When the Giants signed Nori Aoki to a small contract last week, it looked like a sound investment even without digging too deep. The Giants wanted to add another regular outfielder. They found one for cheap, one who can play adequate defense while getting on base more often than the average hitter. While it’s true that Aoki doesn’t hit for much power, that’s just not his game, and he’s valuable despite that, just as David Ortiz is valuable even though he doesn’t steal bases. All right, so it’s not the exact same thing, but you see where I’m going. Focus on what a player can do, and so on and so forth.
Yet there’s also interest in the details. Aoki makes a lot of contact, which is one of the many ways he’s different from, say, Michael Morse. He puts the ball in play, just like Casey McGehee puts the ball in play, and the Giants have put together a higher-contact offense as opposed to a higher-power offense. But there’s also another thing about Aoki: he might be the least-shiftable hitter in the major leagues. He sprays the ball all over the place, unpredictably, which makes him tricky to defend. Dividing the field into thirds (instead of halves), the average hitter pulls about 54% of his groundballs. Aoki has pulled just 34% of his groundballs, meaning there’s no sense in moving your infielders around. He’ll hit the ball where he hits the ball.
As you certainly know, teams are shifting more and more often. Maybe you’re familiar with the numbers; maybe you’ve just had a sense. Here are some numbers, if you want them. As recently as 2011, there were just shy of 2,500 balls put in play with a shift on. The next year, that number went up 94%. Then that number went up 79%. Then that number went up 63%. There were 564% as many shifts in 2014 as there were in 2011. Shifts are even rising dramatically against right-handed hitters, which is particularly unconventional. There are two points. One, shifts have gone way up. Two, they’re going to continue to do that. Why wouldn’t they? Shifts make sense. Put people where the ball goes and the ball won’t get through as much.
Shifts are on the mind. At this point, they’re everywhere in the game, and one can no longer be surprised when a shift is put on. So there’s been talk about counter-shifts. The obvious maneuver is to put down a bunt, but for whatever reason, hitters have been reluctant to do this very often. And then there’s the simple idea of just using the whole field. The problem being, a hitter can’t just start doing that. A hitter’s swing tends to be a hitter’s swing.
I should work to get closer to the point. To jump ahead: I got curious to know which teams, for 2015, look to be the most- and least-shiftable. Now, I don’t think teams are built specifically to counter the shift, but that doesn’t mean we can’t pay attention. The 2015 offenses have mostly been built. Who looks the most susceptible to the infield shift? Who, on the other hand, looks the least? Where will there and won’t there be extra hits prevented?
Read the rest at Just a Bit Outside.