Curious about lefties and defensive positions

[majesty95]

Here is a perfect example of it being attempted (albeit the runner was not a force at 3B)

Rockies' odd 6-5-3 putout | whitesox.com

[majesty95]

Originally Posted by RchW

So why do it?

Why not? You get the lead runner with a chance at a double play?

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by majesty95

If the SS is ranging into the hole to his right, the easier and shorter throw is to 3B. You take the force out. Sometimes you have the chance to make a relay to 1st. Its not common. However, I've seen them and turned them as a 3B. You don't always get the guy at 1B (probably dont more often than not) but they happen.

Its neither here nor there though. I was just saying that a 3B can turn a DP. Its completely irrelevant to the topic though.

I bet you can't find an example of it happening in MLB.

[majesty95]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

I bet you can't find an example of it happening in MLB.

Look above, I posted one lol

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by majesty95

Look above, I posted one lol

No you didn't. I want to see an example of a third baseman turning a double play at third on a ball hit to the shortstop.

[majesty95]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

No you didn't. I want to see an example of a third baseman turning a double play at third on a ball hit to the shortstop.

I posted an example of one being attempted. If you don't think its possible or ever used, feel free to form that opinion. What does it really matter?

My point was disputing the claim that a 3B doesn't turn a DP he only starts them. a 3B can turn them, whether by the mthod I stated or by touching third and going to first. Either way, that statement was factually inaccurate. All I was pointing out. Maybe my method was more rare than I remember but the point still remains the same lol

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by majesty95

I posted an example of one being attempted.

No you didn't. You posted an attempt by the shortstop to throw out a runner trying to advance to third on a groundball to the left side of the infield. Had the third baseman tagged him for an out there would have been no throw to first. Luckily for Tulowitzki the third baseman was aware enough to know he couldn't tag the runner and immediately relayed it to first for the out.

My point was disputing the claim that a 3B doesn't turn a DP he only starts them. a 3B can turn them, whether by the mthod I stated or by touching third and going to first. Either way, that statement was factually inaccurate. All I was pointing out. Maybe my method was more rare than I remember but the point still remains the same lol

The statement was made in relation to the claim that a third baseman turns a double play every three games on average. Which is closer to the truth, that they turn zero every three games on average or three?

[majesty95]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

No you didn't. You posted an attempt by the shortstop to throw out a runner trying to advance to third on a groundball to the left side of the infield. Had the third baseman tagged him for an out there would have been no throw to first. Luckily for Tulowitzki the third baseman was aware enough to know he couldn't tag the runner and immediately relayed it to first for the out.



The statement was made in relation to the claim that a third baseman turns a double play every three games on average. Which is closer to the truth, that they turn zero every three games on average or three?

I'm confused as to what your point is? Are you having a bad day and trying to find a pointless argument? Relax. Go find something better to do (like play OOTP )

Turning or starting two is just a semantical argument for the sake of arguing. Most people understood that I meant they were part of a DP every three games. And it doesn't matter. Its irrelevant to the point of the thread.

You also make the assumption that had the 3B been close enough to tag the runner he wouldn't have "needed" to throw to 1st. Why? There's only one out. Lol. He had time if he could've just tagged him and thrown. I've attempted it more than once. Similarly, he could have time if he was playing near the bag (guarding the lines perhaps?) and the SS throws to him to get the force and possible DP.

Either way, its a pointless argument. The point of the thread was whether the game prevents lefties from playing non-traditional IF spots which turned, logically, into whether they should be allowed to. If you just want to be right or prove me wrong then fine. I'm wrong. Feel better?

[RchW]

Originally Posted by majesty95

I'm confused as to what your point is? Are you having a bad day and trying to find a pointless argument? Relax. Go find something better to do (like play OOTP )

Turning or starting two is just a semantical argument for the sake of arguing. Most people understood that I meant they were part of a DP every three games. And it doesn't matter. Its irrelevant to the point of the thread.

You also make the assumption that had the 3B been close enough to tag the runner he wouldn't have "needed" to throw to 1st. Why? There's only one out. Lol. He had time if he could've just tagged him and thrown. I've attempted it more than once. Similarly, he could have time if he was playing near the bag (guarding the lines perhaps?) and the SS throws to him to get the force and possible DP.

Either way, its a pointless argument. The point of the thread was whether the game prevents lefties from playing non-traditional IF spots which turned, logically, into whether they should be allowed to. If you just want to be right or prove me wrong then fine. I'm wrong. Feel better?

I think you brought this on yourself. Maybe climb down off that horse that's giving us all a sore neck.

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by majesty95

I'm confused as to what your point is? Are you having a bad day and trying to find a pointless argument? Relax. Go find something better to do (like play OOTP )

Turning or starting two is just a semantical argument for the sake of arguing. Most people understood that I meant they were part of a DP every three games. And it doesn't matter. Its irrelevant to the point of the thread.

I thought by ending my comment with "just sayin'" would indicate that it wasn't a serious argument but instead was just correcting you on terminology in a playful manner. Kind of like reminding novice poker players that when they have AK in their hand and there are two aces on the flop they do not in fact have a "set", they have "trips". The reason I make the distinction is because currently the "turn dp" rating is required to be at a certain level for third basemen in OOTP to get a rating at third which doesn't make sense since they almost never actually turn double plays.

You also make the assumption that had the 3B been close enough to tag the runner he wouldn't have "needed" to throw to 1st. Why? There's only one out. Lol. He had time if he could've just tagged him and thrown. I've attempted it more than once. Similarly, he could have time if he was playing near the bag (guarding the lines perhaps?) and the SS throws to him to get the force and possible DP.

It has nothing to do with need. There is no time to tag a runner at third after having the ball thrown to you by the shortstop and then throw to first to get the batter unless he falls down on the way to first. The point was that there was no intention by Tulo to start a double play. He was simply trying for a fielder's choice to get the lead runner. It was a poor play by him that got saved by the quick thinking third baseman. Also there was no force play so that has nothing to do with whether he'd have time or not.

[majesty95]

Brought on what? lol Is this a lynching?

Its ridiculous to argue semantics for no reason. It doesn't serve to better the conversation. Maybe I misunderstood the 3B comment. Cool. No biggie. Let's move on. Far better things to talk about than that. Lol

The question was whether the game prohibits lefties from playing an IF spot other than 1B? No they don't. Should they? Up for debate.

Carry on...

[majesty95]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

I thought by ending my comment with "just sayin'" would indicate that it wasn't a serious argument but instead was just correcting you on terminology in a playful manner. Kind of like reminding novice poker players that when they have AK in their hand and there are two aces on the flop they do not in fact have a "set", they have "trips". The reason I make the distinction is because currently the "turn dp" rating is required to be at a certain level for third basemen in OOTP to get a rating at third which doesn't make sense since they almost never actually turn double plays.

I must have misinterpreted. My apologies

We do agree that if the "turn DP" rating is only for turning, not starting, a DP then it should be mostly irrelevant to a 3B.

And we agree that trips is not a set lol

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

It has nothing to do with need. There is no time to tag a runner at third after having the ball thrown to you by the shortstop and then throw to first to get the batter unless he falls down on the way to first. The point was that there was no intention by Tulo to start a double play. He was simply trying for a fielder's choice to get the lead runner. It was a poor play by him that got saved by the quick thinking third baseman. Also there was no force play so that has nothing to do with whether he'd have time or not.

We'll agree to disagree. I don't know if that was his intent or not but I think its plausible to turn a DP in that manner. Probably far more unlikely than I gave it credit but its plausible. I made plays like Tulo at SS. But maybe I just had poor judgement lol.

[RchW]

So here is Steve Pearce learning to make the turn at 2B. Consider how a LH thrower would get this done without injury or just stupid slowness and then restate how it's not ridiculous to have a LH play 2B. Note that Pearce is going at about 50% vs a competent MLB 2B. I don't see any LH even getting to 50% based on my futile attempts to play 2B as a teenager.

pearce-warmup | FanGraphs Baseball

Click on the gif to make it run.

Edit; added another gif showing a nice DP turned by Pearce. Again I challenge anyone to show me how a LH could even begin to turn that DP. The whole concept is bogus.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/steve...se/pearce-dp2/

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by RchW

So here is Steve Pearce learning to make the turn at 2B. Consider how a LH thrower would get this done without injury or just stupid slowness and then restate how it's not ridiculous to have a LH play 2B. Note that Pearce is going at about 50% vs a competent MLB 2B. I don't see any LH even getting to 50% based on my futile attempts to play 2B as a teenager.

pearce-warmup | FanGraphs Baseball

Click on the gif to make it run.

Edit; added another gif showing a nice DP turned by Pearce. Again I challenge anyone to show me how a LH could even begin to turn that DP. The whole concept is bogus.

pearce-dp2 | FanGraphs Baseball

I think it would require a pivot somewhat similar to the one a shortstop makes at second in order to get in the proper throwing position.

[majesty95]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

I think it would require a pivot somewhat similar to the one a shortstop makes at second in order to get in the proper throwing position.

A SS is coming to the bag with both the runner and bag in front of him...

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by majesty95

A SS is coming to the bag with both the runner and bag in front of him...

Here's an example of the shortstop pivot at 2nd.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkBclTwFwVg

A lefty second baseman would be a mirror image where he would step towards home instead of center and his back would be towards home instead of center.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

I think it would require a pivot somewhat similar to the one a shortstop makes at second in order to get in the proper throwing position.

Not even close IMO. You'd have to describe it with diagrams.

Show a SS pivot because I don't see any connection.

Editoops I missed your post.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

Here's an example of the shortstop pivot at 2nd.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkBclTwFwVg

A lefty second baseman would be a mirror image where he would step towards home instead of center and his back would be towards home instead of center.

And this makes my point completely. A LH 2B could only make this pivot if he was throwing to third base not first base. To throw to 1B he would have to rotate 270 degrees clockwise while running over the case and catching the ball. It just doesn't work at all.

[majesty95]

Originally Posted by RchW

And this makes my point completely. A LH 2B could only make this pivot if he was throwing to third base not first base. To throw to 1B he would have to rotate 270 degrees clockwise while running over the case and catching the ball. It just doesn't work at all.

I can see his point. If he is catching the ball on the catcher side of the bag as opposed to the CF side of the bag (as a SS would) it would be a similar pivot. I just can't wrap my head around having to cross in front of the baserunner and the possible issues that could create in close plays at the bag. It may be feasible but I would think a LH 2B would turn far fewer double plays because of that.

[majesty95]

I would say that if a LH was going to play any IF spot other than 1B it would be 2B but still think the difficulties it presented would make it a losing proposition.