Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A lot more butns fail then result in infield hits/errors

[/ QUOTE ]

Are there stats on this? It instinctually seems true, especially when you consider the negative effect of missing/fouling a couple attempts and having to hit with two strikes.

But Bill James wrote an essay on bunting a long time ago titled something like "Rolling in the Grass" (which, of course I can't find now). His conclusion was that it is correct to bunt a lot more often than he originally thought. The main reason was that a lot of good results can happen from a bunt attempt, aside from a basic successful sacrifice: hits, errors, a fielder unsuccessfully trying to get the lead runner, etc. And the good results outweighed the bad results of an unsuccessful attempt, maybe not in terms of frequency but in terms of degree.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Book has some pretty in-depth information on the percentages of various possible bunting outcomes that have occured in different situations.

Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

[ QUOTE ]
That said, the issue at hand is who is a better hitter, not which player provides more value compared to the average or replacement level of offense at their position.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus christ, do you know how to DELETE SUPERFLUOUS QUOTES?

"I'm glad you don't think I am intelligent. Since apparently I'm dumb..."

I just had to point out how dumb this sentence was. Obviously if one is not intelligent they are dumb. Obviously. Absolutes are obvious. Obviously.

Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That said, the issue at hand is who is a better hitter, not which player provides more value compared to the average or replacement level of offense at their position.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus christ, do you know how to DELETE SUPERFLUOUS QUOTES?

"I'm glad you don't think I am intelligent. Since apparently I'm dumb..."

I just had to point out how dumb this sentence was. Obviously if one is not intelligent they are dumb. Obviously. Absolutes are obvious. Obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again, do you care to address any of the substantive arguments I have presented?

Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

Most of it was irrelevant and I'm assuming it wasn't directed at me.

Also, you should note how I worded what I said. I was talking about "better" in terms of overall value. No one in the world who's worth his salt would say that, measured by VORP or WARP or EqA or whatever you want to use, that Braun, say in 08, is significantly better than Hall. Indeed, their PECOTA-projected EqAs for this year prove my point. I wasn't talking about Braun v Hall in the umbrella of this thread.

Even a non-intelligent person can understand the above, right?

Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

[ QUOTE ]
The main reason was that a lot of good results can happen from a bunt attempt, aside from a basic successful sacrifice: hits, errors, a fielder unsuccessfully trying to get the lead runner, etc. And the good results outweighed the bad results of an unsuccessful attempt, maybe not in terms of frequency but in terms of degree.

[/ QUOTE ]


Not to mention that the THREAT of bunting or just one show of a bunt (took the pitch or fouled it off) forced the defense to respect the possibility that you might do it again which can also increase your chances if you then decide to swing-away (mostly due to the drawn-in 3B but also possibly by hitting behind one of the middle-infielders if he's rotating one way or another).

Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

[ QUOTE ]
Most of it was irrelevant and I'm assuming it wasn't directed at me.

Also, you should note how I worded what I said. I was talking about "better" in terms of overall value. No one in the world who's worth his salt would say that, measured by VORP or WARP or EqA or whatever you want to use, that Braun, say in 08, is significantly better than Hall. Indeed, their PECOTA-projected EqAs for this year prove my point. I wasn't talking about Braun v Hall in the umbrella of this thread.

Even a non-intelligent person can understand the above, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

No intelligent person would say that an apple is the same thing as a carrot, but it has about as much bearing on the conversation as what you said.

Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

I really shouldn't have to draw you a map to illustrate how simple a connection is, should I?

Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

Please explain why positional value has anything to do with the OP.

Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

I wasn't responding to OP.

Dur dur dur.

Re: Settle this Baseball Argument
 

It depends is the correct answer. Lets assume the bunt is successful. 2nd and 3rd, 1 out. The number 3 batter is now walked intentionally to load the bases and set up a force at any base with the DP in order. The number 4 hitter is LH and is a good hitter (obviously if he is hitting clean up) but has trouble with tough lefties. The team on defense has a shut down lefty in the pen that could be brought in. The number 5 hitter was brought in as a defensive replacement and is a below average hitter. The bench has been depleted so no viable pinch hitting exists. Knowing in advance that the bunt will be successful do you still sacrifice an out in this situation? This is why baseball is such a great game IMHO. There are so many variables and you really need to look down the line to see how each decision may impact a future move.