THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

This question brings to mind this recent article by Malcolm Gladwell.

It’s been years since I’ve seen a HS game.  What are the characteristics of the sport at that level?

I say do it just to see what happens.

If you don’t mind pissing everyone off, go for it.

My only disagreement would be that you can position your outfielders in the opposite field and pitch everything on the outer half of the plate. I would be very surprised if HS players can pull those balls into the outfield.

At any rate, many more fly balls are hit to the opposite field than the pull field even without any pitching stunts. I wrote an article about it:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/why-flies-go-one-way-and-grounders-go-the-other/

Good luck finding a small school, low level talent pitcher who can consistently pound the outer half of the plate and throw > 60 MPH.  Kids at that level (and I played for a small school in a low talent level league) can either throw 70-80 or they can throw strikes, but they can’t do both.

At any rate, many more fly balls are hit to the opposite field than the pull field even without any pitching stunts.

Is that really true at lower levels?  I didn’t play in HS, but certainly before HS, our rightfielders barely got any chances when right-handed hitters were at the plate.

Before I actually enacted the 5IF/2OF alignment, I think I would spend a season charting everything out in detail.  How many GB actually make it between 3B and SS?  How many make it between SS and the second base bag, how many fly balls go towards each fielder and towards each gap?  How do the fly balls compare to the ground balls?  It’s tough to know the risk/reward without some rough data.  And not only would this help to guide your decision, but it should make it easier to convince your players to buy into the new alignment.

It also seems that if you’re going to do things really optimally, it would probably make more sense to play traditionally against the best hitters in the league or at least against the best flyball hitters in the league, and play with 5 IF against the weaker hitters who aren’t as likely to drive the ball in the OF.

You probably will need to wait a season to get the fielding data, I am sure there is some parent that has filmed all the games.

(Apologies for the ridiculous handle - the email Tango has posted above is from me, and I post here and at Dave’s site regularly with my real name, but I’d rather not use my real name in this context).  In response:

#1: Gary, the characteristics of high school baseball vary wildly.  I’ve only experienced Northern California hs baseball, but locally there is an elite high school private league (WCAL), which features a few future Division I players per team, and most players play all summer on competitive travel teams. Each team’s ace sits in the mid-to-high 80s, every team has a few guys with home run power, and the defense is clean at every position. 

Then there’s the league my team plays in, which suffers from the mass exodus of elite talent to the private school league.  This league is exactly as Cameron describes in post #4 - velo tops out in the high 70s/low 80s, but it is wildly erractic; your decent strike-throwers throw in the low 70s and aren’t really exceptional at throwing strikes, either. Nobody spots their off speed stuff with any kid of consistency.
(However, you also have umps that are desirous to to expand the strike zone - I always tell my kids that umps “are paid by the game, not by the hour”. A Jack Cust approach doesn’t work like you’d expect, because the umps don’t reward terrific plate discipline).
Many, many runs are scored on the basis of poor fielding and walks.  In the entire league (more than 150 games between them), there might be only five home runs hit over the wall all season.

As such, I’m interested in trying the five-IF approach because, no one in this league is losing games because balls are being crushed to the outfield wall consistently.  It’s an inability to convert playable BIP into outs.

#3 and #4:  Matt, David’s point is spot-on, at least at the talent level we’re talking about in my league.  Hitting the ball with authority to the opposite field is a really refined hitting skill; very few of these kids have it.  So they do one of two things with an outside fastball - roll over it to the left side (if it’s thrown hard), or pull it with authority, because outside fbs help them get good extension (if it’s thrown soft). 
The bigger problem though is the one David offered up in #4:  low-quality high school pitchers can’t consistently locate to one half of the plate.

Ubelmann’s point in #5 is true of my league. My right fielder gets less than once chance per game off the bat of RHB’s, and when he does, we all hold our breath that he’ll catch it. 

Wow, Tom. You did a really great job commenting at Shysterball. Geoff Baker has some really wacky logic/reasons for things. To me, the guy doesn’t make any sense at all.

There is ikely to be another benefit from this approach if your assessment of the talent level among the teams is correct. Psychologically, this is apt to cause problems for the opponents. Kids at that level who are mediocre (if that’s a correct description) are likely going to try to do too much – whether it’s trying to hit it the other way or trying to make certain they at least hit the ball in the air to the outfield.

While not as clever and well thought out as this plan, I took advantage of this mental aspect when I played JV in high school. No, my team wasn’t very good (1-15, I think), but neither was our competition. I may have been the best player on the team, but that’s not saying much. As a hitter, I had a decent eye. For the season, I did something like hit .375 with an OBP of .600. Sounds good, but trust me, we weren’t.

Anyway, one of the tactics I employed was to use a Rickey Henderson-style crouch at the plate. I did this simply because I knew the idea of a small strike zone got into pitchers’ heads. And it worked as far as we were concerned. All I needed to do was get on base, by hit or by walk, and I would likely score via hits, passed balls, wild pitches, stolen bases, or some combination thereof.

Did it rob me of some power, as a friend’s father often pointed out? Probably. But my only goal was to get on base because at this level a single was often as good as a triple. Will the psychological aspect help in your league? You’ll have to make that assessment, but it sounds like something worth considering as it may possibly be an additional benefit to your plan.

And even if the psychology doesn’t apply in this case, it’s another area to pursue for advantages. I can’t remember which Major League player did it recently, but someone was on third with a decent lead. After the pitch, the runner kept the lead, but having noticed the catcher lobbing the ball back to the pitcher previously, broke once the catcher threw the ball. The runner from third scored easily.

I was taught that in Little League and I used it through my pathetic high school JV career. At those levels, there is also an additional psychological advantage, and you can see it on players’ faces. The pitcher is panicking while he waits for the ball to get to him, this impacts the likelihood that he’ll make a good throw, and the catcher is usually nervous since he knows there’s a runner charging hard and there is likely to be a collision.

Similarly, the delayed steal is a good tactic. And anything else you can think of to tactfully (i.e., using good sportsmanship) get in the opponent’s head is likely to benefit your team. If your pitcher has some control, inside pitches are also effective, as are eye-level pitches simply for how kids at this level often then perceive a strike as being too low.

Of course, using any of these tactics requires your players have the necessary skills. But the base stealing methods, for example, only require a fast runner (on base) who you can teach how to read these situations or to whom you can relay a sign. But there are some you can employ just to get in the opponents’ heads regardless of the players you have batting or on base. For example, if the third base coach calls timeout to talk to a batter as if instructions are being given, this can disrupt a pitcher. So, too, can having the third base coach yell over to a runner on first, give some signs, then have the player nod, even if no play is on.

Just some stuff to consider.

When I was in Babe Ruth league (13-15 year olds) my coach had us play a 5 man infield for one year.  Not because the infielders couldn’t make the plays on the balls, but because the distance that most of the players could hit the ball in the outfield wasn’t that great.  Therefore our two outfielders, who were relatively quick to the ball, could cover almost all of the balls hit to the outfield.  We didn’t shade to the pull side any more than we usually would with three outfielders.  Even though hitting to the opposite field on purpose is not a skill that many players that age have, hitting to the opposite field because you are behind on a fastball is common.  Plus there was a very short outfild fence in left and no fence in right so we had to protect against balls hit to right that might roll for home runs.

The infield operated pretty much as described by the poster except deeper.  The fifth infielder playe a little deeper behind 2nd than he proposes, but still close enough to take throws on steals and double plays. Our other infielders had strong enough arms to make the throws to first, and the skill of the other teams hitters was mostly in hitting hard ground balls and line drives so playing the infielders a little deeper cut down on the number of hits.  There was relatively little bunting for a base hit at that age as few players had the speed to beat out most bunts.

We were very successful that year.

Thank you for the terrific feedback. 

Peter #12: 

How was the defense received by you and your teammates?  Did your coach do or say anything upfront to sell you guys on it?

What was the reaction of parents and opposing coaches?  I’m visualizing that many will complain that I’m not teaching these kids “real baseball”.

From a strictly strategic point of view, I think you can make a pretty good case that you’d be better off with the 5/2 alignment.  On the psychological end, you will get some static feedback, especially if it starts working.  You’ll get it from a couple of different places and you might as well prepare for it.

1) The first fluke triple/IPHR that goes down the opposite field line, you will be lambasted for such a ridiculous set up by the parents and possibly by your own players.  It doesn’t matter that you can point to five grounders that were converted to outs that otherwise would have been base hits.  People have an inate desire for the familiar, even if it is less-efficient (or sadly, abusive), and will focus on ways to get back to the familiar.  That first triple will be “proof by example” that your scheme doesn’t work.  In public health, you would be what’s known as an “early adapter.” It’s hard to be an early adapter.  If it succeeds, within five years, you’ll be called a “pioneer” and everyone in your league will copy.  But before you’re called a pioneer, first you have to be called an idiot.

2) You’re probably also breaking something of an unspoken contract with the other coaches/parents.  In the majors, when teams put three infielders on the right side of the infield for a lefty hitter who pulls a lot, it’s just business.  These are professionals (i.e., they get paid) and so market norms are in place and everyone understands that the goal here is to win the game.  Opposing managers have simply found a weakness in the hitter’s game and made a sensible adjustment to take the strategic advantage.

But I presume that in this league, you’ve got kids from around the same areas and some of the parents might even know each other.  People generally know that none of these kids will play past 12th grade and these kids aren’t paid.  You’re in the land of social—rather than market—norms now.  This isn’t business.  Deep down, the assumption is that this is a really advanced Little League game where we all shake hands afterwards and have juice boxes after pretending that we are big leaguers.  You might not see it like that, but there are going to be a lot of people who do.  And they will yell at you.

In employing your shift, you’re pointing out the flaws in the neighbors’ kids (try it sometime!) and you’re “unfairly robbing them” of a few base hits.  (The right to a base hit is in the 3rd amendment I think… or the commerce clause.) Neither of these is technically illegal, but they’re things that you don’t do in polite society.

3) Psychologically, the opposing batters probably will change their approach.  They might try to hit flares to the opposite field, probably to your advantage, but be prepared for the coach that can suggest a strategy that will offset yours.  The fact that your defense will improve will probably frustrate the other team to no end.  You out-thought them.

As a result, your players will probably take some abuse on and off the field.  If you can’t neutralize the advantage on the field, try another way.  Since your players are not honoring the norms of the community, they will be called the names that 16 year old boys throw at one another.  They will be accused of not being “man enough” (or something like that) to play ‘real baseball.’ Baseball (and adolescent male-hood) have traditionally been defined by physical strength, not out-thinking the opponent.

So yes, the 5/2 will probably work.  And people will hate you for it at first.  Eventually, if it works, you’ll be a visionary.  But at first, you might be the most hated man in your league.  I suppose the decision is yours as to whether you want to suffer the slings and arrows.  And win a few more games.

I played in a company league.  The opposing hitter (a co-worker) was a notorious pull hitter.  It would be a topic of discussion all the time, at the bar, at the office, everywhere.  He says he simply prefers to hit that way.

I took my 3B, and moved him to the rover position, between CF, RF, and 2B.  As SS, I moved over to right in front of secondbase.  He hit a (HARD) groundball one step to my right of secondbase (i.e., toward thirdbase).  It was the most he has ever gone to opposite field as I have ever seen him.  He was P-SSED at me.  He figured it’s a friendly game, and so, we should just align ourselves in a friendly manner, with a modest shift at best.  What I did (putting in a rover and taking out the 3B) never happened before (or since!).

It depends how important the game is to everyone who is playing.

In another company (softball) game, as is typical in these leagues, there are alot of bad players, and they are hidden in RF or 2B.  My good friend, a girl, was playing RF. 

In softball, I can place the ball wherever I want.  I told my teammate that my intention is to pull the ball down the 3B line foul, so that the OF will see me as a pull hitter and shift, and then I’ll go opposite field to RF since I know she can’t catch the ball.  Is it ok?

He responded that screw the friendship thing, that this is a game to win.  I did.  She was P-SSED at me when I got my triple.

The moral of the story is that regardless of how you think the game is being played, that there will always be one person who will take what you do personally.

Are any of you familiar with the A-11 in California HS football?  How was that received by the teens?  If you are unfamiliar with that offensive system, Chris at Smart Football has posted about it a few times.

Pizza Cutter (#14):
I think you underestimate the competitiveness of most high school leagues.  Hell, even in my little league games, we had parents get thrown out for arguing balls and strikes.

I’m of the opinion that, in a league where you’re keeping score, any strategy within the rules that leads to more runs is acceptable.  Of course, this doesn’t apply to intentionally injuring someone.  I would also not use this rule of thumb in younger leagues, where the purpose is officially to teach kids about sportsmanship and teamwork and just about sports in general.

Sabercurious #12 - My coach was the Bobby Knight of youth baseball in Fairfax, Virginia.  He was autocratic, but a proven winner at every level.  Parents either loved him or hated him, but they never, EVER, questioned his authority.  My first year playing for him he cut his own son from the team.  He had a practice 3 hours every day except Sundays and game days from as early in the year as we could make the practice field playable until the end of the season. Actually, I should have said his practice field as he leased the land, built the field, and maintained it so he wouldn’t have to compete with other teams for practice time on public fields.  You were expected to be doing something baseball related every minute of practice.  He had at least three helper coaches who came every day for practice.  While he threw batting practice, one coach hit ground balls to infielders, one hit to outfielders and one worked with the pitchers.  After batting practice we worked on game situations so that every player knew who was going to field bunts, who was going to cut off balls from the outfield and where the cutoff man was going to stand, and where we were to go to back up each play.  And you WERE going to back up on every play even if you were the right fielder on a ball hit to left field.  (You ran in to back up the throw to 2B)

More than you asked or wanted to know, but I thought you might want to hear what makes a winning coach and a winning team.  He sold us on his defense by telling us that was what we were going to do.  That was it.  We knew it wasn’t up for discussion.  That was the same way he sold me on changing from a very closed stance to the most radical open stance anyone had ever seen; I literally stood facing the pitcher.  My JV high school coach laughed at me when I tried out for his team, until I hit his first three pitches as line drives back at his head.  I learned more about baseball from my Babe Ruth coach, Jim Scott, than any coach I ever had, including college and semi pro ball.

Gary #17:

The A-11 founders at Piedmont High School are somewhat close to Sabercurious Coach’s area (and the area where I live now too but in another direction). Most people haven’t taken it well, not really because it’s not conventional or “pure” but moreso because it is pretty effective and confusing for the defense. In fact, I think some rules might’ve been changed so that it indirectly outlawed the A-11 (or at least I think I read something about that on ESPN or in ESPN the Magazine earlier this year).

Aaron B. (#20):
While I can’t speak to how people outside the offense reacted to the A-11, I would also like to add a bit to what you’ve said, based off what Chris at smartfootball.blogspot.com has written.

Basically, the only reason the A-11 offense was legal in the first place is due to a rule that is used in the NFL, NCAA, and Texas high schools that is/was not included in most states’ rule books.  Basically, at higher levels of football, the A-11 would be an illegal formation because it is not an “obvious” kicking formation.  It involves having ineligible receivers a step off the line of scrimmage, which is only legal in punt and field goal formations in the NFL, NCAA, and Texas high schools.

So the A-11 is not really the same case as the question that began this thread.  Sabercurious Coach’s league, I assume, operates under the same rules as baseball everywhere, whereas Piedmont High School’s league does/did not.