Werth: "Super-Nerds" are killing baseball

[TheSportsPredictor]

The super-nerds will definitely ruin the long-term contract chances of the Jayson Werths of the baseball world.

He received a seven-year, $126 million contract from the Nats entering his age-32 season. Baseball Reference lists Justin Upton as the most similar player to Werth. Upton signed a five-year, $106 million contract this offseason as he entered his age-31 season. And Lorenzo Cain, entering his age-32 season, signed a five-year, $80 million contract this offseason.

Both the length and price of Werth's contract are now from a bygone era. Players like him won't be seeing contracts like that anymore.

 

[3_Octave_Fart]

Werth had a memorable postseason. Dumb teams will always overpay for that, have always thus.

 

[Kato]

Seems the key to beating a shift (at a team level) is getting people on base. I don't understand the tolerance of players whiffing. Not putting the ball in play negates the chance for errors. You get on base, it impacts the shift, opens up more of the field.

The explanation for this tolerance by the announcers in a game I was watching the other night was that there's a better chance of changing the game with one swing (homering) than relying on three, four, five swings (rallying) to come back in a game.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

It's not easy to just hit the ball wherever you decide to hit it.

 

[LongTimeListener]

The explanation for this tolerance by the announcers in a game I was watching the other night was that there's a better chance of changing the game with one swing (homering) than relying on three, four, five swings (rallying) to come back in a game.

Joey Gallo, one of the most extreme pull hitters in baseball, hit 41 home runs in 2017.

If he decides to hit into the shift every time he sees one and taps some gorky little grounder that dribbles toward second, how many home runs does he hit? Maybe five?

I'll take the groundouts and the home runs, thanks.

 

[Guy_Incognito]

Move the mound back 18 inches.

I forgot where I saw it, but moving the fences back would fix a lot.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

The explanation for this tolerance by the announcers in a game I was watching the other night was that there's a better chance of changing the game with one swing (homering) than relying on three, four, five swings (rallying) to come back in a game.

This is not necessarily true. Yes, you need homers, but an offense that puts men on base all the time with relatively few homers, say with two guys with 25 or so leading the team, will outscore an offense built on the homer as its chief means of offense. The latter gets more dependent on enemy pitchers throwing walks to get its big innings.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

I forgot where I saw it, but moving the fences back would fix a lot.

This would devalue outfield seats that sell for a lot of dough in many of the newer ballparks. Also, how do you move back the Green Monster?

 

[JC]

This thread was made for 93devil.

 

[DanOregon]

Adding base runners would seem to add variables and multiply the impact of a home run. It almost seems like the current model is an equation designed to justify itself, than examine a question openly. It's like figuring out the probability of something, but structuring it so one outcome isn't even in the mix.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Obviously, the ideal offense has both lots of runners on and lots of homers, too. But it's rare to get more than three All-Stars in one lineup.

 

[3_Octave_Fart]

You have to snicker at the thought of expecting the descendants of Mo Vaughn and Pete Incaviglia to be able to just poke it the other way.
You are asking them to do something they literally have never been asked to do, probably never have been -trained- to do, and most importantly aren't paid to do.
It's not anything like putting the sportswriter on courts, and thinking those skills are easily transferable.

 

[JC]

People are acting like this is slowpitch and you simply place the ball wherever you want.

 

[LongTimeListener]

This would devalue outfield seats that sell for a lot of dough in many of the newer ballparks. Also, how do you move back the Green Monster?

Don't move it back, but make it 100 feet tall.

Now those would be some nosebleed seats.

 

[poindexter]

You are asking them to do something they literally have never been asked to do, probably never have been -trained- to do, and most importantly aren't paid to do.

Adapt or die. Those with fat contracts in the middle of this are still making money. The Jason Werths are the do-do birds. The buggy whip makers.

ESPN did an article this week on how the shift has killed Pujols. It is an embarrassment for him.

 

[Spartan Squad]

I forgot where I saw it, but moving the fences back would fix a lot.

Haven't they done this in Colorado? But as was mentioned before, you can't move Fenway back. I imagine Wrigley is the same way. I would settle for the places with short fences *cough* Dodgers Stadium *cough* to be raised to some minimum, uniform height

* There are worse offenders, but I hate LA so much. So much

 

[3_Octave_Fart]

The shift is not new. Rogers Hornsby dealt with the shift.
I agree they need to adapt, but that won't happen while they're still getting big contracts to hit .228 with 35 home runs.
Chris Davis is hitting .203/.302/.406 with 552 strikeouts over the last three seasons and was slotted fifth in the lineup the other night. Earnings over that period: $69 million.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Adapt or die. Those with fat contracts in the middle of this are still making money. The Jason Werths are the do-do birds. The buggy whip makers.

ESPN did an article this week on how the shift has killed Pujols. It is an embarrassment for him.

There's no loss of offense, though. Teams are scoring 4.45 runs a game. That's down a bit from last year (4.65) but still a good measure higher than the pre-steroid era ('80s) or the early part of this decade. There's no need to adapt if the goal is to play winning baseball. Home run derby and all-or-nothing at-bats are sound strategy. This is all about the product on the field and fans' enjoyment of it.

 

[cjericho]

I'm not going to claim to know the specifics of a major league swing, but it isn't always that easy. The pitcher is throwing you a specific pitch that may not be conducive to it.

An inside out swing is not that difficult. If you watch good hs ball you'll see it.

 

[cjericho]

It's not easy to just hit the ball wherever you decide to hit it.

True. But guys who can pull the ball 400 feet, can learn to inside-out for a single the other way. It's not like it's easy to just inside-out and
get a hit, but if some guys worked on it and used it teams wouldn't be so quick to shift. The sabremetricians who said don't just give a team
an out with a sac bunt have a great point.

A week ago Boone had Gregorious bunt to move runners on 2nd and 3rd. Forget who the Yankees
were playing, but they intentionally walked the next batter and then got a forceout at the plate. Didn't see it, my buddy emailed and said
they should tell Boone if you have Didi or anyone bunt in that situation again you're fired. Having guts try to inside-out or look for an outside
pitch to slap in order to beat the shift isn't the same though.