The stats behind "Never Bunt"

[JuliusO1274]

https://www.danblewett.com/run-expectancy-bunting-bad/

Bunting never increases the odds of scoring, only lessens them. It can only be rationalize with a truly awful hitter at the plate like a pitcher. Have you noticed we almost never see other teams sac bunting when playing them. The rest of baseball is now aware of this and have stopped. Yet we have a manager who will bunt every time we get runners on in a late inning close game.

[poppysox]

"You only get 27 outs...don't throw any of them away."  Earl Weaver

[Texsox]

Be predictable and always follow the best odds. We really do not need managers anymore, just plug the scenario into the computer and follow the odds. Why do managers overly complicate this? They start looking at the match up. They start thinking about how the players have performed recently. How they do in this stadium, etc. Are they hurting. Is the wind blowing and what direction. Pure stupidity. Millions of data points have already made the decision. 

 

[ScootsMcGoots]

It's the 8th inning. You are down by a run. Its Runners on 1st and 2nd, nobody out. The runner on 2nd is slow but the runner on first has some wheels.

You have a notorious ground ball hitter at the plate, and he doesn't necessarily have a good history of high exit velocity. He's on a cold streak, 0 for last 10. In fact, he is in the top 20% of hitters in the league who have hit into double plays for the year. It's August, so he has had plenty of ABs. He's got decent speed, despite the high double play percentage, and has15 stolen bases on the year so far. He has proven in the past that he can get the bunt down.

The opposing team's pitcher is a sinkerballer with good control. ERA in the high 2s, and has thrown many DPs.

The next hitter is hot and has been driving in runs like crazy, like 4 homeruns in the last 4 games with 15 RBIs. So far in the game he is 3-3 with a double and a homer, 2 rbis. Actually he is 7-10 lifetime against the sinkerballer. The 3 outs he did make were flyballs to the outfield.

No one is warming in the bullpen.

Plug that shit into a computer

What would you do as a manager in this situation?

(I read the article)

Edited May 11, 2019 by ScooterMcGee

[poppysox]

6 minutes ago, ScooterMcGee said:

It's the 8th inning. You are down by a run. Its Runners on 1st and 2nd, nobody out. The runner on 2nd is slow but the runner on first has some wheels. You have a notorious ground ball hitter at the plate, and he doesn't necessarily have a good history of high exit velocity. He's on a cold streak, 0 for last 10. In fact, he is in the top 20% of hitters in the league who have hit into double plays for the year. It's August, so he has had plenty of ABs. He's got decent speed, despite the high double play percentage, and has15 stolen bases on the year so far. The opposing team's pitcher is a sinkerballer with good control. The next hitter is hot and has been driving in runs like crazy, like 4 homeruns in the last 4 games with 15 RBIs. So far in the game he is 3-3 with a double and a homer, 2 rbis.

Plug that shit into a computer

What would you do as a manager in this situation?

(I read the article)

I bunt of course.  Just wondering where would I find a Sox hitter who has been that hot.

[fathom]

So you bunt the runners over, and now you’ve taken the bat out of the hands of your hottest hitter who will surely be walked to set up another double play situation

[JuliusO1274]

32 minutes ago, Texsox said:

Be predictable and always follow the best odds. We really do not need managers anymore, just plug the scenario into the computer and follow the odds. Why do managers overly complicate this? They start looking at the match up. They start thinking about how the players have performed recently. How they do in this stadium, etc. Are they hurting. Is the wind blowing and what direction. Pure stupidity. Millions of data points have already made the decision. 

 

The problem is that Ricky does this every close game. I wouldn't have an issue if it was only an occasional occurrence. He is the one being predicable and going against the odds every game. That needs to be stopped.

[BamaDoc]

I hope I have really good lineup depth or a great pinch hitter cause if you bunt they are walking the hot hitter and it is the next bater that is going to matter.

[SCCWS]

5 hours ago, JuliusO1274 said:

https://www.danblewett.com/run-expectancy-bunting-bad/

Bunting never increases the odds of scoring, only lessens them. It can only be rationalize with a truly awful hitter at the plate like a pitcher. Have you noticed we almost never see other teams sac bunting when playing them. The rest of baseball is now aware of this and have stopped. Yet we have a manager who will bunt every time we get runners on in a late inning close game.

Maybe I am missing something . I agree with the premise on bunting but where did you get the info on  bolded section. Looking at AL stats only, the White Sox are tied for 6th and finished 5th last year. Now maybe we try and fail more but I doubt it. I know Francona is a big believer in bunting and Cleveland  usually leads the AL. 

[ScootsMcGoots]

2 minutes ago, SCCWS said:

Maybe I am missing something . I agree with the premise on bunting but where did you get the info on  bolded section. Looking at AL stats only, the White Sox are tied for 6th and finished 5th last year. Now maybe we try and fail more but I doubt it. I know Francona is a big believer in bunting and Cleveland  usually leads the AL. 

Exactly. I think this whole bunting issue is just compounded because the Sox just suck in general. It wouldn't be a thing. 

I don't think bunting should be used as much as Ricky uses it, to be completely honest, but I think this whole idea that it should just go away completely is ludacris. There are situations in baseball in non-pitcher hitting situations where the bunt is completely acceptable and strategic.

[ScootsMcGoots]

19 minutes ago, BamaDoc said:

I hope I have really good lineup depth or a great pinch hitter cause if you bunt they are walking the hot hitter and it is the next bater that is going to matter.

Sure, the hitter after that is hot too. Didn't take into account the IBB.

Point is, there are situations where it is acceptable, strategic, and even necessary.

[NWINFan]

For me there is one time you never bunt: The pitcher is laboring and struggling and you have him on the ropes. Make him get an out. Bunting and giving up an at-bat makes no sense in that situation. Ozzie did that a lot in 2011. He'd bunt and kill an inning just because he still thought he was still living in 2005. There are times when you play small-ball and times when you go for it. A manager has to recognize a situation for what it is. Ozzie was on a bunting treadmill. Maybe RR is too.

[JuliusO1274]

53 minutes ago, SCCWS said:

Maybe I am missing something . I agree with the premise on bunting but where did you get the info on  bolded section. Looking at AL stats only, the White Sox are tied for 6th and finished 5th last year. Now maybe we try and fail more but I doubt it. I know Francona is a big believer in bunting and Cleveland  usually leads the AL. 

Where can I find these stats? Are these sacrifice bunts to move runners along or guys bunting for hits? There is a difference. Sac bunts occur late in close games with guys on base. Even if the bunter is thrown out it is considered a success. Bunting for hits happens at anytime in a game and often when no one is on base. I don't have a problem with fast guys occasionally laying down a bunt to get on base. I don't like rally killing bunts in close late inning games.

[Balta1701]

1 hour ago, JuliusO1274 said:

Where can I find these stats? Are these sacrifice bunts to move runners along or guys bunting for hits? There is a difference. Sac bunts occur late in close games with guys on base. Even if the bunter is thrown out it is considered a success. Bunting for hits happens at anytime in a game and often when no one is on base. I don't have a problem with fast guys occasionally laying down a bunt to get on base. I don't like rally killing bunts in close late inning games.

A player bunting against the shift a few times per year and stealing 5 hits (Even if your David Ortiz) probably isn't the worst thing either, especially if it forces the defense to stay more honest in their positioning in your average at bats. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

8 hours ago, JuliusO1274 said:

https://www.danblewett.com/run-expectancy-bunting-bad/

Bunting never increases the odds of scoring, only lessens them. It can only be rationalize with a truly awful hitter at the plate like a pitcher. Have you noticed we almost never see other teams sac bunting when playing them. The rest of baseball is now aware of this and have stopped. Yet we have a manager who will bunt every time we get runners on in a late inning close game.

For the record, bunting CAN increase your likelihood of winning late in a game more than not bunting.

Bunting early in the game and bunting when you need more than one run is unacceptable though. That said, bunting does have the ability to increase your likelihood of scoring ONE run which, if that is all you need, means bunting does have a place 

[SCCWS]

2 hours ago, JuliusO1274 said:

Where can I find these stats? Are these sacrifice bunts to move runners along or guys bunting for hits? There is a difference. Sac bunts occur late in close games with guys on base. Even if the bunter is thrown out it is considered a success. Bunting for hits happens at anytime in a game and often when no one is on base. I don't have a problem with fast guys occasionally laying down a bunt to get on base. I don't like rally killing bunts in close late inning games.

These are SF (sacrifice hits) and obviously not SF.  So that would exclude bunting for a base hit.  I used AL only since NL are skewed.  Not sure where you got your info that "The rest of baseball is now aware of this and have stopped." Only Oakland and Detroit have no SF this season.  Cleveland has 9 already. 

[JuliusO1274]

54 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

For the record, bunting CAN increase your likelihood of winning late in a game more than not bunting.

Bunting early in the game and bunting when you need more than one run is unacceptable though. That said, bunting does have the ability to increase your likelihood of scoring ONE run which, if that is all you need, means bunting does have a place 

Did you read the article? Because it contradicts what you just wrote.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

12 minutes ago, JuliusO1274 said:

Did you read the article? Because it contradicts what you just wrote.

No it does not. All he calculates is expected runs scored. He is not calculating the likelihood of scoring just one run. Bunting decreases the possibility for a big inning skewing the expected runs down, but if your goal is to score just ONE run, bunting increases that.

Edited May 11, 2019 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

For example, a runner on 3rd base with one out has a 64% chance of scoring while a runner on second with no outs has a 61% chance of scoring.

[Jose Abreu]

4 hours ago, SCCWS said:

Maybe I am missing something . I agree with the premise on bunting but where did you get the info on  bolded section. Looking at AL stats only, the White Sox are tied for 6th and finished 5th last year. Now maybe we try and fail more but I doubt it. I know Francona is a big believer in bunting and Cleveland  usually leads the AL. 

Would you mind sharing a link to where you saw that?

And does that take attempted sac bunts into account, or is it just successful sacrifices? If it's solely the latter, then the data is skewed and does not accurately reflect the White Sox affinity for sac bunts. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

4 minutes ago, Jose Abreu said:

Would you mind sharing a link to where you saw that?

And does that take attempted sac bunts into account, or is it just successful sacrifices? If it's solely the latter, then the data is skewed and does not accurately reflect the White Sox affinity for sac bunts. 

What? Why? You think the Sox have some abnormal amount of unsuccessful attempts compared to the 5 teams ranked ahead of them? That's just not true.

[Jose Abreu]

6 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

What? Why? You think the Sox have some abnormal amount of unsuccessful attempts compared to the 5 teams ranked ahead of them? That's just not true.

It depends on what constitutes an attempt, I suppose. Does the bat need to make contact with the ball, or does the hitter need to simply show bunt? I'm referring to the hitter showing bunt, then pulling it back after a pitch or two, and then just swinging. 

[Balta1701]

46 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

For example, a runner on 3rd base with one out has a 64% chance of scoring while a runner on second with no outs has a 61% chance of scoring.

However there's a second part of this story. If your team is down by 1 run and you have a runner on 2nd with no outs - you need 1 run to tie but you need 2 runs to win the game. The bunt narrowly increases your chances of scoring 1 run (with weighting based on who is coming up to hit), but it also substantially drops your chances of scoring 2 runs. So you do slightly increase your chances of tying the game, but you may not make a dent in your overall chances of winning the game because you've hurt your chances at a multi-run rally that inning when you need multiple runs to do that.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

However there's a second part of this story. If your team is down by 1 run and you have a runner on 2nd with no outs - you need 1 run to tie but you need 2 runs to win the game. The bunt narrowly increases your chances of scoring 1 run (with weighting based on who is coming up to hit), but it also substantially drops your chances of scoring 2 runs. So you do slightly increase your chances of tying the game, but you may not make a dent in your overall chances of winning the game because you've hurt your chances at a multi-run rally that inning when you need multiple runs to do that.

Yes but who said anything about bunting when down?

When you need one run, and one run only, bunting can increase your chances of scoring one run.

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yes but who said anything about bunting when down?

When you need one run, and one run only, bunting can increase your chances of scoring one run.

Rick Renteria in a 4-3 game yesterday?