Robin Ventura “Highway”
Rafael “Emerson, Lake, and Palmeiro”
Carlos “one if by Land, two if by Sea, and three if Baerga”
Albert “for whom the Belle tolls”
Barry “U.S.” Bonds
Sammy “say it ain’t Sosa”
As with anything, there’s a decent chance someone else had a similar idea/thought with this name. It came to me while watching a Pirates-Giants game a few back.
So if Berman ever did use it, then I’d happily give him credit for it. But that’s not how I came up with it.
The automatic strike zone comment was interesting, I think Tony overvalues pitch framing. I would rate game calling, ball blocking, and strong accurate throws all ahead of pitch framing. No catcher is gonna lose his job because of automatic strike zone.
Man I hope not. Baseball isn’t the same game that I loved as a kid. There is so much that I’m not a fan of, the DH, ghost runners, 7 inning double-headers, etc. If it starts becoming the over-regulated sport that football is, with a ban on the shift, it just might be the final straw that pushes me away for good, (mixed metaphor aside).
But banning the shift – which incidentally goes back to Ted Williams, so, yes it’s the sox fault (of course) – would go a long way towards bringing back a lot of what made baseball so much more aesthetically appealing than it currently is.
The teams in the AL East are typically teams that lead the league in defensive shift percentage. (Keeping up with the Ray’s etc, etc.) Night after night, there’ll be so many well struck balls that now are right at someone as opposed to the proverbial “nice piece of hitting” that I grew up with.
Doesn’t have to be particularly complicated either, Tad. Two guys on each side of the infield. & that’d do it.
I get no pleasure from seeing a ball hit, that would have been an out last year, go for a single, simply because of a regulation. It will seem artificial to me, that a fielder is prevented from playing where he knows he has better chance to field it. Regulating where a fielder can play is preventing him from playing intelligently. That’s not what I want from a sport.
Yeah, that’s @Joe Brady’s point too. Which I am not insensitive to. I get it. It’s on the hitters to adjust, etc. I fully understand that.
However: it’s the three yards & a cloud of dust form of baseball that has been gradually becoming less engaging. Rules that create excitement have helped the NFL vault to the #1 spot in North American sport.
As such, I think there needs to be a mechanical change to bring back movement & excitement. It’s an imperfect solution. But it’s one I can live with.
tad- does the fielder actually know where the ball is hit? Or has some computer geek passed the information down to the manager who then tells the player where to go, but because that player can’t remember which player hits where, he has to use a cheat sheet in order to be in the right spot? I bet there’s very little intelligence being used on the player’s part.
Shifting has gotten out of hand thanks to computers, it needs to be reigned in in order to keep the game watchable. Like Ducky said, two guys on either side of the infield and I would add they have to remain on the dirt. They’re infielders not beer league short fielders.
Well, Ducky, I’m not much of a fan of football, I find it odd that people think football is exciting and baseball is not. As George Will said, “(it) combines 2 of the worse aspects of American culture; violence punctuated by committee meetings”.
Only 60 minutes of actual game play, and much of that spent walking back to the huddle, huddling up, and taking position. And yet it takes 3+ hours to play the game.
I say leave baseball alone, and it will change. I hate the idea of trying to regulate change artificially, when evolutionary change is so much better.
First of all, the fielder never knows for sure where the ball will be hit. It’s a matter of percentages. That’s been a part of the game forever. It’s why the traditional positions exist, and shifting is just a variation of that. I think it’s silly to legislate against anything because people have gotten better at it.
There’s more to baseball than hitting. As a fan, I like all aspects and want to see more than just guys hitting. I hate the idea of legislating against fielding because people don’t care for that aspect of the game. It would be like the NBA, legislating that a defender can’t get closer than 3 feet to an offensive player, so teams will be able to score easier, because people like scoring better than defense.
The term infielder is a matter of evolution. They got called that because that’s where it made sense to play. They don’t play their because someone came up with the term. It’s where they play, not who they are.
I saw a game where the manager brought the outfielders in to play the IF, knowing that a flyball to the OF loses the game on a score from 3B on a tag up. I loved it. It was interesting and inventive. Legislating against the shift would have made that impossible. Regulating against the shift is artificial. It dumbs down the game, and restricts creativity.
I have no problem with banning on-field cheat sheets. But banning shifts, as a way to eliminate cheat sheets, is an absurd overreaction; like using TNT to rid your yard of squirrels.
The actual amount of “action” in a football game is less than 20 minutes. That being said, I am as big a fan of the G-Men as I am the Yanks.
As to your point of letting the game evolve…well, look what we now have? Pitchers are losing their variety. It’s rare now to see a pitcher that isn’t max effort. Offensively, “hit ’em where the ain’t” now means over the fences.
There is absolutely no incentive to do anything else.
I see this being the one rule that has us – the hardcore baseball fans – in mind. All the other stuff is dumb. Banning the shift would bring back a lot of old school baseball.
You would seriously take Montas over Manaea in New York? Have you seen Manaea pitch at Yankee Stadium? He is a beast. I have been saying he is the missing piece of their rotation since the offseason began. Cashman needs to make that move to make up for trading Sanchez in his contract year. Give them 2-3 good prospects out of the top 4. Toss in Florial as well. He is the type of former top prospect Beane loves.
There is a “John Jacob Heimer Schmidt” in the chat.
At least make an effort to do it right, you filthy imposter.
Yeah, they used to do that to me when I was kyleschwarbersmom.
“Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.” ~ Oscar Wilde
I’m curious — is that original, or is it one of the Chris Berman Sportscenter names (like Todd “Highway to” Helton)?
Robin Ventura “Highway”
Rafael “Emerson, Lake, and Palmeiro”
Carlos “one if by Land, two if by Sea, and three if Baerga”
Albert “for whom the Belle tolls”
Barry “U.S.” Bonds
Sammy “say it ain’t Sosa”
Yeah, Berman had lots of ’em…
Mike “enough” Aldrete.
Curt “what is that” Manwaring.
Oddibe “young again” McDowell.
As with anything, there’s a decent chance someone else had a similar idea/thought with this name. It came to me while watching a Pirates-Giants game a few back.
So if Berman ever did use it, then I’d happily give him credit for it. But that’s not how I came up with it.
Also, my Fantasy Football name last year was JOSHJACOBSJingleHeimerSchmidt. (Caps for emphasis). My league got a chuckle out of it.
Anyone know if the shift is going away. I can’t get that question answered over multiple chats. Thanks!
It’s not part of the current agreement, but it might be added later.
The automatic strike zone comment was interesting, I think Tony overvalues pitch framing. I would rate game calling, ball blocking, and strong accurate throws all ahead of pitch framing. No catcher is gonna lose his job because of automatic strike zone.
I agree. I see game calling, ball-blocking, and controlling the running game far too important to turn catching into a bat-first position.
Thanks!
2023 from my understanding.
Man I hope not. Baseball isn’t the same game that I loved as a kid. There is so much that I’m not a fan of, the DH, ghost runners, 7 inning double-headers, etc. If it starts becoming the over-regulated sport that football is, with a ban on the shift, it just might be the final straw that pushes me away for good, (mixed metaphor aside).
But banning the shift – which incidentally goes back to Ted Williams, so, yes it’s the sox fault (of course) – would go a long way towards bringing back a lot of what made baseball so much more aesthetically appealing than it currently is.
The teams in the AL East are typically teams that lead the league in defensive shift percentage. (Keeping up with the Ray’s etc, etc.) Night after night, there’ll be so many well struck balls that now are right at someone as opposed to the proverbial “nice piece of hitting” that I grew up with.
Doesn’t have to be particularly complicated either, Tad. Two guys on each side of the infield. & that’d do it.
I get no pleasure from seeing a ball hit, that would have been an out last year, go for a single, simply because of a regulation. It will seem artificial to me, that a fielder is prevented from playing where he knows he has better chance to field it. Regulating where a fielder can play is preventing him from playing intelligently. That’s not what I want from a sport.
Yeah, that’s @Joe Brady’s point too. Which I am not insensitive to. I get it. It’s on the hitters to adjust, etc. I fully understand that.
However: it’s the three yards & a cloud of dust form of baseball that has been gradually becoming less engaging. Rules that create excitement have helped the NFL vault to the #1 spot in North American sport.
As such, I think there needs to be a mechanical change to bring back movement & excitement. It’s an imperfect solution. But it’s one I can live with.
tad- does the fielder actually know where the ball is hit? Or has some computer geek passed the information down to the manager who then tells the player where to go, but because that player can’t remember which player hits where, he has to use a cheat sheet in order to be in the right spot? I bet there’s very little intelligence being used on the player’s part.
Shifting has gotten out of hand thanks to computers, it needs to be reigned in in order to keep the game watchable. Like Ducky said, two guys on either side of the infield and I would add they have to remain on the dirt. They’re infielders not beer league short fielders.
Well, Ducky, I’m not much of a fan of football, I find it odd that people think football is exciting and baseball is not. As George Will said, “(it) combines 2 of the worse aspects of American culture; violence punctuated by committee meetings”.
Only 60 minutes of actual game play, and much of that spent walking back to the huddle, huddling up, and taking position. And yet it takes 3+ hours to play the game.
I say leave baseball alone, and it will change. I hate the idea of trying to regulate change artificially, when evolutionary change is so much better.
vtbaseball:
First of all, the fielder never knows for sure where the ball will be hit. It’s a matter of percentages. That’s been a part of the game forever. It’s why the traditional positions exist, and shifting is just a variation of that. I think it’s silly to legislate against anything because people have gotten better at it.
There’s more to baseball than hitting. As a fan, I like all aspects and want to see more than just guys hitting. I hate the idea of legislating against fielding because people don’t care for that aspect of the game. It would be like the NBA, legislating that a defender can’t get closer than 3 feet to an offensive player, so teams will be able to score easier, because people like scoring better than defense.
The term infielder is a matter of evolution. They got called that because that’s where it made sense to play. They don’t play their because someone came up with the term. It’s where they play, not who they are.
I saw a game where the manager brought the outfielders in to play the IF, knowing that a flyball to the OF loses the game on a score from 3B on a tag up. I loved it. It was interesting and inventive. Legislating against the shift would have made that impossible. Regulating against the shift is artificial. It dumbs down the game, and restricts creativity.
I have no problem with banning on-field cheat sheets. But banning shifts, as a way to eliminate cheat sheets, is an absurd overreaction; like using TNT to rid your yard of squirrels.
The average amount of actual action in an NFL game is 18 minutes, that’s a fact. It’s boring AF.
The actual amount of “action” in a football game is less than 20 minutes. That being said, I am as big a fan of the G-Men as I am the Yanks.
As to your point of letting the game evolve…well, look what we now have? Pitchers are losing their variety. It’s rare now to see a pitcher that isn’t max effort. Offensively, “hit ’em where the ain’t” now means over the fences.
There is absolutely no incentive to do anything else.
I see this being the one rule that has us – the hardcore baseball fans – in mind. All the other stuff is dumb. Banning the shift would bring back a lot of old school baseball.
Thanks VPH!
I don’t think the Giants ill give up top prospects for JRamor and finish under 90 wins.
What does everyone make of the new MLB Home Run Derby X?
You would seriously take Montas over Manaea in New York? Have you seen Manaea pitch at Yankee Stadium? He is a beast. I have been saying he is the missing piece of their rotation since the offseason began. Cashman needs to make that move to make up for trading Sanchez in his contract year. Give them 2-3 good prospects out of the top 4. Toss in Florial as well. He is the type of former top prospect Beane loves.
The Royals would be stupid to trade MJ Melendez.