...but post-season is what counts no? Here is a great example on new style (statistics) baseball.
Verlander is pitching with runners in scoring position. I forgot who was batting. Stats dictate to put the shift on. The batter takes an outside pitch and hits a slow roller to the second basement. The only problem is the second basement was on the other side of second. Run scores and the rest is history.
In that situation the hitter can probably hit to the right side 7 or 8 times out of 10.
I'm not sure of the specific moment you're speaking about above, but I would also suggest that although the Nats did score in that situation, the pre-hit odds of the shift getting the Astros out of the inning vs playing the field straight up. Increasing the odds in your favor doesn't guarantee things, it just makes them more likely. Also part of the shift requires pitcher execution - did the pitcher make his spot in that situation?
I've read two books recently that talk about the shift and it's impact, one of them "The Only Rule is it has to work" -
https://www.amazon.com/Only-Rule-Has-Work-Experiment/dp/1250130905/ talks about an extreme shift they applied to one minor league player. By looking at all of his stats, they realized he hits ground balls all over the field, but fly balls only go to left or center. So every time this guy gets up to bat, they pull the right fielder into the infield as the first infielder. The hitter is frustrated, but as the story goes, he never reaches base in that game. (In the majors, the only equivalent I've seen is the 5th infielder to prevent a walk-off on a ground ball where you know that a fly ball of any kind is at least a sac fly).
In "The Shift" - (Which is interestingly enough, not entirely about the shift we're discussing) -
https://www.amazon.com/Shift-Next-Evolution-Baseball-Thinking/dp/1629375446/ - the author points out that a hitter who is shifted would simply need to make an attempt to hit ground balls against the shift one out of every 3 attempts for it to be worth it, but that most players don't because they often feel they need to go for the deep hit vs the infield single. When Jay Bruce was on the Mets, he'd get extreme shifts all the time. With a no-strike or one-strike count, they'd put a guy in the hole and 3 infielders on the right side. With two strikes, there'd be 4 infielders between 1st and 2nd. It would kill me. Because even if Bruce would bunt in the first inning - even if he bunted foul. The opposing team would need to honor it if he came up in the ninth with the game on the line. But Jay Bruce was a true outcomes guy - 150 strike outs and 30 HR per season.
