Identifying the Ideal Candidate for the Five-Man Infield
In The Only Rule Is It Has to Work, the excellent new book by Ben Lindbergh and Sam Miller, the authors served as the baseball operations department for the Sonoma Stompers, an independent league team in the Pacific Association of Professional Baseball Clubs. The analytically inclined writers-turned-executives were given freedom to make roster, lineup and strategical decisions based on data, and among the most radical ideas explored in the book is the implementation of a five-man infield against an opposing player named Scott David.

The Stompers deploy a five-man infield against Scott David of the Pittsburg Diamonds, with Mike Jackson Jr. on the mound. (Source)
David is one of the best hitters in the league, one with seemingly no exploitable flaws in his approach, and the authors were struggling to come up with anything substantial to provide their pitchers in a scouting report. That is, until an off-hand remark was made about the possibility of enacting a five-man infield, and the realization that David was, in fact, the ideal candidate for the radical defensive alignment, for four key reasons:
- He hits a bunch of ground balls
- He sprays those ground balls all over the infield
- He is an effective ground ball hitter
- He has very predictable fly ball tendencies
As soon as I finished the chapter, I knew I needed to find Major League Baseball’s Scott David. Into the numbers I dove.
Using the FanGraphs leaderboards and BaseballSavant, I was able to put a number on each of the four tendencies above. Step one, ground ball rate, is simple enough to find. For step two, I calculated the difference between pull ground ball rate, and opposite-field ground ball rate to serve as a proxy for how often a player sprays his ground balls. For step three, I simply used ground ball OPS — no point in bringing in an outfielder if the player’s ground balls aren’t doing any damage. And for step four, I found the absolute value of a player’s pulled fly ball rate as a way to highlight predictable fly ball tendencies. Then I summed the z-scores of each of the four numbers to come up with a “Five-Man Infield Score.”
In the top five, we find guys like Eric Hosmer and Nori Aoki, but doing this to a lefty, as Lindbergh and Miller did, is admittedly more dangerous due to the exposure of the right field corner for an easy triple. Right-hander David Freese pulls too many of his ground balls; a normal infield shift will do the trick for him. Jean Segura is a decent candidate, though his ground ball rate and spray tendencies are not nearly as extreme as the number one name that pops up on our spreadsheet, far and away the most ideal candidate in Major League Baseball for the five-man infield: Howie Kendrick.
Look no further than his spray chart for convincing. The yellow dots are rough estimates of the optimal positioning against Kendrick in the proposed five-man infield:

Kendrick’s hit a ground ball on 65% of his balls in play, one of the highest rates in baseball. He hits them all over the infield, so shifting him with four infielders is impossible, and while Kendrick has been a pretty poor hitter this year, his OPS on ground balls is actually above-average, so there’s still hits to be taken away here. And as we can plainly see in his spray chart, there simply hasn’t been a need for a left fielder against Kendrick, so bring him in to play behind the second base bag, shift the the center fielder over slightly, and, voila! We’ve got a five-man infield, perfectly designed for Howie Kendrick, the only obvious candidate for a five-man infield in today’s MLB.
Now who’s going to be the first team to do it?
August used to cover the Indians for MLB and ohio.com, but now he's here and thinks writing these in the third person is weird. So you can reach me on Twitter @AugustFG_ or e-mail at august.fagerstrom@fangraphs.com.
Definitely seems like something the Dodgers would do. Luckily (or unluckily) for them, they’re the ones who have Kendrick.
Astros, Dodgers, maybe the Rays, and the Red Sox all come to mind.
The Red Sox seem like a particularly strong choice for three reasons: Fenway basically doesn’t have a left field, one of the Red Sox outfielder’s natural position is second base (and another is either a catcher or a super-utility infield/outfield guy), and also the Red Sox as an organization generally deploy an outfield with at least two “natural” center fielders (due to the size of right field).
In fact, if you overlay Fenway’s outfield over your spray chart, things work really well. Brock Holt would probably be the one to shift forward, and it seems likely that Bradley and Betts would have very little trouble covering the rest of the territory.
I’ve always loved the idea of unusual defensive alignments. One idea that I’ve had is the three infielder alignment. One guy playing midway between 2nd and third base, one guy playing at straight up 2nd behind the pitcher, and one guy playing between 1st and 2nd. Then you have 2 outfielders playing left-center and right-center, and 2 outfielders playing near the lines. You could probably effectively eliminate doubles and triples with an alignment like this. But I think there would be a couple of weird quirks that may make it unworkable.
– The pitcher would have to be expected to cover first base on almost every play.
– The catcher would have to back up third and first. meaning they couldn’t cover home. That is the big one.
– You would have to work out a shift to hold a runner on first, and keep runners from stealing 3rd.
But I do wish that some team some day would get really unorthodox with its defensive alignments.
I think you can give up the catcher backup thing. Not ideal, but how often does the catcher backing up a base matter? The bigger issue I see is that there can’t be anyone on base. Maybe you feel safe with a guy on third; second and third; bases loaded and guy on second, but even some of those you’re playing with fire. And yeah, the pitcher covering first on more plays than usual would probably cause problems. Still, love this idea. I’m sure there are occasional scenarios where this makes sense. Maybe works better with a hitter you’d shift anyway: three infielders on the right side, extra outfielder in right center.
Yeah, you’re probably right about the catcher thing. And I don’t really have a solution for a guy on first base except 1) going back to a traditional alignment in those situations or 2) just don’t hold runners at first.
I was thinking that this could be implemented by a team (like the Royals) that goes against the player evaluation grain and targets fly ball pitchers. You could probably obliterate the wOBA on balls in play for a player like Chris Young or Ian Kennedy if you regularly used 4 outfielders. Or maybe its just a crazy idea and would never work in a million years. But I’d like to see a team try something like that one day.
The Royals have essentially had a four-man outfield when Dyson, Cain and Gordon are in the lineup together. 😉
But with any of them out and Young or Kennedy on the mound, I’d love to see them try this.
And what do they do when the batter bunts?
Same thing you do with a regular overshift : gamble that he won’t. Some never do.
Next you have to look at the 4 man outfield candidates & 4 man outfield situations.
JW
Grumpy Copy Editor sez: “strategic” >>>> “strategical,” not really a word.
If a team is considering doing this, they might mow the outfield grass in left a little higher. That way any ground balls that still get through are slowed down and don’t make it to the wall.