Does the defensive shift's prevalence in baseball change the meaning of "We covered all our bases"? [closed]

Historically, covering all of your bases means being careful and methodical, and preparing for any possibility. Also historically, this was the dominant defensive strategy in baseball.

However, recently, the most effective and increasingly common defensive strategy is called the defensive shift, and actually involves leaving bases uncovered in order to redistribute fielders to the most likely places that the current batter will hit the ball. This often results in all of the infielders standing on the same side of the field, leaving no one within 50+ feet of third base (for example).

Does this change the meaning of covering all of your bases in non-baseball scenarios? Does it now mean being overly cautious, overly reliant on old ways of thinking, and slow to adapt?

Language does not work that way. Covering your bases will still mean taking thorough precautions against any potential problem regardless of whether the circumstances where the expression originated remain the same. This is especially so because many people unfamiliar with baseball strategy use the idiom, and indeed many are unaware that it originated in baseball in the first place.

You don't throw your hat in the ring in boxing any more, but that remains the expression. A Monday morning quarterback is still someone who criticizes with the benefit of hindsight, not someone making suggestions or predictions, despite the half century of Monday Night Football that has been played. For that matter you still walk a mile in his shoes regardless of the status of metrication in your country, and you still pick up the phone even if it's sitting on the desk streaming the call through Bluetooth.

In later years, of course, people may well ask "why do we say X even though it doesn't make any sense?" There is no expectation that X itself will change in meaning.