No bunt? Ever?

by free hotdogs on Jul 7, 2008 8:20 PM EDT

Now I know this is the American League, and I know that nobody on the team can bunt....but how come Maddon never uses the bunt? I can't really question Joe on many things, he continually proves that he is a great, smart, and when he needs it, lucky manager, and I really can't think of a better person to run this team.....but if I had a complaint about today's game, it was that it could have been won with a bunt.

In the sixth down by a run, Hinske singles with nobody out, and Zobrist comes up. If you are not going to bunt Zobrist in that situation, when is a good time to ever do it? Earlier in the game Aki doubled, and CC came up. In this situation, I can see not bunting, but say you do, Carl has a good chance to beat it, and we have Aki at third for a sac fly.

I know these are unpopular, small ball, NL type tactics, but for a team that has solid pitching that keeps the team in the game, and an offense that comes and goes, it wouldn't hurt to manufacture some runs. If I am totally wrong, please don't hesitate to call me out. It would probably make me feel better knowing I am the crazy one.

P.S.- with the Rays in NYC, I prepare myself to enter the forbidden temple of Yankee Stadium with full Rays gear tomorrow night......wish me luck that I may come out alive and victorious.

This post was written by a member of the DRaysBay community and does not necessarily express the views or opinions of DRaysBay staff.

Tweet Comment 27 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Sacrifice bunts are almost never a good idea.

You’re more likely to score with a runner on first and no outs than with a runner on second with one out. I don’t have the numbers handy, so if someone else wants to throw up a link…

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 7, 2008 8:38 PM EDT reply actions

Or I could just do it myself...

Link

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 7, 2008 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions

Of course that ignores who is up at the plate

The OP stated that he is okay with CC swinging but not okay with Zobrist swinging. I totally agree with that. Those are just two totally different scenarios. Nobody is saying to bunt every single time someone is on first with no outs (or runner on 2nd). What we are saying is if the hitter totally stinks (hence why pitchers do a lot of sacrificing) then you should bunt. There is little upside to having Zobrist hit. You are basically praying for a walk. That isn’t the way to win games.

by matthan on Jul 7, 2008 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions

You act like Zobrist is a little leaguer...

At worst, Zobrist is a .200 major league hitter. Aki is a .270 hitter. That’s a difference of a little more than one hit every twenty at bats. If you’re gonna bunt with Zobrist than you may as well bunt with Aki. Saying the outcome is an out or a walk is ridiculous.

by tallyray on Jul 7, 2008 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions

If Zobrist had realistic XBH potential then you’d have a much stronger argument not to bunt. But with a singles hitter up, especially with essentially another singles hitter on deck it makes little sense to swing. If there was a strong shot at the runner being able to score from first on a hit then I could see swinging. But banking on Aki or Zobrist to deliver an XBH isn’t the best bet. Especially Zobrist.

I think the most important factor is that we need 1 run and odds are Zobrist isn’t going to get a runner to second base by swinging. Most likely you are going to have Aki up (singles power) with a man on first and 1 out when you could have Aki up with a man on 2nd and 1 out.

Personally I would have pinch hit and pinch ran in that situation. I would have put Brignac at 1st and Gross at the plate. I’d have Brignac steal on Buck. I think that would have been the best and highest percentage move. A bunt by Zobrist would have been second best. Having Hinske steal would have been third best (or at least a hit and run). ANd the worst would be having Zobrist swing.

by matthan on Jul 7, 2008 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Giving the other team an out is an ever worse way to win games.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 8, 2008 3:18 AM EDT up reply actions

So then why was Zobrist hitting?

That is nearly a guaranteed out, and even worse it is likely he won’t be able to move the runner over.

by matthan on Jul 8, 2008 8:29 AM EDT up reply actions

That's a different issue.

And “nearly a guaranteed out” is different than “guaranteed out.”

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 8, 2008 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions

I like the table....

That’s interesting, I am glad you threw up that link. I understand what you are saying, but here is my point, the table shows with a runner on first and one out the average is .573, where as from second with one out it is .725. So if you have a batter up who more likely than not make an unproductive out anyways….i.e. a strikeout of fly out with a runner on first, then you should bunt him. Nothing against Zobrist, I just don’t think he is a great hitter, and he is in the 9 slot. Than again, he had been hot at the plate, so maybe they made the right gamble.

by free hotdogs on Jul 7, 2008 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions

oh yea

sorry, just saw that somebody else pretty much said the same thing as me

by free hotdogs on Jul 7, 2008 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions

ALL hitters are more likely to make an out than not.

It’s just that giving one up is the worst idea of all.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 8, 2008 3:19 AM EDT up reply actions

Right

So how does it make more sense to require 2 hits with 3 outs (using your worst hitter) than 1 hit with 2 outs (using two of your best hitters)?

You can spin it all you want, but there is no way Zobrist should be swinging there.

You need to factor in the quality of the hitters. You just can’t standardize everything.

by matthan on Jul 8, 2008 8:35 AM EDT up reply actions

Well...

If Zobrist gets a hit than you have three outs to move a guy from possibly third to home. Which wouldn’t take a hit.

Anyhow, you’re assuming Zobrist is an automatic out which is ridiculous. The odds of him getting a hit are about 15% worse than Aki getting a hit. Zobrist just did the second worst thing possible and that makes the second guessing all that much easier.

by tallyray on Jul 8, 2008 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions

Additionally,

You can’t assume that the odds of Zobrist laying down a perfect sac bunt are 100%. He could bunt the ball foul twice, he could pop the bunt up, or they could throw the bunt to second.

You only have 27 outs in a baseball game. Giving one up intentionally is hardly ever a good idea.

by Peter Bendix on Jul 8, 2008 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions

If he's such a bad hitter, pinch hit.

Problem solved. Don’t give away outs.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 8, 2008 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Extended table

http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902score.html

by kurby on Jul 8, 2008 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Which shows an interesting result…

With a runner on second and 1 out you have a higher chance of scoring ONE run, but a lower chance of scoring more.

You also have a higher chance of scoring no runs…

by kurby on Jul 8, 2008 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions

I think the Royals demonstrated the downside of the sacrifice bunt today

It’s one thing to call for a bunt…It’s a completely different thing to have personnel capable of executing it. Twice today they popped up on bunt attempts. On the second one, Navarro alertly turned a double play as the batter (I believe Gathwright) failed to run it out upon seeing he’d popped up the ball.

by GomesSweetGomes on Jul 7, 2008 8:45 PM EDT reply actions

Then teach them?

The excuse that major league ballplayers do not know how to bunt just doesn’t fly. It is one thing to disagree on strategy, but if they do not know how to bunt then that is a sign of a poor organization.

by matthan on Jul 7, 2008 9:42 PM EDT up reply actions

They all know how to bunt

But like anything, it’s a use it or lose it skill. There are a limited # of practice hours in a day after all, and teams that spend tons of time on bunting are often the same ones that aren’t good at the whole walking/singling thing.

by GomesSweetGomes on Jul 7, 2008 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions

That makes sense. Zobrist can’t hit anyways so perhaps he should be our all time bunter?

by matthan on Jul 7, 2008 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions

Thou shall no bunt.

by P Brady on Jul 8, 2008 2:23 PM EDT reply actions

As someone who has hated the sacrifice bunt

since I started following baseball in the 1950s, I still recognize there are times-few and far between-when it can be a proper tactic. But the notion that it is clearly right at a particular time is misguided.

Even considering the argument that Zobrist is a poor hitter, that does not support the notion he should bunt. As bad as he is, let us suppose he is optimally a .200 hitter (his abbreviated career so far shows .206). But every time he sacrifices, he becomes at best a .05 hitter because at least 95% of the time he will make an out-on purpose! And that does not include the times he will fail to bunt anyway or the runner will be thrown out at second base.

There is no reason to belabor the point with hypotheticals about bunting into double plays or getting to first on an error and such. And it is possible that in the situations described, Maddon should have called for the bunt, although I don’t like that in the 6th inning. But Zobrist has been hitting lately, and hitting for some power as well. Better than 1/6 of his ABs have been extra base hits this year. If Maddon is not bunting in the 6th, I have no problem with that.

by bobr on Jul 8, 2008 3:49 PM EDT reply actions