Banning the shift is a commercial decision to prop up batting numbers — that's not baseball

---

Banning the shift is a commercial decision to inflate batting numbers, full stop. You're surgically removing defensive strategy from the game. That's not baseball.

The shift is accumulated wisdom — positioning based on how a specific hitter attacks the ball. That's strategy. MLB decided to outlaw it to make box scores look better and broadcasts more "exciting." That's entertainment management, not competition integrity.

I've watched baseball for forty years. Rule changes happen. This one bothers me the most because it targets the logic of defensive positioning itself.

Banning the shift is a commercial decision to inflate batting numbers, full stop. You're surgically removing defensive strategy from the game. That's not baseball.

The shift is accumulated wisdom — positioning based on how a specific hitter attacks the ball. That's strategy. MLB decided to outlaw it to make box scores look better and broadcasts more "exciting." That's entertainment management, not competition integrity.

I've watched baseball for forty years. Rule changes happen. This one bothers me the most because it targets the logic of defensive positioning itself.

The shift ban impact on batting average is exactly what the advanced metric community predicted — small positive effect, large strategic cost. The rule change was made for casual fan appeal, not competitive integrity.

Glad someone else is angry about this. The batting average increase is minimal. The defensive preparation reduction is permanent. It's not a trade worth making.