means nothing to the franchise or fan base and just expecting him to keep doing what he was doing. Those are just my opinions though. To each their own. To me the Dodgers have become similar to those Yankees teams. Not quite as extreme but close.
One of those guys that will be on the fence for some people, but 219 wins, 2800 Ks, and 73 WAR is pretty damn good. I think he’s one of the better pitchers of his era, so I would say yes. Padding the stats a little more won’t hurt, but I think he’s in if decided he was done right now.
The stats are there and I didn’t realize how young he was when he broke in, but I never really had him in that Verlander/Scherzer/Kershaw group of shoe-ins in my head.
Yeah, so strange to me that he’s a borderline guy with some people when we have all the readily public information available. Dude has clearly been a beast to anyone paying attention to our beloved sport.
But then, I also don’t understand why Kevin Brown is such a meme either. If you played video games in those formative years in that era, he was like the guy to pick up. Nerdy nerd, I know
I believe he broke the bar for a Sp on highest contract ever inked during his time- With that comes responsibility
He never lived up to the LAD contract but not many players did with us during that stretch. Those teams were severely flawed yr to yr with no direction coming from above
Kevin Brown didn’t just break the record for starting pitchers. He was the first ever $100 million player. At one point he was the highest paid player in baseball history period. Kevin Brown isn’t a name you would expect to hold that honor. Then again, neither is Mike Hampton. I think he’s the one who broke Brown’s record. That only lasted a couple days though. Then A-Rod shattered them all. There was a period in time though that the 2 highest paid players in MLB history were Kevin Brown and Mike Hampton. 2 starting pitchers who both got worse after they signed those deals.
Anthony, would you consider doing an article about why you think banning the shift would increase three true outcomes? I am genuinely curious about that. My own personal opinion is that it wouldn’t do much anyway because homers are the best outcome and who cares where the defense is when you’re slugging it out of the park. Great chat as usual!
Thanks, I’ll explain it a little more here. I generally agree that most players aren’t going to modify their approach too much regardless of the defense. As you said, homers are super valuable and strikeouts are still going be rampant, making it hard to string hits together.
What I expect — and it’s obviously just a theory I can’t test unless there’s a ban in place — is that if you ban the shift, teams will roster more pull-oriented sluggers.
Which hitters are most adversely affected by the shift? It’s guys like Joey Gallo and Ryan Howard, not Nick Madrigal or David Fletcher. Power hitters who try to pull the ball because it’s the best way to hit homers also tend to strike out more often and hit more rolled-over grounders. If you ban the shift and allow more of those pulled grounders to get through for singles, that kind of player becomes more valuable and, I’d guess, more prevalent.
Yes, but some guys would have their singles drop in elevating their batting average. This isn’t football,
fielders should stay where are supposed to stay!
Players have shifted to varying degrees since the game began. Basemen at one point stood 2-3 steps from the bag, but that changed when teams realized there are better locations to position them. Teams created the Williams Shift to counter Ted Williams’ pull tendencies. Teams adjust as they learn more, and defensive positioning has been evaluated extensively the last several seasons.
If you think players should be in more traditional positions, that’s understandable, but that doesn’t mean that’s where they’re “supposed to” be.
Interesting that you should compare to football. I am against rules limiting shifts for the very reason that I don’t want baseball to become as over-regulated as football.
When you look at football you see players that aren’t allowed to catch a ball, and aren’t allowed to run more than a couple yards down the field from the line of scrimmage. It’s a penalty for illegal touching if a lineman gets accidentally hit with a pass.
I’ve seen where a QB throws to the strong side WR, it’s a great throw/great catch, with impressive yards gained after the catch for a huge gain. But it gets called back, with a 5 yard penalty, because the weak side WR lined up a yard back from the line of scrimmage, leaving the weak side lineman uncovered. A beautiful play called back for illegal formation.
That’s exactly the kind of stuff I don’t want to see in baseball, but you will if they legislate against the shift. You could see a guy hit a weak grounder, but get awarded 1B because the umpire ruled the fielder was too far from the base when the pitch was made. No thanks.
While home runs are valuable in MLB. Remember Chris Carter 41 home runs in 2016 to be out of MLB the next year (2017) at 30 years old. Chris Carter resurfaced in 2019 in the Mexican leagues and hit 49 home runs.
My experience following MLB over a number of decades is that ultimately it’s balanced teams that get to the WS. Some may have more pitching or more speed or more defense or more power hitting – but ultimately the teams that succeed can win games in multiple days.
Whereas HR’s can make up for a lot of sins in a game, the reality is that teams that were based on HR’s the past few years – starting with the Twins (they set a HR record in 2019), Yankees, and now White Sox, are playoff good but not WS worthy, especially since some of the juice was taken out of the baseball.
Much depends on whether the franchise and its fans want to be titillated and entertained or if they want their team to win.
Moderator: I don’t think many teams are breaking the lockout rules.
Also moderator: Here’s an example of someone finding ways of breaking those rules.
Well I mean, he never said he doesn’t think no teams are breaking the rules. Just not many.
Fair enough. Team executives probably just miss Buster Olney so much they call him from their wives phones. They’re probably above doing that to sign players.
I assume their wife already had his number… 😉
Let’s hope not. Buster is the type of guy you call from your wives phone because you know he won’t take your wife. Until you find his trade rumors in her DM’s
Buster Olney is a reporter/journalist. There’s a big difference between talking to the media, which admittedly is forbidden, and having discussions with players or their agents.
In other words, he’s a minor rulebreaker, whose actions have zero impact. That’s a far cry from anyone that would be a major rulebreaker, using back channels to do so, that would have a major impact.
What’s naïve is to think teams aren’t weighing risk/reward in regard to breaking the rules. It doesn’t give any team that much of an advantage, but could wind up being very punitive if caught. I can see why you think what you do because people love conspiracy theories.
There isn’t going to be any team/FA signing announced within hours of the lockout ending because that will look extremely suspicious.. And no FA is going to sign with a team, regardless of previous illegal contact, if another team is going to offer a better deal when the lockout ends.
The fact that an executive would take such steps, only to call Buster Olney, tells you these executives are being extremely circumspect. There wouldn’t be much of a penalty if an executive was caught talking to the media. But if contact with a player or agent was revealed, that deal could be voided with additional penalties like cash or loss of draft picks.
Any executive caught would justifiably lose, their job, and could also justifiably be called an idiot, for being so stupid.
@ tad2b13;
Over the years I’ve known some MLB players and managers. As with any industry, back channeling does go on. But it’s mostly a feeling out process – i.e. “these guy’s would be interested in speaking with you when the time is right – please don’t commit elsewhere until we can talk”.
I agree with you in that I doubt a major actor (that was smart enough to become a major actor) would endanger his/her career by blatantly breaking the rules.
As for the Buster Olney and the guy on MLB.TV, they’re really the Hedda Hopper’s and her sister (the Coen Brothers recently made a movie set in 1951 with characters like them), Walter Winchell-type gossip columnists. Who knows who’s using who.
When do you guys think the lockout will be over and do you think the Mets can get Matt chapmen and Kris Bryant?
I guessed 2/14 in the contest. Don’t know if they have the prospects for Chapman but Cohen is not shy about spending money (Bryant).
Agreed
Lockout will be over in a few weeks and there is zero chance that the Mets get both Bryant and Chapman. I know, you expect to be able to trade Cano, Dom Smith, and McNeil for everyone. lol
I really hope so but I believe the Mets have the money to spend and get good players like chapmen and manea and maybe Bryant LGM !!!!!
No talks even scheduled right now, and you think this will over in a few weeks!? While I’m sure everyone would like to see this over on that time table, I think we are in February before this is settled. Also, Chapman AND Bryant is not going to happen in Queens, nor should it from a roster standpoint. Frankly, I’d be surprised if they got either one.
I just hope it will be over soon and that the Mets make the right moves and whatever it takes to make those Moves !
Roy DeMeo:
While I doubt the Mets get Chapman and Bryant, I disagree that getting Bryant categorically won’t happen. If the Mets throw enough money at Bryant they can sign him. They probably won’t but I would never say never.,
February is in a few weeks…..
Regarding the Steve Cohen quote, yeah, they can be worth 5x or more their slot bonus. They can also be worth nothing. A number of 1st and 2nd round picks never sniff the majors. The owners are still getting a good deal, but it’s an investment that has more inherent risk in it than football or basketball because the baseball draft is more of a crapshoot. You also have to wait longer to see that return.
Is Zack Greinke a shoe-in HOFer?
Yeah
One of those guys that will be on the fence for some people, but 219 wins, 2800 Ks, and 73 WAR is pretty damn good. I think he’s one of the better pitchers of his era, so I would say yes. Padding the stats a little more won’t hurt, but I think he’s in if decided he was done right now.
The stats are there and I didn’t realize how young he was when he broke in, but I never really had him in that Verlander/Scherzer/Kershaw group of shoe-ins in my head.
Yeah, so strange to me that he’s a borderline guy with some people when we have all the readily public information available. Dude has clearly been a beast to anyone paying attention to our beloved sport.
But then, I also don’t understand why Kevin Brown is such a meme either. If you played video games in those formative years in that era, he was like the guy to pick up. Nerdy nerd, I know
I believe he broke the bar for a Sp on highest contract ever inked during his time- With that comes responsibility
He never lived up to the LAD contract but not many players did with us during that stretch. Those teams were severely flawed yr to yr with no direction coming from above
Kevin Brown didn’t just break the record for starting pitchers. He was the first ever $100 million player. At one point he was the highest paid player in baseball history period. Kevin Brown isn’t a name you would expect to hold that honor. Then again, neither is Mike Hampton. I think he’s the one who broke Brown’s record. That only lasted a couple days though. Then A-Rod shattered them all. There was a period in time though that the 2 highest paid players in MLB history were Kevin Brown and Mike Hampton. 2 starting pitchers who both got worse after they signed those deals.
Speaking of Brown, wasn’t he “juiced?” He did seem to have an anger management problem if I
remember correctly…..
Anger = juicing???
There are lots of fiery players. That doesn’t mean they’re using PEDs.
Anthony, would you consider doing an article about why you think banning the shift would increase three true outcomes? I am genuinely curious about that. My own personal opinion is that it wouldn’t do much anyway because homers are the best outcome and who cares where the defense is when you’re slugging it out of the park. Great chat as usual!
Thanks, I’ll explain it a little more here. I generally agree that most players aren’t going to modify their approach too much regardless of the defense. As you said, homers are super valuable and strikeouts are still going be rampant, making it hard to string hits together.
What I expect — and it’s obviously just a theory I can’t test unless there’s a ban in place — is that if you ban the shift, teams will roster more pull-oriented sluggers.
Which hitters are most adversely affected by the shift? It’s guys like Joey Gallo and Ryan Howard, not Nick Madrigal or David Fletcher. Power hitters who try to pull the ball because it’s the best way to hit homers also tend to strike out more often and hit more rolled-over grounders. If you ban the shift and allow more of those pulled grounders to get through for singles, that kind of player becomes more valuable and, I’d guess, more prevalent.
Yes, but some guys would have their singles drop in elevating their batting average. This isn’t football,
fielders should stay where are supposed to stay!
jorge78, what do you mean by “supposed to?”
Players have shifted to varying degrees since the game began. Basemen at one point stood 2-3 steps from the bag, but that changed when teams realized there are better locations to position them. Teams created the Williams Shift to counter Ted Williams’ pull tendencies. Teams adjust as they learn more, and defensive positioning has been evaluated extensively the last several seasons.
If you think players should be in more traditional positions, that’s understandable, but that doesn’t mean that’s where they’re “supposed to” be.
jorge78:
Interesting that you should compare to football. I am against rules limiting shifts for the very reason that I don’t want baseball to become as over-regulated as football.
When you look at football you see players that aren’t allowed to catch a ball, and aren’t allowed to run more than a couple yards down the field from the line of scrimmage. It’s a penalty for illegal touching if a lineman gets accidentally hit with a pass.
I’ve seen where a QB throws to the strong side WR, it’s a great throw/great catch, with impressive yards gained after the catch for a huge gain. But it gets called back, with a 5 yard penalty, because the weak side WR lined up a yard back from the line of scrimmage, leaving the weak side lineman uncovered. A beautiful play called back for illegal formation.
That’s exactly the kind of stuff I don’t want to see in baseball, but you will if they legislate against the shift. You could see a guy hit a weak grounder, but get awarded 1B because the umpire ruled the fielder was too far from the base when the pitch was made. No thanks.
Thanks for the reply, man! Makes sense.
While home runs are valuable in MLB. Remember Chris Carter 41 home runs in 2016 to be out of MLB the next year (2017) at 30 years old. Chris Carter resurfaced in 2019 in the Mexican leagues and hit 49 home runs.
@ Juiced Balls;
My experience following MLB over a number of decades is that ultimately it’s balanced teams that get to the WS. Some may have more pitching or more speed or more defense or more power hitting – but ultimately the teams that succeed can win games in multiple days.
Whereas HR’s can make up for a lot of sins in a game, the reality is that teams that were based on HR’s the past few years – starting with the Twins (they set a HR record in 2019), Yankees, and now White Sox, are playoff good but not WS worthy, especially since some of the juice was taken out of the baseball.
Much depends on whether the franchise and its fans want to be titillated and entertained or if they want their team to win.
@samuel
I am titillated and entertained when my team wins. Aren’t you?
You see Votto as outside looking in on HOF or did he just slip your mind?