Logan Morrison: 'So Many' MLB Teams Cheat Using Video; Names Yankees, Dodgers

[failos]

I remember A-Rod would always steal our signs. But he did it without cheating.

[Angelsfan1984]

Make them wear the scarlet letter! 1 year of uniforms with Cheaters written across instead of the team name.

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

2 hours ago, Billy_Ball said:

But did they use trash cans too?

l think they used video to break the code, but only relayed it to hitter if they had a runner on 2B.

[Taylor]

1 hour ago, RendZone said:

Between juiced players, juiced baseballs, wife beating, sign stealing, drug usage, bad umpiring and some other things the game is losing its integrity. Shameful times. 

Yep, none of this stuff happened in previous generations of baseball.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Went back through some old dodger games, and noticed this picture from the playoffs, right before bellinger hit that home run.....

Like how did he know a slider was coming?

[AngelsLakersFan]

There is a defense against the runner on second stealing your signs. What is the defense against the center field camera relaying signs to the batter, especially when the battery doesn’t know it’s happening.

[daygloman]

4 hours ago, VariousCrap said:

Bleacher Report Article

 

"I know from first hand accounts that the Yankees, Dodgers, Astros, and Red Sox all have used film to pick signs," he wrote, per NJ Advance Media's Brendan Kuty. "Just want you guys to know the truth. I personally think it's a tool in a tool belt to pick signs, but if we are going to be punishing people for it. Don't half ass it."

 

One got caught!

 

 

 

 

[floplag]

1 hour ago, Kevinb said:

This is strictly out of boredom argument. But aren't both stealing signs by seeing them and stealing signs with technology both doing the same thing stealing signs? Isn't both considered cheating? If you can steal signs with a person on second or steal signs with a use of technology that's more effective why wouldn't you? If one is ok wouldn't the other be ok as well? 

I see where your going with that, but no i dont think it is the same at all.
If a team is dumb enough to make their signals visible to a player, who then has to figure out how to relay that to the batter, who also has to look at that player taking his eye off the pitcher and do all this in like half a second.... that very different from using technology and an audible bang that requires no effort on anyones part but some guy on a walkie calling out numbers.
What takes place on the field, by the players is one thing, zoom lenses and real times comms is another.

[DCAngelsFan]

1 hour ago, Φαήλος said:

Here's a thought:

Maybe signs shouldn't be transmitted the way they currently are. I think integrating some kind of haptic device small enough for a pocket for both the pitcher and catcher would solve this.  Think of it as Morse code taps that are transmitted as vibrations. Pitchers and catchers can both communicate to it, as well as the manager. Obviously it would require some good encryption to prevent un-authorized people from listening in.

Some of the early reports mentioned signaling stolen signs via a wireless device that attached to the skin and vibrated - much more sophisticated than banging on a trash can.  

Joel Sherman wrote:

 

Quote

In recent days I have had scouts and executives talk to me about a variety of methods they think have been or could be employed, such as a realistic-looking electronic bandage placed on a player’s body that buzzes in real time to signal what is coming — one buzz for a fastball, for example — if the surveillance determines what type of pitching is coming. One person I spoke to has ties to the Astros and said he already had spoken to MLB’s investigators. 

Was it just someone's imagination?  Or was there truth in there?

It's well within current technology to have high-resolution telephoto cameras, possibly processed by an AI engine, using some wireless signaling that could communicate to the batter what kind of pitch was called for, and location.   In fact according to this 2018 article: https://www.si.com/mlb/2018/11/02/cameras-stealing-signs-pace-play-rob-manfred - there are already cameras specifically placed to steal signs and people to interpret them.   (but with 4k broadcast cameras ubiquitous, you could just tap the tv video streams for a less obvious approach.)

It all begs the question - what's the purpose of stealing signs if you don't act on it - that is, tell the batter what pitch is coming, to tell a baserunner it's a good pitch to steal on?  

I think what did Houston in was their lack of sophistication - the audible recorded evidence of the banging trash cans sounds.  

I'd actually be surprised if some clubs aren't stealing signs and communicating that to their batters using much more sophisticated techniques than a trash can. 

Looking at you, Dodger blue ... 

 

[kevinb]

21 minutes ago, floplag said:

I see where your going with that, but no i dont think it is the same at all.
If a team is dumb enough to make their signals visible to a player, who then has to figure out how to relay that to the batter, who also has to look at that player taking his eye off the pitcher and do all this in like half a second.... that very different from using technology and an audible bang that requires no effort on anyones part but some guy on a walkie calling out numbers.
What takes place on the field, by the players is one thing, zoom lenses and real times comms is another.

It is just a more advanced way of doing things. Similar to instead of an umpire being behind the plate calling balls and strikes an automated system is calling them. Someone still has to decipher the "code" and rely them to the players. I personally think both are cheating, but I find it a lot less egregious then most other people. It is a part of the game in some respects as you alluded to earlier. I find corking a bat, or putting some sort of substance on a pitch worse than someone stealing signs. 

[Tank]

1 hour ago, well_red said:

In olden days there used to be a big deterrent in that, if you suspected the other team was stealing signals, the next batter would get one in the earhole, can't do that anymore.  It is easy enough to obfuscate the signals, silly to act like people aren't watching the third base coach or a runner on second can't see in to the pitch call.  Maybe going forward catcher's will need to do more complicated signaling, even with no one on base. 

[DCAngelsFan]

The Staten Island Yankees promo item when they play the Astros' affiliate.

 

[floplag]

12 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

It is just a more advanced way of doing things. Similar to instead of an umpire being behind the plate calling balls and strikes an automated system is calling them. Someone still has to decipher the "code" and rely them to the players. I personally think both are cheating, but I find it a lot less egregious then most other people. It is a part of the game in some respects as you alluded to earlier. I find corking a bat, or putting some sort of substance on a pitch worse than someone stealing signs. 

No its an outside the game way of doing things. 
Inside the lines is cool, anything else is not in that same area code.
And no also not the same as corking a bat or illegal substance, at least not to me.  

[kevinb]

2 minutes ago, floplag said:

No its an outside the game way of doing things. 
Inside the lines is cool, anything else is not in that same area code.
And no also not the same as corking a bat or illegal substance, at least not to me.  

Interesting. Well thanks for playing a long with my curiosities. 

[Duren, Duren]

Stealing signs in game shows players/coaches using their brains. It always has been an acknowledged part of the game.

Read any of the old books by Jim Brosnan (precursor to Jim Bouton and Ball Four)  and all the anecdotes from old players. Sign stealing was considered a respected skill. And a status symbol for those who were good at it. It was a common topic of discussion in the dugout as a game progressed. 

Why do you think baseball has had indicator signs and multiple variations of signal sequencing for as long as the game has been played?

  Each team expects to be analyzed and are ready to instantly change their patterns.

Stealing signs was also more than battery related. It involved base running. Steals, bunts, hit and run, squeeze plays and so on. Often the coaches were more adept than the players, trying to break down the opposing signals. The coaches had many more years of experience and familiarity with different systems, and considered trying to get an edge as part of their jobs. 

Relatively few players had the patience and analytical skills to concentrate on opposition signals when on base and focused on their own coaches and what might happen with the next pitch. 

As part of the competitive challenge between teams on the field, trying to decipher opposing signals seems fair game. 

You see it all the time in football, where it is just part of the game. That's why they now have coaches hiding their mouths and using flash cards to try and protect their calls.

Technology is the intrusive element that dehumanizes the process, and takes away the skill factor of real time analysis and reaction.

Standing on second base, watching the catcher, deciphering the sequence,relaying it to the hitter and bench, having the hitter adjust within a 20  or so second window is an intricate process. Requiring skill and synchronization. Standing in the batters box, waiting for a trash can signal based on video surveillance is a cynical process intruding on the game and not based on player or coaching analytical skills. 

I know we"re deep into a post modern, technologically enslaved society to some degree. And there is a legitimate debate about how, where and why tradition requires updating and change. A complex subject on many levels.

But baseball more than any other sport in North America is proud of tradition and continuity. If you look at baseball history and stats from a hundred plus years ago you still instantly understand and relate to what you see. Even with a new set of  analytic metrics superimposed on the past things pretty much equate along similar lines. 

But if technology gets too intrusive we will see a seismic break with tradition.

Replay hasn't had a dramatic effect, mostly just clarifying 50/50 plays. But if Robo umps, hi tech spying and communications and other off field changes become part of the game, then the sport will be entering dangerous territory. 

Let the sport be decided by the players and coaches using their competitive skills in real time. 

 

[Claude]

MLB is a fraud. 

[Pancake Bear]

54 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

It is just a more advanced way of doing things. Similar to instead of an umpire being behind the plate calling balls and strikes an automated system is calling them. Someone still has to decipher the "code" and rely them to the players. I personally think both are cheating, but I find it a lot less egregious then most other people. It is a part of the game in some respects as you alluded to earlier. I find corking a bat, or putting some sort of substance on a pitch worse than someone stealing signs. 

Wow. No. 

Knowing what pitch is coming is a bigger deal than being on the juice. At least with the others you have to hit the damn ball. When you know what pitch is coming, you can time it far better. With previous stealing there were extreme limits to it. With this system, there were far less.  

[kevinb]

25 minutes ago, RBM said:

The point is moot. It is, by definition, not illegal to steal signs in baseball. it never has been.

It is illegal to use electronics to steal signs in actual time.

 

17 minutes ago, Pancake Bear said:

Wow. No. 

Knowing what pitch is coming is a bigger deal than being on the juice. At least with the others you have to hit the damn ball. When you know what pitch is coming, you can time it far better. With previous stealing there were extreme limits to it. With this system, there were far less.  

Agree to disagree. If stealing signs isn't cheating, then using advanced techniques to steal signs isn't cheating. It is just a more efficient way of doing things. I think stealing signs is cheating either way you slice it. But if you are ok with one form of cheating if the second form is doing the exact same thing just more efficiently then that by in itself is cheating. 

[Angelsfan1984]

8 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

 

Agree to disagree. If stealing signs isn't cheating, then using advanced techniques to steal signs isn't cheating. It is just a more efficient way of doing things. I think stealing signs is cheating either way you slice it. But if you are ok with one form of cheating if the second form is doing the exact same thing just more efficiently then that by in itself is cheating. 

Stealing signs while at 2nd base is simply part of the game. You aren't using anything outside of the field of play. Even the trashcans aren't a massive issue if they were to get that information from a runner on base. Typically a runner will throw out an arm in either direction to relay to the hitter which side of the plate the pitch is going.

I don't have any issues with that.

[Lou]

15 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

Agree to disagree. If stealing signs isn't cheating, then using advanced techniques to steal signs isn't cheating. It is just a more efficient way of doing things. I think stealing signs is cheating either way you slice it. But if you are ok with one form of cheating if the second form is doing the exact same thing just more efficiently then that by in itself is cheating. 

Seeing how MLB has ruled that using electronic devices to steal signs isn't allowed, you are wrong. Whether or not you disagree doesn't really matter.

[yk9001]

13 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

 

Agree to disagree. If stealing signs isn't cheating, then using advanced techniques to steal signs isn't cheating. It is just a more efficient way of doing things. I think stealing signs is cheating either way you slice it. But if you are ok with one form of cheating if the second form is doing the exact same thing just more efficiently then that by in itself is cheating. 

This is the same argument Otter used in Animal House.

The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with our female party guests—we did. [winks at Dean Wormer] But you can't hold a whole fraternity responsible for the behavior of a few, sick perverted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole fraternity system? And if the whole fraternity system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg: isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!

 

[yk9001]

2 minutes ago, Lou said:

Seeing how MLB has ruled that using electronic devices to steal signs isn't allowed, you are wrong. Whether or not you disagree doesn't really matter.

From reading this message board, I get the feeling that many posters are living in their own wonderland.

THE COMMISSIONER SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED THE USE OF ELECTRONICS TO STEAL SIGNS.  But, no, we have people here arguing that there is no difference.

[goldenGlove]

they should be forced to void Cole's contract and not allow any other cheating teams to be able to sign him. Then maybe we'll finish 2nd for him this time

[Lou]

12 minutes ago, yk9001 said:

From reading this message board, I get the feeling that many posters are living in their own wonderland.

THE COMMISSIONER SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED THE USE OF ELECTRONICS TO STEAL SIGNS.  But, no, we have people here arguing that there is no difference.

Dumbassesb

[kevinb]

32 minutes ago, yk9001 said:

This is the same argument Otter used in Animal House.

The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with our female party guests—we did. [winks at Dean Wormer] But you can't hold a whole fraternity responsible for the behavior of a few, sick perverted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole fraternity system? And if the whole fraternity system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg: isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!

 

Disagree I never said what they did wasn’t cheating. I don’t know where u read that I literally said the opposite.