- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Extreme defensive shifts in baseball
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:24 pm to KosmoCramer
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:24 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
they are still able to walk even if they square to bunt. At least that's how I would interpret it.
Not necessarily true. They could square to bunt on the first pitch of the AB and get it down.
If they were swinging, they might foul the first pitch off and then take 4 straight balls and walk.
I don't think that would be the greatest way to look at it.
What you also aren't factoring in, is does the situation even call for a bunt?
2 out nobody on in the bottom of the ninth of a 1 run game, the Red Sox don't want David Ortiz bunting for a hit.
1
Posted on 5/28/14 at 4:24 pm to shel311
There's the crux of the issue right there. If a player, regardless of prowess or stature, can ccompetently bunt for a single a majority of the time against the shift it discourages the use of the shift entirely.
Just as the most important thing when batting its getting on base, or rather not getting out, the most important thing on defense is getting the player out.
The only time an out is conceded by the defense to a batter is when that batter has a runner in scoring position with first base open and the manager feels that the matchup of the hitter on deck is more favorable than the hitter at the plate.
Personally I feel like extreme shifts are bush league and generally do more harm than good with the only exception being having the infield playing in to protect the lead with arunner on third .
Just as the most important thing when batting its getting on base, or rather not getting out, the most important thing on defense is getting the player out.
The only time an out is conceded by the defense to a batter is when that batter has a runner in scoring position with first base open and the manager feels that the matchup of the hitter on deck is more favorable than the hitter at the plate.
Personally I feel like extreme shifts are bush league and generally do more harm than good with the only exception being having the infield playing in to protect the lead with arunner on third .
Posted on 5/28/14 at 4:26 pm to ZenFNmaster
quote:
Personally I feel like extreme shifts are bush league and generally do more harm than good
Posted on 5/28/14 at 4:26 pm to barry
Big Papi, changing the game. 
Posted on 5/28/14 at 4:28 pm to PurpleAndGold86
quote:
Do you watch baseball at all? It happens all the time.
Its happened 30 times this year in roughly 900 games, so how about you not jump to the conclusion that it happens all the time because you saw Rizzo do it twice.
fricking cubtard
Posted on 5/28/14 at 5:16 pm to PurpleAndGold86
quote:
2 out nobody on in the bottom of the ninth of a 1 run game, the Red Sox don't want David Ortiz bunting for a hit.
Are you saying that if the Red Sox knew it would be a 100% guarantee that it would be a bunt single, they still wouldn't take it in that situation?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 5:29 pm to barry
quote:
Its happened 30 times this year in roughly 900 games, so how about you not jump to the conclusion that it happens all the time because you saw Rizzo do it twice.
You made it sound like it absolutely never happens. I see it happen fairly regularly. I didn't say it happens every game you stupid dipshit.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 5:30 pm to The Seaward
quote:
Are you saying that if the Red Sox knew it would be a 100% guarantee that it would be a bunt single, they still wouldn't take it in that situation?
I'd take him swinging away every single time in the 1 run game in the bottom of the 9th.
1. He would not bunt for a base hit 100% of the time
2. He hits a HR every 15.2 ABs
3. 41% of his hits are XBH and a runner is alot more likely to score from second base with 2 outs than he is from first.
This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 5:31 pm
Posted on 5/28/14 at 5:32 pm to The Seaward
quote:
Are you saying that if the Red Sox knew it would be a 100% guarantee that it would be a bunt single, they still wouldn't take it in that situation?
You showed you were pretty dumb in the other thread and now you're trying here?
No, you can't guarantee 100% that he would bunt for a hit. But if Ortiz was coming up with two outs and no one In a one run game in the bottom of the ninth and asked the manager if they wanted him to bunt against the shift, they would say not no, but frick no.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 5:45 pm to PurpleAndGold86
I wasn't sure by the way you worded it. I thought you were saying even if hypothetically you could guarentee a hit (which in reality you obviously couldn't) you still wouldn't bunt him.
As for your personal attack, piss off.
As for your personal attack, piss off.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 5:47 pm to PurpleAndGold86
You're mad.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 6:21 pm to PurpleAndGold86
quote:
I see it happen fairly regularly.
Well it has happened in 3% of games out of 900, so you either are full of shite, watch an assload of baseball, or have no idea what fairly regularly means.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 7:41 pm to barry
In the OP's picture, a bunt would either be an easy single or if the ss tried to make a play at 1b would allow the runner to advance all the way to 3rd. I wonder how many outs there are at the time if this picture and the score. That pretty much will tell you the story.
This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 7:43 pm
Posted on 5/28/14 at 9:04 pm to EvrybodysAllAmerican
How often are they shifting with no one on? Seems like the shift would be more advantageous with a runner on.
Also - regarding the "fairly regurlarly" comment... how many extreme shifts have we seen in the 900 games to date? If 10% of games, and we've seen a bunt against the shift in 30 games, that would be 1/3 of the time. I would consider that fairly regular. I don't know the number, though. That's why I am asking.
Also - regarding the "fairly regurlarly" comment... how many extreme shifts have we seen in the 900 games to date? If 10% of games, and we've seen a bunt against the shift in 30 games, that would be 1/3 of the time. I would consider that fairly regular. I don't know the number, though. That's why I am asking.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News