71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Little known fact about the "hot" St. Louis Cardinals, who won 17 in a row.
The best team from Sept. 1 to the end of the season was not St. Louis.
In fact St. Louis was not even 2nd best.
St. Louis was 23-9

#1 was SF Giants at 23-7
#2 was LA Dodgers 22-7

So, technically the Giants and Dodgers are the hottest teams right now.
Of course you don't seem "hot" when you do it all year.
So much for streaky "hot" teams.
It doesn't match up to being the best.

But I wonder, did Bellinger steal the sign for Taylor last night?
Taylor had been slumping badly and did not look good last night.
The Dodgers rarely had anyone on second all night, although Bellinger had been on second two other times and both times the hitter (Mookie Betts) hit the ball hard (single and sharp line drive to center).
I thought I saw Bellinger make a subtle signal shortly before the pitch to Taylor but I could be imagining things.
Taylor smashed that first pitch after the steal for a home run.

There were 2 other times that the Dodgers had guys on second. The first was with the bases loaded in the 3rd and Trea Turner lined hard into an inning ending double play. The second was in the 6th and AJ Pollock hit a weak hit in front of home plate that was fielded by the pitcher for an out at first.

It may be that Bellinger is better at stealing signs than other guys or that they don't do as well stealing the signs until later in the game or that I am full of ****. But, as a Giant fan, I'd rather not have Bellinger at second, which may be hard to do because I think he is finally breaking out of his season long problems and is seeing the ball well.

---

Players stealing signs is as old as the game. There is nothing wrong with that. If your opponent isn't changing things up when there is a runner at second, too bad for them.

Where sign stealing crosses the line is when technology is brought into the equation.

---

My apologies if my post sounded disrespectful. I have a great deal of respect for Bellinger either way. He has had a very tough year and has found ways to help the team despite that. He was on base 3 times yesterday and, if he can contribute by stealing signs, more power to him.

I do think that teams are changing it up, which may explain the length of games these days. I mean, despite the efforts of MLB administrators, the games are longer than ever. The length of time between pitches seems to have extended quite a bit, with pitchers taking a very long time getting signs and batters stepping out because of it.

It seems that the time between pitches is averaging more than 1 minute. With nearly 200 pitches pitched per game, you do the math. This doesn't include breaks between innings, trips to the mound etc.

It also seems that I'm seeing more long counts, more foul balls with 2 strikes and more pitching changes. In fact batters are now trained specifically to make the pitcher throw more pitches. I wouldn't be surprised if pitches are well above 200 per game in some instances.

I was at a game in SF this year that went over 4 hours. We left at the 4 hour point in order to catch the train. The game was still in the 9th inning. The final score was 9-6.

Baseball used to be routinely faster than football. But football games have actually gotten a bit faster. Games used to go about 3.5 hours. Now they are closer to 3 much of the time. So actually baseball games are longer than football games now much to the chagrin of MLB and viewers.

---

Speed the game up?

Easy - put a serious clock on the pitchers and disallow stepping out of the box by hitters.

The other rule change I would like to see - eliminate exaggerated shifts.

What we will see (and I am happy to say goodbye to these temporary rules): no more Manfred runner to start extra innings and the seven inning doubleheader games. And, of course, the DH is almost certainly coming to the NL (unfortunate but inevitable).

---

I agree on all fronts, although I don't know how you enforce the shift limitations and it won't happen. Shifts are here to stay imo.

Or trash cans...

I believe Manfred has suggested that for shifts, infielders wouldn't be able to be completely on the outfield grass ( so no rovers in the OF). I think he's also suggested that you couldn't have more than two IFs on either side of 2nd base.

Why do people care about shifts? It is part of the game.

I like the idea of a pitch clock.

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/mlb-announces-20-second-pitch-clock-for-spring-training-games/

oski003 said:

---

Why do people care about shifts? It is part of the game.

I like the idea of a pitch clock.

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/mlb-announces-20-second-pitch-clock-for-spring-training-games/

---

Totally agree. I don't think there should be any rules about positioning of fielders as that would impact one of the core dynamics of the game. Changing some procedural rules around timing, substitution, mound visits, etc. would be fine by me because they really aren't fundamental to the game.

Those types of proposed changes are aimed at making it more entertaining for the casual fan. Offense is entertaining. (see the ban on sticky substances)

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Little known fact about the "hot" St. Louis Cardinals, who won 17 in a row.
The best team from Sept. 1 to the end of the season was not St. Louis.
In fact St. Louis was not even 2nd best.
St. Louis was 23-9

#1 was SF Giants at 23-7
#2 was LA Dodgers 22-7

So, technically the Giants and Dodgers are the hottest teams right now.
Of course you don't seem "hot" when you do it all year.
So much for streaky "hot" teams.
It doesn't match up to being the best.

But I wonder, did Bellinger steal the sign for Taylor last night?
Taylor had been slumping badly and did not look good last night.
The Dodgers rarely had anyone on second all night, although Bellinger had been on second two other times and both times the hitter (Mookie Betts) hit the ball hard (single and sharp line drive to center).
I thought I saw Bellinger make a subtle signal shortly before the pitch to Taylor but I could be imagining things.
Taylor smashed that first pitch after the steal for a home run.

There were 2 other times that the Dodgers had guys on second. The first was with the bases loaded in the 3rd and Trea Turner lined hard into an inning ending double play. The second was in the 6th and AJ Pollock hit a weak hit in front of home plate that was fielded by the pitcher for an out at first.

It may be that Bellinger is better at stealing signs than other guys or that they don't do as well stealing the signs until later in the game or that I am full of ****. But, as a Giant fan, I'd rather not have Bellinger at second, which may be hard to do because I think he is finally breaking out of his season long problems and is seeing the ball well.

---

Players stealing signs is as old as the game. There is nothing wrong with that. If your opponent isn't changing things up when there is a runner at second, too bad for them.

Where sign stealing crosses the line is when technology is brought into the equation.

---

My apologies if my post sounded disrespectful. I have a great deal of respect for Bellinger either way. He has had a very tough year and has found ways to help the team despite that. He was on base 3 times yesterday and, if he can contribute by stealing signs, more power to him.

I do think that teams are changing it up, which may explain the length of games these days. I mean, despite the efforts of MLB administrators, the games are longer than ever. The length of time between pitches seems to have extended quite a bit, with pitchers taking a very long time getting signs and batters stepping out because of it.

It seems that the time between pitches is averaging more than 1 minute. With nearly 200 pitches pitched per game, you do the math. This doesn't include breaks between innings, trips to the mound etc.

It also seems that I'm seeing more long counts, more foul balls with 2 strikes and more pitching changes. In fact batters are now trained specifically to make the pitcher throw more pitches. I wouldn't be surprised if pitches are well above 200 per game in some instances.

I was at a game in SF this year that went over 4 hours. We left at the 4 hour point in order to catch the train. The game was still in the 9th inning. The final score was 9-6.

Baseball used to be routinely faster than football. But football games have actually gotten a bit faster. Games used to go about 3.5 hours. Now they are closer to 3 much of the time. So actually baseball games are longer than football games now much to the chagrin of MLB and viewers.

---

Speed the game up?

Easy - put a serious clock on the pitchers and disallow stepping out of the box by hitters.

The other rule change I would like to see - eliminate exaggerated shifts.

What we will see (and I am happy to say goodbye to these temporary rules): no more Manfred runner to start extra innings and the seven inning doubleheader games. And, of course, the DH is almost certainly coming to the NL (unfortunate but inevitable).

---

I agree on all fronts, although I don't know how you enforce the shift limitations and it won't happen. Shifts are here to stay imo.

---

My thinking on shift limitations…

No more than two players on either side of 2B.
No infielders more than x feet* from the edge of the dirt on the outfield side during the first eight innings**

* to be determined
** Employing four players in the outfield in the ninth would still be ok in my rule. This would enable teams to continue to use a variety of run prevention strategies in tie games in the ninth.

Basic shifts have been around since the 1940's and there is certainly nothing wrong with employing them. It is the exaggerated shifts that need to be reined in. Doing so would increase the BABIP success rate which is integral to the game.

oski003 said:

---

Why do people care about shifts? It is part of the game.

I like the idea of a pitch clock.

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/mlb-announces-20-second-pitch-clock-for-spring-training-games/

---

I think the shift is fine but the reason people care is because MLB has seen a sharp increase over the last few years in strikeouts and home runs. There are fewer base runners and action, and MLB sees that as a problem. I tend to agree, action on the bases is the one of most exciting parts of the game. If you ban the shift, you increase base runners.

Cal8285 said:

---

GMP said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Why do people care about shifts? It is part of the game.

I like the idea of a pitch clock.

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/mlb-announces-20-second-pitch-clock-for-spring-training-games/

---

I think the shift is fine but the reason people care is because MLB has seen a sharp increase over the last few years in strikeouts and home runs. There are fewer base runners and action, and MLB sees that as a problem. I tend to agree, action on the bases is the one of most exciting parts of the game. If you ban the shift, you increase base runners.

---

The shift and the increased emphasis on HR's go hand in hand. Get more guys bunting and more guys hitting the balls through the vacant holes caused by the shift, and we get a lot less shifting. But who wants a bunt single or a grounder through the vacant right/left side for a single when you can swing for the fences? So what if instead of a HR you hit a line drive to a guy playing in shallow RF for an out? It's the price players pay when they try to hit more HR's.

Defenses pick their poison, play positions for a guy trying to hit it out of the park, or play better positions for a guy just trying to get on base. The more there are of the latter, the less shifting there will be, and we don't need to worry about rules so much.

Banning the shift might increase base runners, but I don't know. It will also mean even more guys trying to just hit HR's as opposed to getting on base. Things come and go in the game. I'd like a pitch clock and no stepping out of the box all the time, but I'm not so sure about a shift ban.

---

I think any rule regarding shifting is going to be arbitrary and the clubs won't vote for it. The # of feet from the foul line rule will definitely slow down the game even more because now you are measuring feet and inches or drawing a bunch of chalk lines across the field, uglifying (not a word) the game. I suppose you can enforce 2 infielders on each side or # of outfielders but I think this ultimately will backfire as far as baserunners.

For example, it has been entertaining watching more and more players, including "dead pull" hitters like Brandon Belt and Brandon Crawford either bunt or go opposite field to beat the shift. The game keeps evolving. Defenses can shift, forcing the hitters to evolve into complete hitters. The successful players and teams are the ones that can evolve. The Giants would not be where they are if their hitters had not evolved to beat the shift. I find this more entertaining than the traditional single up the middle. These days the hits mean more because they mean the hitter became more skilled as a result.

Teams that overshift regularly and get beat because of it will stop shifting. That's how you get rid of the shift.

A comment on hitters stepping out of the box. Have you played the game? Do you remember that their were many great hitters before batting gloves were invented.

I remember playing as a kid and really valuing my batting gloves. I didn't become a great hitter because of it.
I don't remember needing to re-tighten my batting gloves after every pitch. Honestly the glove adjusting is just a delay tactic to allow the hitter to step out and look for a sign from the dugout indicating what the next pitch will be.

Stealing signs is essential for successful hitting. These days pitches are coming in above 90 mph on a regular basis. Honestly most pitches are probably closer to 95 mph. The response time to pick up the rotation and location of the ball and swing effectively is pretty tight. Some guys have the bat speed but, after 162 games, the speed is hard to keep up. Knowing what pitch is coming absolutely makes all the difference in the world. I think this is the main reason for all of the stepping out.

As for the # of home runs and strikeouts. This is partly due to the substances being used by pitchers and the remaking of the baseball so it has more carry. The league has cracked down on the former but making the baseball the way it used to be made should help even things back out. If the batters are prevented from stepping out beyond a certain length of time and the league rebuilds the baseball with less carry then the # of runs scored and the # of home runs will decrease lessening the appeal of the game. So, even though the games are longer, they are more exciting the way things are now. Scoring equals marketability in all major sports and, as a result, I doubt the league is going to crack down on hitters, even though it makes the games much longer than people want.

Agree that the best way to stop the shift is to find a way to make it have consequences, in terms of runs given up and losses. While I don't love the shifts, it doesn't seem fair to take punitive action because teams have figured out a better way to play the game.

This is another analytics thing. There was an article on ESPN a couple years ago and Daniel Murphy (good hitter, played for the Nationals) explained it in pretty logical terms - his goal as the batter is to end up on 2nd base, because if he can get there it only takes 1 more hit to score a run (2 hits total - his double and then another hit from someone else). If you bunt against the shift it's still most likely going to take 2 more hits (3 total) to score him, and it's hard these days to get 3 hits in an inning. Of course, the other option is that someone else can hit the double instead of him, and he MIGHT score from 1st.

Another thing here is that ground balls don't result in doubles very often. Which is why guys are all about launch angle and getting the ball in the air now.

So something's got to give. Either figure out a way to get more ground ball extra base hits, have your first two guys up each inning place perfect bunt singles to get a guy on 2nd, or continue to try and hit balls over the shift instead of around or through it. Personally I see value in at least the lead off man getting on base however possible each inning. But I'm also not crunching the numbers on my computer to decide if you want to pay Brandon Belt to do that or try to hit the ball as hard as he can somewhere (taking broken fingers completely out of the equation).

FreeTrialMan said:

---

Agree that the best way to stop the shift is to find a way to make it have consequences, in terms of runs given up and losses. While I don't love the shifts, it doesn't seem fair to take punitive action because teams have figured out a better way to play the game.

This is another analytics thing. There was an article on ESPN a couple years ago and Daniel Murphy (good hitter, played for the Nationals) explained it in pretty logical terms - his goal as the batter is to end up on 2nd base, because if he can get there it only takes 1 more hit to score a run (2 hits total - his double and then another hit from someone else). If you bunt against the shift it's still most likely going to take 2 more hits (3 total) to score him, and it's hard these days to get 3 hits in an inning. Of course, the other option is that someone else can hit the double instead of him, and he MIGHT score from 1st.

Another thing here is that ground balls don't result in doubles very often. Which is why guys are all about launch angle and getting the ball in the air now.

So something's got to give. Either figure out a way to get more ground ball extra base hits, have your first two guys up each inning place perfect bunt singles to get a guy on 2nd, or continue to try and hit balls over the shift instead of around or through it. Personally I see value in at least the lead off man getting on base however possible each inning. But I'm also not crunching the numbers on my computer to decide if you want to pay Brandon Belt to do that or try to hit the ball as hard as he can somewhere (taking broken fingers completely out of the equation).

---

I can tell you that you can absolutely get to second base on a single bunt or ground ball against the shift because nobody is there. This is occurring more and more which is probably why they are doing it more. Also, more extra bases are being taken because of the shift. For example, yesterday a Tampa Bay guy stole home because he was able to get a huge lead off of 3rd base because nobody was anywhere near 3rd base due to a shift. The overshifts are creating a lot of problems for defenses at 3rd but also at first base where more and more often runners are beating out slow hits because nobody can cover first base.

I have watched a lot of baseball and I have never seen a season where guys are batting close to .333 when hitting the ball poorly with exit velocity below 50 mph. It's possible that the shift is allowing poor hits at an equal rate to taking away strong hits and some of those go for doubles simply because nobody is around where the ball is hit and it just rolls forever.

One down.

Big C said:

---

Giants take game one!

I'd like to say I predicted all this, but honestly, all I've predicted lately is that Cal would go 8-4.

---

Not surprised Buehler struggled a little, but still gave the team a chance to win.

Webb shut down a pretty good offense tonight.

Props!

Dodgers even up the series!

We're headed back to LA!

I know Bellinger had a big hit tonight but I don't understand why Roberts keeps playing him.

This is more than a slump.

Dude is pretty much an automatic out.

If he's playing CF I get it, but to play him at 1B makes no sense.

Who am I to argue with the results tonight, though?

Yup, the Dodgers brought their bats tonight.

No one ever said this would be easy. Giants bullpen has been good all season but they stunk it up tonight.

dimitrig said:

---

Dodgers even up the series!

We're headed back to LA!

I know Bellinger had a big hit tonight but I don't understand why Roberts keeps playing him.

This is more than a slump.

Dude is pretty much an automatic out.

If he's playing CF I get it, but to play him at 1B makes no sense.

Who am I to argue with the results tonight, though?

---

First, I know he's had a bad year but there was no way he wasn't having a big hit this series

Second, I had the same thought today. He's been hitting poorly but he's an incredible center fielder. He runs down almost everything. Why was he at first and not center? Meanwhile Taylor is a passable but very below average center fielder. It didn't ultimately matter but on the giants' sac fly run, I think Bellinger makes that play - he has a way stronger arm and as a lefty his momentum would have been going the right way. Taylor has to reverse his momentum and had no shot.

Curious what the Dodger fans thought about that.

GMP said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Dodgers even up the series!

We're headed back to LA!

I know Bellinger had a big hit tonight but I don't understand why Roberts keeps playing him.

This is more than a slump.

Dude is pretty much an automatic out.

If he's playing CF I get it, but to play him at 1B makes no sense.

Who am I to argue with the results tonight, though?

---

First, I know he's had a bad year but there was no way he wasn't having a big hit this series

Second, I had the same thought today. He's been hitting poorly but he's an incredible center fielder. He runs down almost everything. Why was he at first and not center? Meanwhile Taylor is a passable but very below average center fielder. It didn't ultimately matter but on the giants' sac fly run, I think Bellinger makes that play - he has a way stronger arm and as a lefty his momentum would have been going the right way. Taylor has to reverse his momentum and had no shot.

Curious what the Dodger fans thought about that.

---

If Belly isn't playing CF then he shouldn't be in the game.

Roberts was trying to get Taylor's bat into the lineup, which was a good idea.

Play Taylor at CF and Beaty at 1B if that's the plan.

Bellinger is the absolute worst hitter on the Dodgers this season. That includes all of the pitchers!

That's saying something!

If Betts was moving well, then you could put him in a CF, but he's clearly not 100%.

Belly had a big hit tonight, but he needs to sit more often than not. I can't imagine a lot of guys hitting the way he's hitting who have gotten so many ABs.

Pujols and Beaty are both better options at 1B.

Belli came up as a 1st baseman. Better defensively than both Beaty and Pujols

bonsallbear said:

---

Belli came up as a 1st baseman. Better defensively than both Beaty and Pujols

---

Of course, but he can't hit for crap.

He can barely even put the ball in play. He usually strikes out.

dimitrig said:

---

bonsallbear said:

---

Belli came up as a 1st baseman. Better defensively than both Beaty and Pujols

---

Of course, but he can't hit for crap.

He can barely even put the ball in play. He usually strikes out.

---

So bizarre for a 25 year old former MVP. Have to assume he will figure it out again at some point.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

bonsallbear said:

---

Belli came up as a 1st baseman. Better defensively than both Beaty and Pujols

---

Of course, but he can't hit for crap.

He can barely even put the ball in play. He usually strikes out.

---

So bizarre for a 25 year old former MVP. Have to assume he will figure it out again at some point.

---

The regular Dodger channel announcers claim that when someone does their shoulder like he did it usually takes just over a year to get "right" again. They have brought up several other players as examples over the years. No idea if that is legit or not.

89Bear said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

bonsallbear said:

---

Belli came up as a 1st baseman. Better defensively than both Beaty and Pujols

---

Of course, but he can't hit for crap.

He can barely even put the ball in play. He usually strikes out.

---

So bizarre for a 25 year old former MVP. Have to assume he will figure it out again at some point.

---

The regular Dodger channel announcers claim that when someone does their shoulder like he did it usually takes just over a year to get "right" again. They have brought up several other players as examples over the years. No idea if that is legit or not.

---

Didn't Bellinger's woes start last season before he dislocated his shoulder?

Apropos of nothing, I recall one of the theories behind Adrian Beltre's breakout season with the Dodgers many years ago was that he had a shoulder injury which made it painful for him to swing at balls out of the strike zone lol. In order to avoid that pain, he swung less and dominated the league. The next year his pain was gone and he started swinging at garbage again.

Two down.

Wow. Was this a game w/o errors or even walks by either team? Great pitching and fielding! I was just starting to think that Longoria seems perpetually overmatched lately... when he popped that one. Go Giants!

Scherzer was pretty good tonight; didn't expect to win a 1-0 game tonight. Well played game all around with lots of great defense.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Scherzer was pretty good tonight; didn't expect to win a 1-0 game tonight. Well played game all around with lots of great defense.

---

Dodgers shut out twice in the series!

Never would have expected that!

Can't win if you can't score any runs…

Big C said:

---

Wow. Was this a game w/o errors or even walks by either team? Great pitching and fielding! I was just starting to think that Longoria seems perpetually overmatched lately... when he popped that one. Go Giants!

---

Wood walked a couple of guys in one inning but pitched around it.

And I think Scherzer walked the first batter. Obviously he settled down after that!

Gavin Lux looks on in disbelief. pic.twitter.com/xJGKWdAJbo

— Baseball GIFs (@gifs_baseball) October 12, 2021

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

Wow. Was this a game w/o errors or even walks by either team? Great pitching and fielding! I was just starting to think that Longoria seems perpetually overmatched lately... when he popped that one. Go Giants!

---

Wood walked a couple of guys in one inning but pitched around it.

And I think Scherzer walked the first batter. Obviously he settled down after that!

---

That's right: Wood was a little wild, high, there, for a few innings (and had a wild pitch, too, right?). Still, a very professional game by both teams, in a max-tension environment.

Dave Roberts on the wind: "Any other night, the CT ball, the Gavin Lux ball would have been home runs."

"Those two balls right there, it would have been a different outcome."

— Kerry Crowley (@KO_Crowley) October 12, 2021