John Farrell and the Shift Defense
The largest change in baseball strategy over the last decade has been the radically increased use of the shift defense in the past two years. This was pointed out in a Bill James Online article by John Dewan early in 2012. Farrell’s Blue Jays were among the earliest adopters of the shift, reportedly due to the influence of 3rd base coach Brian Butterfield. Butterfield has moved to Boston with Farrell, and we can expect the shift to make the trek east as well. He may be actually taking it with him, as reportedly the Jays are planning to lessen their use of the shift in 2013 (MLB.com report).
I had the damnedest time finding complete data on the use of the shift in 2012. I am pretty confident in my google-fu, and I could not find a full-season update of the data Dewan presented in midseason. What I did find were mentions at ESPN that the Jays were “among the leaders” in the use of the shift in 2012 (the Rays shifted the most), and that the Jays got the most value out of the shift of any club, saving an estimated 12 runs over the season. The Red Sox made not insignificant use of the shift last year, so we can’t expect the Butterfield shift to made a difference of any more than 5-10 runs if the BIS numbers are correct. At the same time, if a new strategy wins an entire game, that’s a pretty great new strategy.
One of the peculiarities of the Butterfield version of the shift was the use of Brett Lawrie. The Jays third baseman spent a significant amount of time in short right field against LHB, sometimes almost hugging the foul line, other times playing far behind the infielders in the 1B-2B hole. The Jays second baseman and shortstop just shifted a bit to the first base side. Lawrie’s positioning was both peculiar for a third baseman and peculiar for the shift-RF fielder, as he moved around the short outfield zone much more than the usual shift fielder. (See discussion at the Cut Off Man blog.)
The Red Sox also have a young, athletic, defensively gifted third baseman. And according to recent reporting by Jon Paul Morosi, it is indeed Will Middlebrooks who will be the key man in the new Red Sox shift. This is probably extrapolating too much from too little data, but I do think it’s interesting that the Jays got more value out of the shift than anyone else, despite using the shift a good bit less than the league leaders. If there’s something there beyond random variation, it seems likely that Butterfield’s odd deployments of Lawrie are the primary cause. Middlebrooks could be crucial to saving a few extra runs this year.
One question I have, regarding the shift, is its relative utility in Fenway Park. The Green Monster changes the game for left-handed hitters, and if the aggressive shift leads to any significant increase in opponent wall-ball doubles, it will likely not be a positive expectation strategy. At the same time, I have to imagine that for a creative baseball guy like Butterfield, the crazy dimensions of Fenway provide an opportunity for new defensive alignments. Where is the best place to put your LF against different kinds of hitters? Can you try to overload the left side against pull RHB, and where exactly would that overload go? These are questions not just for the season, but for the spring, as the Sox will be working out their new defensive responsibilities and alignments in Grapefruit League games.
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: March 06, 2013 at 10:01 AM (#4381788)I don't know if Middlebrooks has that kind of athleticism though. I don't see him as being especially athletic but I could be wrong.
As a regular watcher of cricket, one sees the fielders shift constantly as the bowler and batsman change. What also happens is that the bowler will tailor his bowling to how the field is actually set.
With a shift against someone like Papi, does the pitcher try to throw more inside stuff or more breaking stuff(assuming RH pitcher) to entice him to pull the ball? The obvious risk being of course he really turns on one nicely and hits is 450 feet into the seats.
I'd love it for Farrell to win a couple worldseries just to shut RJ the f up.
I do wonder, though, how tempting it will be for lefty batters to just try to fight everything off the opposite way with an open left side and that short wall in left.
On the subject of shifting, wasn't there something recently about Pedroia moving before the pitch, based on catcher's signals? It was played up as a really smart move, but I wonder if it tipped off hitters, contributing to the surprisingly awful performances by the Sox pitchers. I also wonder if Butterfield will put a stop to it.
Speaking of which, Varitek retires, and all of a sudden, every one of our pitchers stinks. Coincidence?
Totally agree with points two and three, but isn't a throw from deep 2nd/short RF, where the ball is coming at you pretty much straight on, easier than going to your right and throwing back across your body?
Any word on what, if any, role Varitek and Pedro have had in ST? They are both assistants to the GM now.
At the pitifully low level at which I could ever play baseball, I've been subjected to the shift twice, because I'm a complete pull hitter, left to my own devices. It actually helped me, and was quickly abandoned in both leagues. The reason that it helped me is that I had only medium line-drive power, but a lot of bat control. You leave the 3B line unguarded, and I'm going to hit a two-hopper right down the line for a double. If you leave the SS hole open, I'll hit a two-hopper there for a single. Based on that pitiful amount of info, I'd suggest that the shift only has any chance of working if you know the hitter has some combination of the following: lousy bat control, big time power to the pull side, an inability to hit with power to the opposite field and/or a ballpark that favors power to the hitter's pull side. I have no idea how many MLB hitters fit that description. - Brock Hanke
I enjoy the playful hatreds baseball inspires. My dad is currently nursing a grudge against Rajai Davis that always mildly amusing. I think it's about time I jumped on board...here's hoping one of the Jays proves frustratingly futile this year...Maicer Izturis perhaps?
That wouldn't make him immune to firing...
The shift can getting inside the hitter's head. It's worth trying once on some batters for that value alone, then perhaps taking it off the next AB. Anything to get the guy thinking.
I've played outfielder in softball against some guys who always check the position of the fielders before they first step into the box. I like to take up one position against a guy like that, then move on the pitch.
I'd like to see evidence of this. The shift basically only works on GB. Ortiz, for example, only hits a GB in 22.5% of his career PAs. His GO/AO ratio has been fairly stable throughout his career (but then he got shifted on pretty early).
Until last year, Tex had a much lower GB/FB in NY than for his career. He hit a GB in only 23.5% of his PA in his first 3 years in NY and he posted the two lowest GO/AO ratios of his career. From 2009-11, Tex hit 199 on ground balls. That's not good but the Yankee median looks to be about 230-235 and he's hit only 534 GB in that period. So we're talking about maybe 5 singles a year. For all players (300+ GB) the median is 245 (Cano conveniently enough) so that would be about 8 hits a year. Even at 8 hits a year over his typical 600ish AB, that's only 13 points of BA or about 18 points of BABIP but we're talking about a guy whose BA has dropped 40-50 points.
And he's hardly alone at that level. Ortiz is at 195, Konerko 203, Dunn 201, LaRoche 199, Soriano 197, Encarnacion 195, Matsui 193, Howard 188, Kubel 181 and Pena 138. Three of those guys are RHB. Some others -- Longoria 215, Chipper 216, Votto 224, Fielder 224, Granderson 226, Kendrick 227, Napoli 229.
If anything, he may have over-reacted to the shift by hitting more flyballs -- which led to more HR but also lower BABIP. Or it's just standard old man hitting style.
Obviously putting infielders closer to where a particular bat hits GBs will help. But most dead pull hitters (at least the ones anybody cares about) are flyball hitters. Tex gets 170-180 GB a year. Obviously you'd rather take away those 5-8 hits a year. If teams average 2 LH pull hitters, then on defense you might save 10-15 hits a year which sounds like about what Dewan found. But it's not a big enough effect to explain Tex's BA/BABIP problems.
Please don't root against one of the surviving ex-Expos! How about Esmil Rogers?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main