4th and short.

[Bull94]

2 minutes ago, BDYZR said:

How many years did baseball play 1st, 2nd, ss and 3rd pretty much straight up until Maddon looked at computer graphs and moved the ss to the right side of second base and the second baseman to short right field when facing a dead pull lefty?

it's insane the amount of analytics they use in baseball now. all the best teams have departments full of people now. red sox, astros, cubs, etc.

[AstoriaBullsFan]

In a 24-10 game against your rival, in a game you know will be high scoring, where you have nothing left to lose, absolutely go for it on 4th and 1. What did the defense do that made Strong think they could hold C from scoring again and get the ball back to the offense with enough time to score 2-3 touchdowns? We had no momentum on offense after the first quarter, so something had to change to ignite that flame; punting will not get your offensive going. Also, Mitchell Wilcox has been clutch all season; he's the one I would have trusted to pick up that yard on a short crossing route. 

[Dave_Glaser]

Bottom line: In a rivalry game where we had absolutely nothing to lose, we ran a conservative game plan, took no chances, tried nothing unusual. This was a let-it-all-hang-out opportunity. Wasted.

[BrassBulls12]

2 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

you have to play the odds to give yourself the best chance to win.

what were your situational irregularities? his moron OC? He can override a play.

How the offense has performed that day is one of the irregularities, another one is the offense you are playing and the likelihood of the putting the game away if you fail.

Do you really want your career Defensive minded coach calling the play? Is that any better? 

[Bull94]

4 minutes ago, BrassBulls12 said:

And if you watch any of Bill Ripken on MLB network, he will present you with numbers that even with the shift the Batting averages don't change. So is the shift really doing anything but put your defense in awkward positions? 

funny this MLB article says that the shift does in fact work.

When making contact, those hitters batted .299 without the shift and .281 against the shift. It hurt righties (.302 without the shift, .277 with the shift) even more than lefties (.298 without, .283 with), but it lowered averages on both sides.

https://www.mlb.com/news/9-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-shift/c-276706888

[BrassBulls12]

What no one has said yet, Is "I believe we going to ge that yard" and if you can't say that then you're basically saying we should have just gave the game away right then and there. 

[Bull94]

2 minutes ago, BrassBulls12 said:

How the offense has performed that day is one of the irregularities, another one is the offense you are playing and the likelihood of the putting the game away if you fail.

Do you really want your career Defensive minded coach calling the play? Is that any better? 

the guy has coached football for how long? you don't trust him to make a play call on 4th and 1? all the more reason to send him packing.

4 minutes ago, Dave_Glaser said:

Bottom line: In a rivalry game where we had absolutely nothing to lose, we ran a conservative game plan, took no chances, tried nothing unusual. This was a let-it-all-hang-out opportunity. Wasted.

exactly. leave it all on the field.

[BrassBulls12]

2 minutes ago, Bull94 said:

funny this MLB article says that the shift does in fact work.

When making contact, those hitters batted .299 without the shift and .281 against the shift. It hurt righties (.302 without the shift, .277 with the shift) even more than lefties (.298 without, .283 with), but it lowered averages on both sides.

https://www.mlb.com/news/9-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-shift/c-276706888

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/24265798/mlb-myth-buster-shift-curbing-runs-creating-them

In fact, the data suggest that the shift doesn't do what it's supposed to do. It's designed to stop grounders, but it's supposed to help the defense prevent runs. And, in four fantastic articles (1, 2, 3, 4) at Baseball Prospectus this spring, Carleton found good evidence that it's not doing this.

[Bull94]

2 minutes ago, BrassBulls12 said:

What no one has said yet, Is "I believe we going to ge that yard" and if you can't say that then you're basically saying we should have just gave the game away right then and there. 

it doesn't matter what you think. the math says go for it.

hell I didn't think we were going to win. does that mean I didn't want them to pull out all the stops to try?

[Bull94]

5 minutes ago, BrassBulls12 said:

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/24265798/mlb-myth-buster-shift-curbing-runs-creating-them

In fact, the data suggest that the shift doesn't do what it's supposed to do. It's designed to stop grounders, but it's supposed to help the defense prevent runs. And, in four fantastic articles (1, 2, 3, 4) at Baseball Prospectus this spring, Carleton found good evidence that it's not doing this.

 yes runs are up in baseball but it's not because of the shift. it's because of the launch angles and the value of home run hitters now. it's also why there are far more strikeouts.

quote from your article

The data suggests it does do what it's designed to do: It puts fielders where the ball most often goes and turns more ground balls and line drives into outs. There are different ways to measure this, and different questions one must resolve to do so, but this has been a pretty consistent finding:

Edited November 29, 2018 by Bull94