MLB Off-Topic

[ubernoob]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

The shift being regulated is still the dumbest ****ing thing they can talk about.

If I know where someone is gonna hit it, you damn well believe I'm standing right there. Get ****ed.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

The shift being regulated is still the dumbest ****ing thing they can talk about.

If I know where someone is gonna hit it, you damn well believe I'm standing right there. Get ****ed.

I don't know if you have a stance on these or not, but how do you feel about football having illegal formations and motions, or offsides in soccer/hockey, three-in-the-key in basketball, etc.?

[Majingir]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I don't mind shifts, but maybe just make it where 2B and 1B must stay on one side of 2B while SS and 3B have to be on the other side.

They can still move around, as long as they stay on their side of 2B. So no exaggerated shifts where the SS basically ends up as a shallow RF for the first 2 strikes or something.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I don't mind shifts, but maybe just make it where 2B and 1B must stay on one side of 2B while SS and 3B have to be on the other side.

They can still move around, as long as they stay on their side of 2B. So no exaggerated shifts where the SS basically ends up as a shallow RF for the first 2 strikes or something.

That's what they'd be restricted to if they do it. Keep them on the dirt and their side of 2B.

I'm fine with shifts, but there would have to be trade-offs for what happens when you pull somebody over or put somebody in the outfield. I won't post my video again, but essentially many extreme shifts can still be what they are.

I would like for the position to be established in relation to the positions around them though, and that the position can't change for essentially the duration of the at-bat. So if a 3B slides over to become the "SS" or whatever, then they are the SS of record for that at-bat and can't move back as a relative 3B after that.

It just would be nice if shifting came more at a cost is all. That's a me thing.

[reyes the roof]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I don't know if you have a stance on these or not, but how do you feel about football having illegal formations and motions, or offsides in soccer/hockey, three-in-the-key in basketball, etc.?

As for football, I think you need to compare defense to defense. If a team is only running plays to the right side of he field, are you going to tell the defense they can’t stack most of their players on that side?

[ubernoob]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I don't know if you have a stance on these or not, but how do you feel about football having illegal formations and motions, or offsides in soccer/hockey, three-in-the-key in basketball, etc.?

That's not remotely comparable, as stated above.

I don't care if they remove offsides or not, soccer formations used to be 1-1-8. I imagine it'd be pretty boring being that player trying to cherry pick.

It's like saying "Lebron James is gonna get the ball on this last shot, but you're not allowed to double team him because you know what he's gonna do."

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

That's not remotely comparable, as stated above.

I don't care if they remove offsides or not, soccer formations used to be 1-1-8. I imagine it'd be pretty boring being that player trying to cherry pick.

It's like saying "Lebron James is gonna get the ball on this last shot, but you're not allowed to double team him because you know what he's gonna do."

Okay, then on that front... what is the point of positions by name, except for pitcher and catcher? I mean this for scorebook/statistics purposes, and the infield fly rule/hitting baserunner rule. If they can literally stand anywhere and they arrange to do the most bizarre of configurations for certain batters in certain counts that represent nothing regarding their actual position they are being tracked for, what is the point of having that considered in the first place? What is a third baseman if they are standing in shallow right-center field?

Keep in mind my proposition doesn't eliminate this in its entirety, but it does acknowledge positions by relative location and keeps them there.

[ubernoob]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

There is no point, save for arbitration reasons and scorekeeping.

Baseball is the dumbest of sports with unwritten rules and pastimes being sacred for no reason. Nobody cares when the OF shifted, but now the infield does it and people lose their mind?

[Master Live 013]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Yeah, so baseball should change the shift because of position names? Come on.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

There is no point, save for arbitration reasons and scorekeeping.

Baseball is the dumbest of sports with unwritten rules and pastimes being sacred for no reason. Nobody cares when the OF shifted, but now the infield does it and people lose their mind?

I've been up in arms since the year 2000, or whenever they started doing it to Bonds, Giambi, and L. Gonzalez.

My want for shifting restrictions isn't new for me, and I was 12 years old when I realized it. I didn't need Statcast or Manfrick to tell me this one. I even posted about it eleven years ago here before it became a mainstream thing in MLB (at a time when no one soul cared about pace of play, mind you).

Now, I've softened my stance on it and have been okay with an optimization version of the rule. I guess I will post my video again, and all you need to see is the thumbnail to know that I'm not eliminating shifts. Far from it, in fact.


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WUEB3ciH8KY" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Yeah, so baseball should change the shift because of position names? Come on.

I didn't say that. I'm asking how it should account for the fact that a position player is not only no longer not playing in their respective location but not even in their relative location. When the third baseman isn't even the furthest left in the field, what are they? When they camp under a pop up and an infield fly rule is called but they started in the outfield, what are we doing there?

Again, they are questions. I have my own reasons for the mockery that some of the shifting has caused, but I was asking the small questions first. The stubborn deflection regarding those questions is quite hilarious that they can't be answered, though.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

On the infield fly rule, it states that any outfielder that stations themself in the infield is eligible so I think that would come back to whether or not they are physically in the infield. As for the rest, when a PG draws a center on a switch, the center hasn’t become a point guard. When a corner covers a tight end on a play, he isn’t a linebacker. I feel like you’re creating problems that aren’t there.

[Jeffrey Smith]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Comparing baseball shifts to football or basketball makes no sense. There are no man to man match ups in baseball except for the pitcher vs hitter.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Majingir]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

CBA expiring, all these potential changes coming, and a possible lockout ontop of it all, we're in for the craziest offseason since 94.

[Speedy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Impressive.

FB_IMG_1629994143762.jpeg

[The Kid 24]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I havent been able to watch him^ yet... Does he throw that hard or just that filthy that NOBODY can hit him?