Take your new school baseball and shove it - bunting WORKS

[S.]

 

I AM BASKING IN THE TEARS OF YOU SO-CALLED BASEBALL "EXPERTS"

 

RUB SOME DIRT ON IT AND WALK IT OFF AMIRITE

http://i.imgur.com/BMsKNFI.jpg

[nicksaviking]

 

Falvey's not going to need his analytics department to weigh in here.

 

Hmm, let's see. Yeah, we'll give up an out here, so that we can have Adrianza, who's hit a ball deep enough to score a run from third about four times this year, and then when he fails, we'll leave it up to that hit machine Castro.

 

 

Rosario, a fast runner on second and nobody out.

 

Buxton in 2017 w/runners in scoring position: .180/.286/.197, 41% K Rate, 73 PA

 

Buxton in 2017 when bunting: .583 BA, 4 Sacs, 16 PA

 

Maybe Pickler showed Molitor the stats.

 

So perhaps just a straight steal of 3rd? Do we have to always get cute with it?

[prouster]

 

In all seriousness, that wasn't a terrible place to bunt. Tie game, runner on second, seventh inning.

 

With Buxton, you have a good chance he'll reach safely. If he doesn't, he advances the runner to third with one out.

 

I love to complain about bunting but that was an acceptable time to call a bunt. I would have let Buxton swing away - after all, it was the seventh inning with no outs - but whatever. I don't have to agree with every decision 100% all the time.

 

Here's another way to look at it: Rosario runs pretty well. Unless Milwaukee is playing their outfielders in (which maybe was the case; I don't know), he'll probably score on a base hit. Maybe Buxton hits one to the gap, maybe he strikes out looking. The worst case scenario is a runner in scoring position with one out. There's no chance for a sac fly with Adrianza up in that situation, but a base hit still probably scores Rosario. The flip side is that, with Rosario on third via bunt, there's still only one chance to score him on a sac fly. If it doesn't pan out with Adrianza, there's no meaningful difference between Rosario on second or third with two outs. Castro still needs to reach base, and Rosario is running on contact no matter what. So, all things considered, I'd rather have three chances to score him from second than 1-2 to score him from third. Although I can certainly see how a bunt is defensible in this scenario.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Here's another way to look at it: Rosario runs pretty well. Unless Milwaukee is playing their outfielders in (which maybe was the case; I don't know), he'll probably score on a base hit. Maybe Buxton hits one to the gap, maybe he strikes out looking. The worst case scenario is a runner in scoring position with one out. There's no chance for a sac fly with Adrianza up in that situation, but a base hit still probably scores Rosario. The flip side is that, with Rosario on third via bunt, there's still only one chance to score him on a sac fly. If it doesn't pan out with Adrianza, there's no meaningful difference between Rosario on second or third with two outs. Castro still needs to reach base, and Rosario is running on contact no matter what. So, all things considered, I'd rather have three chances to score him from second than 1-2 to score him from third. Although I can certainly see how a bunt is defensible in this scenario.

Agreed on all counts.

[Eris]

Using Nichols probability tables

http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/users/brooks/public_html/feda/datasets/expectedruns.html

 

2B, 0 outs RE=1.13     RP= 0.633

3B, 1 out, RE = 0.96     RP = 0.667

1B & 3B, 0 outs, RE =1.75     RP = 0.870

 

RE = run expectancy, RP = run probability

 

Having Buxton bunt Rosario to 3B, giving up an out, the probability of scoring 1 run increases from 0.633 to 0.667 (4 more favorable outcomes in 100 opportunities).  Of course in the process of losing an out, the run expectancy decreases from 1.13 to 0.96.  

 

However, this data presents itself only after the outcome of the sacrifice bunt.  There is also the possible outcome that Buxton successfully reaches first.  There is also the outcome of Rosario getting making an out at 3rd or at second, but these are much smaller and I will ignore them (because I don't know the values).  If you take dbminn's data that Buxton's BA when bunting is 0.583, then the probability of scoring at least 1 run is 0.667*(1-0.583) + 0.877*0.583 = 0.789  (favorable outcomes have increased by 19 in 100 opportunities).  Even if Buxton's BA on bunting is cut in half (0.583/2 = 0.294), then the run probability is 0.728.  

 

These are MLB averages and the results for our Twins may vary, however, the run probability tables suggests that bunting in this situation would increase the probability of the Twins scoring at least one run.

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

If Buxton could bunt that well every at bat, he would always bunt. Always.

[spinowner]

There are times where bunting is the right move. While in many, if not most, situations a successful sac bunt actually lowers win expectancy the alternative must be considered. If an unproductive out or a double play is a strong possibility then a sacrifice bunt is less bad. That's why pitchers almost always bunt when one or two runners are on base with less than two outs. And it's my humble opinion that the squeeze is an underutilized play, especially in a late-and-close situation.

[Twodogs]

Rod Carew was handy with the bunt. I feel it's kind of like pitching, even if it's the norm to throw a breaking ball in the dirt on an 0 - 2 pitch, if you do it every time then you become predictable and I feel that you want that other team to always have to consider how to defend different possibilities everytime you are up at the plate. I don't think they should bunt everytime in that situation, but you need to bunt in that situation sometimes so they know you can and will do it.