We Don't Need to Abolish the Shift

June 14, 2017
 I was recently asked the following question by Mike Murphy (or as many know him, Murph), one of the premier sports radio hosts in Chicago for years:

"I hear more talk again popping up of banning the shift. (MLB wants more hits, more excitement, etc.). Idea: You have Defensive Runs Saved. But, do you have Offensive Runs Lost?"

He went on to explain that he was particularly curious because he had seen a few plays recently where it was clear that the shift had taken away hits from Anthony Rizzo and Kyle Schwarber, and he was interested if there was a way to see how much the shift was hurting offensive players.

In his question, Murph hits on an important concept that comes up often when I talk with people around the game about Defensive Runs Saved. When we refer to the defense saving runs, those runs are just as much lost by the offense, so we can understand the impact that defense has from an offensive perspective as well. In the case of shifts in particular, we track Shift Runs Saved, which measures the value of the shift relative to traditional defensive positioning.

Through the first two and a half months of this season, teams have saved 186 runs with the shift. Compared to the 8,916 runs scored in the league so far, that’s actually a pretty small impact. The difference ends up being only 0.09 runs per team per 9 innings, from 4.75 to 4.66. The shift has an impact but nothing like people think. It’s helpful for a team to shift—there’s no sense not doing it because it helps more often than it hurts. But it’s just a tactic, like platooning, where you get an advantage when you have a righty hitter face a lefty pitcher. You should do it, but it’s not a panacea, and certainly not a threat to offense overall.

In fact, despite the use of the shift continuing to increase year-over-year, we have actually seen scoring increase to the point that it is now consistent with historical levels. This season’s 4.66 runs per team per 9 innings is the highest since 2009 and is right in line with previous seasons in the modern era (steroid-driven years excluded). A lot of this has been attributed to an airball revolution—a concerted effort by hitters to get more lift on the ball—that, to some extent, comes as a counterpunch by hitters to the shift. And this is the really important point to take away here: the shift drives down offense, but hitters are still able to perform well despite the increased use of the shift because they too can make adjustments to combat it.

 
 

COMMENTS (7 Comments, most recent shown first)

shthar
By the time they get to the majors, hitters are gonna hit they way they're gonna hit. The only guys who attempt to change, are guys that can't hit. If a particular hitter CAN just decide to hit the other way, they aint gonna shift on him. At least not for long.
1:52 PM Jun 15th
 
Fireball Wenz
Legislating against the shift is a HORRIBLE idea. One - you wind up with the type of :is this a zone defense" rulings that make no sense. Two - the defense is SUPPOSED to move around to provide the optimal defense, and has for decades - this is just a longstanding tradition that has been expanded. Three, and most importantly - the shift is a natural reaction and corrective to the offense adopting as an optimal strategy trying to pull every pitch. Forcing hitters to adapt will restore some variety in the game.
12:23 PM Jun 15th
 
billsizer
I completely agree with astros34. Legislating against the shift is almost impossible as a practical matter. You can't tell fielders where they must stand. After that, what? Replays to determine if a fielder cheated? C'mon.
9:23 AM Jun 15th
 
astros34
I don't see how you could abolish the shift anyway. All you could do is say the defense has to have two defenders on each side of second base or something and there would still be shifts. Then you couldn't do a five-man infield if you wanted to because you'd have three guys on one side or the other. You can't just tell the shortstop and/or second baseman where he has to stand.
7:27 AM Jun 15th
 
Brock Hanke
I'm not sure what baseball insiders think, but my impression of the shift is that it is mostly designed to take away power. You force the hitter to hit to the opposite field, he can do that, but he loses some power.
12:40 AM Jun 15th
 
OldBackstop
I know John doesn't usually follow up, but I'd be curious as to whether the system measures plays....we've all seen them....where the shift hurt the defense -- a ball going right through where the third baseman would have been, or some baserunning advantage when a runner grabs third.
11:56 PM Jun 14th
 
bearbyz
If hitters learned to hit the other way, would be one way to lesson the number of shifts.
10:02 PM Jun 14th
 
 
©2019 Be Jolly, Inc. All Rights Reserved.|Web site design and development by Americaneagle.com|Terms & Conditions|Privacy Policy