Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Did Playing Shallow in the OF cost the Sox the Game?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Did Playing Shallow in the OF cost the Sox the Game?

    Last night in the Sox/Yanks game, the Sox had the outfield shallow with one out and first and third, Brett Gardner at the plate, Kimbrel on the mound.... Gardy had been 1-6 lifetime against Kimbrel...

    here's the video

    https://www.mlb.com/video/must-c-yan...h/c-2027212583


    So thoughts on playing shallow vs regular depth?

    Shallow to try and cut the run off from thrid - but how likely is that going to happen, Walker at thrid, so not a fast guy, but not slow, Torres at first, a deep ball now over the head of a outfielder lets both score.

  • #2
    Originally posted by stkjock View Post
    Last night in the Sox/Yanks game, the Sox had the outfield shallow with one out and first and third, Brett Gardner at the plate, Kimbrel on the mound.... Gardy had been 1-6 lifetime against Kimbrel...

    here's the video

    https://www.mlb.com/video/must-c-yan...h/c-2027212583


    So thoughts on playing shallow vs regular depth?

    Shallow to try and cut the run off from thrid - but how likely is that going to happen, Walker at thrid, so not a fast guy, but not slow, Torres at first, a deep ball now over the head of a outfielder lets both score.
    Maybe...bigger issue for the Sox is they have nobody who can get outs in the 7th and 8th innings..

    Comment


    • #3
      The pitch was a meatball down the middle, on 3-2 count. Bad pitch call with a base open. A walk would have been an option, so the pitch selection could have been more stealthy.
      Last edited by songtitle; 05-10-2018, 06:52 AM.
      efastball.com - hitting and pitching fact checker

      Comment


      • #4
        Here's the REAL reason...​​​​​​​



        https://twitter.com/Dan_Shaughnessy/...14039517319168
        I don't like my balls to smell like pickles.

        Comment


        • #5
          This is a topic of personal interest for me..
          You'll win more games over the course of a season my moving your OF'ers in and out--no singles or no doubles--depending on the situation.
          (Which is what I do.)
          But your fans freak out when a ball is hit over the head of no-singles.
          Your fans want no-doubles all the time.
          Last edited by skipper5; 05-10-2018, 07:47 AM.
          Skip

          Comment


          • #6
            I think it was simply a matter of a one-run, late inning game with a runner on third with one out, and the Sox just playing for the win being up by one...and pulled in the OF to try to take away the sac fly to tie the game. Now did that actually cost them the game?

            I don't know, hard to say...because the ball was hit into the gap, and had the CFer been playing back, he's still chasing it on an angle...and just how much quicker he could/would have gotten there to throw R1 out at the plate is still debatable IMO.

            But all-in-all, I don't see it as that bad of a managerial decision...because had it been a sac fly, and R3 is thrown out at the plate after tagging preserving the win...we'd be talking about how smart the manager was, instead of asking if his decision cost his team the game.

            That's the cool thing about baseball...sometimes you're the hammer, and sometimes you're the nail...just have to learn how to deal with it either way, and move on to the next game, next inning, next out, next AB, next pitch, and so on.

            In memory of "Catchingcoach" - Dave Weaver: February 28, 1955 - June 17, 2011

            Comment


            • #7
              I think the thing that lost the game was not leaving Carson Smith in another inning. Although the long run best interest of the team was that Smith have a good outing and gain confidence in that role (which he did). Leaving him in another inning might have wrecked that.

              I would have walked Gardner in that spot but I would have looked like a fool when Judge hit a grand slam so who knows. I never like coming back from down 3-0 in the count against a really hot hitter in a situation like that especially with an open base to put him on.

              Like Mud says though, shake it off and get after it tonight.

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm sure the team has data on this. Fans always get mad if an unconventional defensive alignment (like a shift) goes wrong. of course it happens that such an alignment gets beaten. if that happens people get mad but if a hit happens against conventional alignment it is just a hit and nobody questions it. however modern front offices don't think that way, they don't think what if we lose the game because of this but instead they think like if we play each situation 100 times which leads to more won games. they are not correct on this 100% either probably and even saber front offices do make bad calls in some cases but in the long run they are probably pretty good.

                this particular alignment probably did increase the chance to lose the game that inning but don't forget that if it would have been tied they only have a 50% chance to win it then plus you burn another reliever. thus the sox manager (who talks about this with the math guys) probably liked the chance of winning it right now for the risk of losing it right now over a chance to more likely get to an extra inning.
                I now have my own non commercial blog about training for batspeed and power using my training experience in baseball and track and field.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by dominik View Post
                  Fans always get mad if an unconventional defensive alignment (like a shift) goes wrong. of course it happens that such an alignment gets beaten. if that happens people get mad but if a hit happens against conventional alignment it is just a hit and nobody questions it..
                  Well stated.
                  At the HS level the default depth of OFs is deep, which I suppose keeps anyone (including the coach) from having any regrets.
                  A shallower "no-singles" depth is IMO smarter in many (most?) situations, but of course causes sadness/madness when it gets beaten, lol.
                  Similarly, HS corner infielders tend to cheat towards the foul lines.
                  Last edited by skipper5; 05-11-2018, 09:17 AM.
                  Skip

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by skipper5 View Post

                    Well stated.
                    At the HS level the default depth of OFs is deep, which I suppose keeps anyone (including the coach) from having any regrets.
                    A shallower "no-singles" depth is IMO smarter in many (most?) situations, but of course causes sadness/madness when it gets beaten, lol.
                    Similarly, HS corner infielders tend to cheat towards the foul lines.
                    I think this is not smart. A double is worth about 1.8 times a single and a triple is worth 2.3 times. So let's assume the average ball over the OF is worth two times a single then it is absolutely not smart to have 10 balls drop in front of the of and two going over it. It shouldn't be 1 to 1 of course but the math says about 2:1 is ideal. So if almost all balls drop before the of play shallower. In fact usually it probably would make more sense to play mostly shallow and only move back for the 2-3 bigger guys.
                    I now have my own non commercial blog about training for batspeed and power using my training experience in baseball and track and field.

                    Comment

                    Ad Widget

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X