![]() |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: The porridge is... | |||
| Too hot! |
|
24 | 77.42% |
| Too cold! |
|
1 | 3.23% |
| Just right. |
|
6 | 19.35% |
| Voters: 31. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] this exact scenerio is outlined in BP's book. it completely depends on what you are hoping to accomplish. trying to maximize your runs or maximize your chances of scoring one run. bottom of a the 9th in a tie game, depending on who the batter is and who would be the next batter(s), bunting is a little better. [/ QUOTE ] The thing is, of course, that sacrifice bunting is never 100% successful. I think you could never bunt ever, and it not be a mistake. [/ QUOTE ] You're going to have to bunt some of the time, for game theory reasons. Sometimes bad bunts became better bunts if the third-basemen can't play the bunt well, or if he's not expecting it at all. |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
Without reading any responses, I think the answer is pretty obviously a man on 2nd with nobody out. If it were "better" to have a guy on 3rd with 1 out, every team would be bunting the guy to third every time.
|
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you mindlessly look at overall stats, trading an out for 90 feet is a bad trade. Outs are precious, and if your on-deck batter hits a single, you've pretty much just wasted an out.
However, taking the bunt can be right if certain factors are in play. If the batter tends to hit the ball to the left side of the diamond, a ground ball out will fail to advance the runner, so you may be better off bunting. If it's a flyball pitcher, you're far more inclined to take the bunt to get the runner into position to score. If the on-deck man is an impatient hitter, you probably don't want to bunt. And so forth. Many managers have both the data and instinct to take these factors into account. |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hmmm, this just happened in the Twins playoff game. Torii Hunter bunted with a runner on 2nd and no outs. It resulted in a runner on 3rd with 1 out.
|
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Without reading any responses, I think the answer is pretty obviously a man on 2nd with nobody out. If it were "better" to have a guy on 3rd with 1 out, every team would be bunting the guy to third every time. [/ QUOTE ] I think this logic is flawed. I think if a team knew that bunting was 100% successful, they would do it. That's why I think man on 3rd with 1 out is better. |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Hmmm, this just happened in the Twins playoff game. Torii Hunter bunted with a runner on 2nd and no outs. It resulted in a runner on 3rd with 1 out. [/ QUOTE ] I was just going to mention this. This seems like an absolutely horrible spot to bunt in. The leadoff double was the third! hit by minnesota in the first two innings. Absolutely awful. Even moreso b/c Hunter is a good hitter who hasn't laid down a sac bunt all season. Twins are in pure panic mode. results for those not watching: no runs for Minnesota |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, Torii Hunter being a good hitter is up for debate, but yeah that is a pretty bad spot to do it in.
|
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Well, Torii Hunter being a good hitter is up for debate, but yeah that is a pretty bad spot to do it in. [/ QUOTE ] c'mon dude, he went .278/31/98 this year with nobody hitting behind him. He consistently puts up .270-.280 25-30 90-100 type seasons. He's clearly a "good" hitter. I didn't call him a HOFer or anything. |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
Augie Garrido, the Texas baseball coach who has won more games than any other college coach, bunts a lot. I mean, a lot.
If he gets the leadoff man on in an inning, he's probably going to bunt. If he gets men on 1st and 2nd with nobody out, he has said he would bunt if Babe Ruth was the batter. I bet he would want 3rd base, 1 out more often than not. I realize this is not conventional wisdom in the majors, but this man's won an awful lot of games. I think it depends on who the batter is and how many runs you need. |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Well, Torii Hunter being a good hitter is up for debate, but yeah that is a pretty bad spot to do it in. [/ QUOTE ] c'mon dude, he went .278/31/98 this year with nobody hitting behind him. He consistently puts up .270-.280 25-30 90-100 type seasons. He's clearly a "good" hitter. I didn't call him a HOFer or anything. [/ QUOTE ] Career OPS+ of 102. So not a good hitter. Though considering he is a very good CF'er, he is a very good player. |
![]() |
|
|