Voila_Capture 2015-01-29_11-34-50_AM

And what point does it become OK to discuss the fact that the commissioner of baseball seemingly never had any dental insurance?

New commissioner Rob Manfred continued with what now appears to be a series of carefully chosen interviews with trusted baseball reporters. First it was Karl Ravech in a room with radiators, and now it’s the bow tie man himself, little baby small fry, Ken Rosenthal.

Manfred talked about all the expected things, including rule changes and pace of play. Here’s an excerpt:

ROSENTHAL: You were asked recently in an interview about any radical changes that you would make to help the sport. You mentioned the elimination of shifts as one possibility. How concerned are you about the lack of offense and how far can you go to help fix that?

MANFRED: Let me go back and put the comment I made in context. I was asked about long term, radical thoughts and what I said was that I was I prepared to have a conversation about shifts. Look, we have a lot of conversations in this building about a lot of things, so I don’t think it would be a good idea to read too much into that comment.

Having said that, we watch what goes on in the game very, very carefully. On the field, what the trends are, we’re always doing that. There was a lot of talk about the lack of offense, particularly late last year and coming into the offseason. We’re watching those trends. But one of the reasons we don’t act too quickly is you never know when people are going to adjust.

Maybe a lot of hitters went home this winter and they figured out how to go the other way against the shift and it will self-correct and we’re not going to need to make a change. We look at these things, we think it’s smart to pay attention, we think it’s important to think about possible solutions even if it turns out that we don’t have a problem.

Somewhere, Little Rhino knows all is right with his world.

But let me make a counter argument about proposed rule changes like eliminating the shift: It’s actually not embracing change at all. The recent use of extreme shifts and goofy defensive alignments are the departure from the norm. The first time one really stood out to me was Game 3 of the 2008 World Series, when Joe Maddon brought an outfielder in when the Phillies had the bases loaded and no outs in the bottom of the ninth. Here’s how Jayson Stark described it:

And then, Rays managerial innovator Joe Maddon signaled for everyone’s favorite 1 a.m. brainstorm — the old five-man infield. That left the infield so overcrowded with Rays fielders that Phillies first baseman Ryan Howard later quipped: “I thought they were about to send them all in on a blitz.”

Since then, out-of-the-box defensive shifts have almost become the norm. Thanks to advanced analytics, seemingly every team except the Phillies has all sorts of data at their fingertips, which leads to the wild shifts. Progressive managers merely play the odds of where the ball will go. Their decisions don’t work every time, but the sample size of a 162-game season is more than large enough for this strategy to be successful. [I’d argue it’s why SABR heavy teams like the Rays and A’s have had so much regular season success of late, but typically struggle in the Postseason when random events and good ol’ experience factor in.] “Extreme defensive shifting is innovation,” wrote Craig Calcaterra of Hardball Talk. Baseball wouldn’t be fighting against change if they eliminated the shift– they’d be trying to preserve the status quo – “these nine players stand and squat in these nine spots” – which is what’s holding the game back.

Manfred went on to talk about how baseball, thanks to MLB Advanced Media, has a huge advantage over other leagues in technology, and he said that he wants to marry the on-field game with technology as a way to appeal to a younger demo. So here’s an idea: Instead of eliminating the shift – a genuine strategy well within the rules of the game that exists in its current form largely because of technology – why not embrace it further by allowing managers to use tablets in the dugout? This way, rather than having them pour over a binder full of charts and scouting reports, they could quickly call up the data already available to them with just a touch. I can already see Tim Cook on-stage at a future Apple Keynote after showing a video of all the uses for iPad: Isn’t that great?! I mean, HOW COOL IS THAT? At Apple, we don’t fear change, we embrace it. And we’re glad that Major League Baseball has embraced it with us. Now, let’s talk about  Car.

I’ll take it a step further. David Murphy, with whom I actually agree, proposes that the league do away with mound visits* and the pageantry of managers walking out to umpires with a piece of paper and a pencil— both things that waste precious time. So in that vein, how about not only allowing managers to use tablets in the dugout, but also empowering them to make pitching changes and substitutions from the devices? The tablet would be synced with the scoreboard and official box score and, boom, instant lineup changes. For completeness, the umpire could turn to the dugout and acknowledge and confirm the change with the manager (in case of an input error) with something as friendly as a hand wave, a gentle tap, or a quick sketch. PLAY BALL!

This would serve the dual purpose of both speeding up the game and embracing technology. To me, baseball’s selling point is that it’s a complex chess match. Each at-bat, a game within a game. Why not embrace that? Why not marry data with the game in a more seamless way? Why not allow people at home or at the game, through the MLB.tv app, to see all of the data available to managers and follow along as the decisions are made in real-time?** You remember how much suspense ESPN created with poker table cameras that allowed you to see the hands? Alfred Hitchcock once said that you don’t create tension by surprising the audience with a bomb… you create tension by showing them the bomb first. Same idea here– you add a new wrinkle to the fundamental core of the game (for fans) without changing the actual on-field game. Additionally, implement some of the time-centric changes being tested in the Arizona Fall League, and now you have a faster, more modern game, without any stupid gimmicks, juiced balls, changes in dimensions or manufactured hardships. It’s brilliant. I’ve solved it! I need to talk to the Commish. SOMEONE GET ME MANFRED ON THE PHONE! The Eagles just hired a 30-year-old VP of Assuaging Chip’s Big Balls— it’s time for a 31-year-old MLB Czar of Strategery and Tech for Fans Who Can’t Read Good and Wanna Learn and Do Other Good Stuff Too. Call me, Rob.

*Cheese is right— what other sport allows coaches to come out to struggling players and offer them comfort mid-game? And that’s before we discuss the AWESOME potential of watching a strung-out reliever have a near-nervous breakdown on the mound. I could see Jonathan Papelbon literally ripping his own head off and throwing it at a batter, which would be a win all-around– 1) entertainment, and 2) something like that would have to void the remainder of his contract, I’d think.

**Yeah, yeah– I know it’s proprietary data. But soon, if not already, everyone is going to be working with the same data set, so why not just put all the cards on the table?