Should the MLB Outlaw the Shift?

Last Friday, while I was visiting my mom in my hometown of San Diego, we decided to catch a Padres game. It was a nightcap, and the Padres were facing off against the Mets. The weather was immaculate, and I even caught a foul ball in my cap, a ball that was later given away to a random six-year-old kid. Alas, the plight of being an adult at a baseball game. It was a fantastic game that ended in a 2-0 Padres victory. 

The Los Angeles Dodgers (above) shift more than any team in baseball, deploying a shift in 56.2% of total plate appearances. (via Sports Illustrated )

Although she’s not the world’s biggest baseball fan, my mom nonetheless has an acute eye for one Manny Machado. When he first signed with the Padres, he lived somewhat close to my mom, and I think that’s when she first discovered her love for the four-time All-Star., At one point during the game, my mom said something along the lines of “Is that Manny in the outfield?” As a self-professed baseball nerd, I described with great detail the reasons why he was in shallow right field and the effects that the shift has had on baseball as a whole. 

As often happens, I got quite heated amidst this discussion, but that’s neither here nor there. A positive consequence of this conversation is that it allowed me to revisit both sides of this debate -- those arguments in favor of the shift, and those in opposition to the shift. This article will outline a brief discussion of each side, and I’ll close with my own opinion on whether or not the MLB should outlaw (or at least limit) defensive shifting.

Arguments in Support of the Shift

The shift is deployed for a multitude of purposes. But in general, teams use it to stifle offensive production, and at first glance, it seems to be doing its job. For instance, in 2017, players who saw at least 100 pitches both against the shift and not against the shift saw their batting averages drop drastically. Of the 201 qualified hitters, righties hit .302 without the shift and just .277 with the shift. Lefties were also heavily affected by the shift, hitting .298 without the shift, and just .283 with the shift. 

However, perhaps batting average isn’t the best metric by which to measure the shift’s effectiveness against hitters. Another way in which we can measure a hitter’s success is through the use of Weighted On-Base Average, or “wOBA.” This metric attempts to measure the relative value of each distinct offensive outcome. In other words, unlike batting average, which values each hit equally, wOBA values a triple at a higher value than a single. An average wOBA is roughly .320.

In 2021, righties have a wOBA of .330, whereas lefties have a wOBA of merely .310, against the shift. Although not as drastic a change as their respective drops in batting average, neither lefties nor righties are hitting at a particularly effective clip against the shift when analyzing their success in terms of wOBA. However, it doesn’t look like the shift has made such a drastic impact so as to justify its complete omission either. 

I think another important argument in favor of the shift comes down to the freedom of teams to have the ability to utilize their own data to come up with an effective game plan against their opponents. If opposing teams are having trouble hitting against the shift, then perhaps the hitting coaches need to make some adjustments to find success. Perhaps, for example, bunting down the third-base line when the entire infield is shifted to the right side would prevent defenses from shifting so often. 

One way to overcome the shift is to hit the ball over the shift entirely. For instance, so far in 2021, 6.6% of pitches against the shift have resulted in the ball leaving the ballpark. Hitters are being forced to elevate the ball over the shifted infield, resulting in more homers. If hitters are already starting to adjust to the shift, then what’s the point in outlawing it all together?

 The underlying data has shown that although the shift has been effective, it has not been so effective as to preclude its utilization altogether. Furthermore, teams should retain the ability to utilize the data that they collect in any way that they please, and it should then be up to opposing hitters to find a way around a shifted infield. 

Arguments Against the Shift

Although the shift hasn’t drastically affected hitters’ underlying numbers, the utilization of the shift (especially at the rate that it’s being used) has heavily contributed to the “Launch Angle Era” that has developed over the past few seasons. Some form of the shift has been utilized on roughly 32.3% of plate appearances in 2021, compared to just 13.7% of plate appearances in 2016. This increased usage has forced hitters to alter their approach at the plate in order to combat the shift, leading to some unintended consequences.

The Launch Angle Era has taken the league over by storm, due in part to the rise of the defensive shift. (via Halos Heaven)

As mentioned above, hitters have adjusted to the shift by increasing their launch angles, elevating the ball above the infielders’ grasps. However, the batting average for balls in play (otherwise known as “BABIP”) is the lowest since 1992. Furthermore, rising alongside launch angles have been strikeout rates, which have risen 5.7% since 2015, sitting at roughly 27%. In other words, batters are popping up a lot more in an attempt to avoid being caught by the shift. 

However, the increased usage of the shift hasn’t necessarily correlated with its increased acceptance. As Alex Bregman said so wonderfully, “When I’m hitting, there should be no shifts, but when we’re on defense, we can shift whenever we want.” The role that the shift has played in the “feast or famine” sort of offensive approach has frustrated many players, coaches, and front-office executives, leading many of them to propose banning the shift. Much of this is due to the effect that the shift has had on the game, including lowering batting averages, wOBA, and BABIP, all while increasing the strikeout rate throughout the league. 

Another argument proposed by opponents of the shift is not to completely eliminate its use, but rather to limit its use. Some ideas that have been proposed have been to require two players on either side of the infield, or to necessitate that all infielders are actually in the infield (and not in the outfield grass like my mom pointed out), or a combination of the two. Perhaps with the shift’s limitation, we would see more consistent offensive play, something that fans, players, and coaches have been calling for some time now. 

My Opinion

I am a believer in the old adage “hit it where they ain't.” I know -- it’s easier said than done. And I don’t actually think the solution is that simple. But I do think that limiting the shift would promote the old version of baseball that I like seeing. I’m partial to the “small ball” era of baseball -- bunts, hit-and-runs, stolen bases, and squeeze plays. So I think limiting the shift and de-incentivizing hitters from going all-in on the launch angle philosophy would be beneficial for the game. But, that’s just my two cents.