How well did the shifts work against Ortiz?

by user Bmoseley07

Last year for the first time in Big Papi's career, teams were starting to use the shift on him. It took away some hits to the right field, but how much exactly did it affect him?

First, let's take a look at his overall stats from the past three seasons:

As you can see, he's improving every year in almost every category. Walks are up and strikeouts are down, implying that he's getting more selective. His home runs increased 6 in 2005 and then 7 this past year. The noticeable differences are hits, doubles, and batting average. Those take the biggest hit, which makes perfect sense, since the shift takes away the gap in the right field.

The graph above shows it took away a lot of hits, which explains the .013 hit on his batting average. His BABIP (batting average of balls in play) dropped 35 points from the year below and was over .025 below league average.

So with all this against him, what did he do to adjust? Putting the shift on is invitation for Ortiz to go deep, and that's exactly what he did, blasting out a career high 54 home runs leading the rest of the league by at least 10. His slugging increased by 32 points which doesn't really show the improvement as that takes his declining batting average into effect.

ISO is the true testament to a slugger's worth and Ortiz proved himself once again. His ISO (isolated power) went from .304 to .349- a 45 point increase. Ortiz and Travis Hafner led the American league by more than 40 points over the next best player with Hafner ending the season just .001 above David Ortiz. Not only did it not hurt him, but Ortiz went on to lead the league in total bases and runs created.

Despite the batting average drop, Ortiz still managed to score 115 times (tied with interestingly enough Johnny Damon for third in the league) and knock in 137 runs (which was good enough to lead the league) proving to all that moving all the fielders on the playing field to the right side can't stop Big Papi from doing his job.

Final Verdict Using the shift against David Ortiz didn't win or lose here. It did it's job by taking away hits from one of the biggest sluggers in the league, but he was able to adjust by hitting out more home runs. Next year, I expect to see that average rise as he begins to exploit the shift, finding the holes and making a run for MVP for his third straight season.

More from this author can be found at Here's to Next Year.

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1067 days ago

Score 1

Getting the pics in. Give me a minute.

Permalink | Reply

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1067 days ago

Score 1

There.

Permalink

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1067 days ago

Score 1

Still getting used to this new-fangled wiki stuff. Not easy.. for me.

Permalink

DNLLegend

1067 days ago

Score 0

You can always ask others for help -- that's the beauty of a wiki :)

Permalink

Davis21wylieMVP

1067 days ago

Score 0

It's my bad. He asked me to help, but I didn't check the site until just now.

Permalink

Anonymous Fanatic #1

1067 days ago

Score 0

Good job!

Permalink | Reply

XinophDraft Pick

1066 days ago

Score 0

Great article, nice job!

Permalink | Reply

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1066 days ago

Score 0

Thanks for putting up the Ortiz hitting pic. I was having a bit of trouble with placement of that one.

Permalink | Reply

KelsdadAll-Star

1066 days ago

Score -2

Nice read, but no proof to the existence of a shift. More likely he's just getting pull happy, which is a common problem for all sluggers, especially when there is a noticable drop-off in production elsewhere in the lineup. See Johnny Damon.

Permalink | Reply

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1066 days ago

Score 1

No proof to the existence of a shift? I watched the games, buddy. That's how I know there were shifts lol. This isn't a guess. And he's not getting pull happy- he's a lefty which means he's pretty much always been pull happy. And I'm not really sure how a drop-off in production in the lineup would effect his batting average?? I'm not really sure where you're coming from at all. Kevin Youkilis and Mark Loretta at the top of the order were better than Johnny Damon and Edgar Renteria. Even then, he still led the league in RBI's which is the only thing that a loss in production in the lineup could affect.

Permalink | Reply

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1066 days ago

Score 1

Nevermind you're a Yankee fan.

Permalink

KelsdadAll-Star

1066 days ago

Score -2

What's that have to do with anything? And I watched the games too. So all lefties are automatically pull hitters? Drop off in production wasnt his, it was everyone else's. Homers and rbi's up and hits down? Doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize he hit more three run homers than before and less one run singles because there were fewer opportunities to drive in runs. Look at his doubles totals too.

Permalink | Reply

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1066 days ago

Score 1

Sorry that was a cheap shot for questioning your intelligence because you are a Yankee fan, but dude, did you read what I wrote? Just read it before you comment. I mentioned the doubles totals and I even explained why they were down. They're down because the shift takes away the right field gap.

And apparently it's gonna take more than a rocket scientist for you to realize that 54 minus 47 is a bit more than three. Try 7, which right there is enough for me to question the validity of whatever else you say.

But actually, it's pretty common knowledge that lefties have a loop in their swing that pretty much all but prevents them from going the opposite way. And you have no clue what you're talking about. That may be a little harsh, but fewer opportunities to drive in a run has absolutely nothing to do with batting average, singles and doubles. The only thing it would affect are his RBI which actually did decrease from the year before by 11, but he still led the league by a long shot in that category.

Permalink | Reply

KelsdadAll-Star

1065 days ago

Score -2

I read your bio and saw that you're only 17 years old. Enough said. So a little advice, if you want to listen fine and if not thats fine too. While you may have designs on being the next Bill James or Peter Gammons, you have a long way to go. When people question something you've said, dont take it personally, ask questions, because you're too young to know everything. I've been a baseball writer and historian, not to mention coach and player, for over twice as long as you've been alive and I've likely forgotten more than you know. Nothing personal to what you said because its so far off base it discredits itself, but I can tell you that you are not qualified to say I don't have a clue.

Permalink | Reply

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1065 days ago

Score 1

Oh wow. That's real lame, bring my age into this. Age has absolutely nothing to do with anything. I have been a fan of the game my whole life and have been studying for years now. I don't care if what your age or your qualifications are. Bill James never played ball, while on the other side of the spectrum we have Joe Morgan, a good ballplayer, but lousy at analysis. You can play the game, coach the game, whatever, but that doesn't mean anything. If that's the only thing you have to disproving what I've said, then you have a long way to go before you win my respect. So just you saying that I've so far off base that I descredit myself is enough. Baseball players, managers, and coaches for years thought that OBP and walks meant nothing consistently sent speedy slap hitters to the top of the lineup despite .320 OBP's. It was "common knowledge" at the time that was helping your team. We find out much later that it was actually hurting the team and limiting the number of chances a team had to score a run. And this was a widely upheld belief, so before you go all Joe Morgan on me, stop hanging on to your "credentials" and start actually backing up your claims. I've watched the game, I've played the game (for many years now) and I've studied the game.

"When people question something you've said, dont take it personally, ask questions, because you're too young to know everything."

And you know what they said to Bill James, when he brought his ingenious work up: You've never played the game before, you don't know what you're talking about. I think I've proved with what I've written in past pieces, this piece, and in comments to prove that I know a thing or two about what I'm talking about, so I don't want to hear any of this "but you're only 17, you don't know anything" crap and carry your balls like a real man and debate this out with real facts behind your statements.

Permalink

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1065 days ago

Score 0

^That was a really poorly written comment grammatically-wise. My nerves were a little tweaked when writing that if you can understand why, so please make the necessary corrections as you go along.

Permalink

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1065 days ago

Score 0

And I thought me picking on him for being a Yankee fan was a low blow.. my god.

Permalink

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1065 days ago

Score 1

And yea, I do have "designs" in being the next Bill James, Peter Gammons. Much better goals than what I'm guessing are yours. Joe Morgan wouldn't exaclty be somebody I want to replicate. Then again, I'm not a Yankee fan, so what do I know.

Shit, I could go on and on with this stuff.

And for our viewers at home, I'm going to post in quotes everything Kelsdad (Joe Morgan's username?) said and actual stats to disprove him. Alright, here we go:

"No proof of an existense of a shift." -This one I'm actually going to have a hard time disproving on stats alone, but I watched the game, I saw the shifts and I'm sure millions of Red Sox fans can attest for me.

"Noticable drop off in production elsewhere in the lineup (see Johnny Damon)." -Yes, Johnny Damon left but that didn't affect much. Damon had an OPS of .808 in 2005 while this year Youkilis had a .815 OPS. So where exaclty is that noticable drop off in production?

"Homers and RBI's are up and hits are down" -I don't know how he reads stat sheets or if he just goes by memory but I actually have the season stats posted at the top of the page, clearly showing that RBI's decreased by 11. Something I also pointed out in the article if he read it.

"Doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize he hit more three run homers than before.." -I pulled up the numbers and in 2005 he hit 5 three-run homers and in 2006 he hit only 2. That's a decrease of 3. Apparently it does take a rocket scientist or at least a 17 year old kid who backs up his claims with actual statistics.

"...there were fewer opportunities to drive in runs." -In 2005, 471 runners where on base when Ortiz came to bat. In 2006, the number actually rose to 473.

"Look at his doubles totals too." -I did and even mentioned it in the article, too. I also gave a reason for it, while apparently the "noticable drop off in production elsewhere in the lineup" affected his double total. Would like some expansion on that topic.

And now on to the stats that back up his claims:

"I've been a baseball writer and historian, not to mention coach and player, for over twice as long as you've been alive and I've likely forgotten more than you know. Nothing personal to what you said because its so far off base it discredits itself, but I can tell you that you are not qualified to say I don't have a clue."

What can I say? Does that not win the argument right there? I don't know. You be the judge.

Thank you Mr. Morgan (Kelsdad's new nickname btw for the slow) for coming on my show "Why Everything You Say Is Wrong And Why Your Silly Attempt To Discredit Me With No Actual Facts Other Than My Age Which Is Clearly Discrimination And Which Will Lead To Your Demise And My Successful Career At Whatever I Choose To Do- Show". Feel free to come back at anytime.

Permalink

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1065 days ago

Score 0

Of all the things you can edit, comments has to be the only thing you can't. I don't know if you can fix that, but if any admin's can, please do so.

Permalink | Reply

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1065 days ago

Score 1

And lastly, this line right here might have worked back in the 50/60's when you were born: "..for over twice as long as you've been alive.." Welcome to the 21st century, where that phrase means absolutely nothing and really lends no credibility to you. Sorry if you've been waiting 34+ years to use it, but means shit nowadays. And hey, I am allowed to swear on in these things? I'm not a sailormouth or anything, I just like to use it sometimes to emphasis my point. I don't feel like crap has quite the emphasis I'm looking for anymore.

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1064 days ago

Score 0

+ to the dirty superlatives! My favorite adjectives

Permalink

Phoenix SuperfanVarsity

1064 days ago

Score 3

This is all too funny. I don't know who you are Bmoseley07 but I do know Kelsdad is not Joe Morgan lol. He is however a very good friend of mine and one of the nicest guys you will ever meet in your life. However, I have spent the last several years having similar discussions with him at work via email. A few things you need to know ahead of time. First, you couldn't be more on point with your Yankees fan dig. Secondly, he hates the DH and Ortiz in particular so he is automatically going to shoot down anything you write about Ortiz. Third, he is old but not as old as he likes to think he is because that is his number one arguement in any discussion. Unfotunately he hasn't watched a live game since the 80's. Finally, he is an old baseball guy who coached high school state championship teams in Connecticuit and coached major league players including Brad Ausmus and Rico Brogna so he does know a little bit about what he is talking about. As for the nickname, as funny as Joe Morgan is he already has a nickname, Mr. Baseball. Kind of an inside joke but I am sure you can see where I am coming from. Anyway, my point is don't take it too seriously, he is just hating on the new school.

Permalink | Reply

Bmoseley07Soccer Kid

1062 days ago

Score 1

haha. Thanks for explanation, Pheonix. Explains a lot and I really like the nickname for Joe Morgan. Definitely going to carry that on. And I don't think he'll be using the age argument any time soon if he's read this. Anyways, thanks again for clearing that up.

Permalink