UPig Game 3 Thread

[MarketingBully01]

Sac fly now up 5-1 MSU. :)

[I seen it dawg]

Atta boy

[whosyourdawgy]

One of the beat writers tweeted middle of 7th and made me question myself. Oh well. 3 outs more is much better. A couple more runs will make it even better

[Will James]

People walk out of Vegas with money sometimes, but there's a reason those fancy chandeliers are hanging in the lobby

[Will James]

Bunting over to 3rd with no outs seems like a high % move. Is that not the case Will?

No.

[rtdawg]

Think it is a smart move to bunt to 3rd with no one out there. Want to try and get the lead to +4.

[MarketingBully01]

Henderson strikes out. We go to the top of the ninth, MSU 5-1

[I seen it dawg]

No.

Why not?

[MarketingBully01]

One of the beat writers tweeted middle of 7th and made me question myself. Oh well. 3 outs more is much better. A couple more runs will make it even better

Not a problem. :). You were right beat writer was wrong hehe. :)

[Will James]

Think it is a smart move to bunt to 3rd with no one out there. Want to try and get the lead to +4.

The odds of scoring are essentially the same. You would have to have a 97% bunt success rate to make it a good play which obviously nobody can attain.

[MarketingBully01]

High fly ball out, one down.

[I seen it dawg]

The odds of scoring are essentially the same. You would have to have a 97% bunt success rate to make it a good play which obviously nobody can attain.

Situational baseball dictates it's a good move. Something you know nothing about.

[MarketingBully01]

Randolph....

[whosyourdawgy]

It worked. Musta been that 3% this time around

[I seen it dawg]

I just don't understand why he plays...

[Will James]

Situational baseball dictates it's a good move. Something you know nothing about.

Glittering jewel of colossal ignorance

[I seen it dawg]

It worked. Musta been that 3% this time around

Yeah those baseball situations sometimes throws the algorithms out of whack.

[MarketingBully01]

Holder strikes out the next guy, two down one on.

[I seen it dawg]

Glittering jewel of colossal ignorance

Lol

[I seen it dawg]

Will you're worse than Randolph's arm

[Will James]

It worked. Musta been that 3% this time around

Jesus, not saying it CANT work morons. Again, people win in Vegas but the chandeliers still hang in the lobby.

[Will James]

Yeah those baseball situations sometimes throws the algorithms out of whack.

I bet you loved the final game of 2012

[MarketingBully01]

Fly out for the third out! Dogs win 5-1 and win the series and are now tied for first in the western division at 6-3! :)

[Will James]

You don't judge baseball decisions based on results. Jacob Robson could have come in and gotten that last out on the mound, wouldn't have made it the right call

[Will James]

6-3!

[I seen it dawg]

I now love bunting because it makes you slam your face into your keyboard. I wish we would bunt every damn at bat.

[whosyourdawgy]

Jesus, not saying it CANT work morons. Again, people win in Vegas but the chandeliers still hang in the lobby.

Moron? Seriously? Just because I don't agree with you I'm a moron? We bunted his ass to 3rd w one out. A sac fly, base hit, passed ball, wild pitch, hit gets a run home. Suck it! We won, We are 6-3. We have won every series so far. It's working.

[Will James]

I now love bunting because it makes you slam your face into your keyboard. I wish we would bunt every damn at bat.

Ignorance is bliss

[I seen it dawg]

You don't judge baseball decisions based on results. Jacob Robson could have come in and gotten that last out on the mound, wouldn't have made it the right call

Not judging it on results dipshit. It's the right baseball call for the situation we were in. If he would have popped it up and got Pirtle doubled off it's still the right call to make. Everytime. In that particular situation.

[I seen it dawg]

Ignorance is bliss

Bliss is you beating your face on a keyboard. Bunt bunt bunt!!!

[Will James]

Just because I don't agree with you

Should you hit or stay on 18. Hitting and getting a 3 doesn't mean its the right play. Thats the point. One option works 70% of the time. One about 58%. I'm going with 70.

[I seen it dawg]

I don't think you ever actually played the game of baseball. You get slide rules...baseball bats not so much

[Will James]

Not judging it on results dipshit. It's the right baseball call for the situation we were in. If he would have popped it up and got Pirtle doubled off it's still the right call to make. Everytime. In that particular situation.



Outs

0

1

2


Empty

32%

18%

07%


1st

49%

32%

15%


2nd

70%

47%

25%


1st and 2nd

71%

49%

27%


3rd

89%

73%

32%


1st and 3rd

89%

70%

34%


2nd and 3rd

89%

73%

32%


Loaded

90%

72%

39%



Can you guarantee the bunt has a 97% success rate. No. MLB rates are 50%. That makes the bunt here give us a 60% (73+47)/2 chance of success. Not bunting gives a 70% chance of scoring. I figured this game full of buntfails would resonate but sadly no

[dawgs]

Ignorance is bliss

Some people will always being up the exceptions to "prove" the odds wrong. Glad we won, but I'm with you on the bunt thing in general. Depends on who is at bat though and if you only need the 1 run.

[I seen it dawg]

Outs

0

1

2


Empty

32%

18%

07%


1st

49%

32%

15%


2nd

70%

47%

25%


1st and 2nd

71%

49%

27%


3rd

89%

73%

32%


1st and 3rd

89%

70%

34%


2nd and 3rd

89%

73%

32%


Loaded

90%

72%

39%



Can you guarantee the bunt has a 97% success rate. No. MLB rates are 50%. That makes the bunt here give us a 60% (73+47)/2 chance of success. Not bunting gives a 70% chance of scoring. I figured this game full of buntfails would resonate but sadly no

Your table doesn't mean shit because of the situation the game was in. Also you can't just take 2 percentages and divide by 2...what in the samshit is that? The % increases from man on 2nd with no outs to man on 3rd with 1 out. But more dramatically so I would imagine when the defense HAS to stop that run in the late innings and what it causes the pitcher and defense to have to do (human element). It's situational baseball not algorithms and calculators. You'll never get it.

[whosyourdawgy]

WTF is this? So bunting him to 3rd gives us a 60 percent chance to score with no outs? Where is the chart for hitting away with a man on 2nd and no outs? In the 8th inning, leading 4-1

[I seen it dawg]

Some people will always being up the exceptions to "prove" the odds wrong. Glad we won, but I'm with you on the bunt thing in general. Depends on who is at bat though and if you only need the 1 run.

I'm not disputing the "odds" but in THAT baseball situation it's the right call 100% of the time.

[I seen it dawg]

I don't think you ever actually played the game of baseball. You get slide rules...baseball bats not so much

Will?

[Will James]

Your table doesn't mean shit because of the situation the game was in. Also you can't just take 2 percentages and divide by 2...what in the samshit is that?

Assuming a 50% bunt success rate, which is what the MLB rate is, you absolutely add them together and divide by 2.

[Will James]

WTF is this? So bunting him to 3rd gives us a 60 percent chance to score with no outs? Where is the chart for hitting away with a man on 2nd and no outs? In the 8th inning, leading 4-1

Are you and WinningIsRelentless cousins? How is that chart hard to comprehend.

[Will James]

I'm not disputing the "odds" but in THAT baseball situation it's the right call 100% of the time.

What makes you assume a successful bunt?

[I seen it dawg]

What makes you assume a successful bunt?

I'm not assuming a successful bunt dumbass. It's the right CALL. If it doesn't work it doesn't work but it's the right call.

[whosyourdawgy]

Are you and WinningIsRelentless cousins? How is that chart hard to comprehend.

Oh I see So bunting him to 3rd increased his chances of scoring from 70 to 73 percent. I see now.

[Will James]

Oh I see So bunting him to 3rd increased his chances of scoring from 70 to 73 percent. I see now.

If the bunt is successful....

[Coach34]

Assuming a 50% bunt success rate, which is what the MLB rate is, you absolutely add them together and divide by 2.

Will, here is where you go horribly wrong:

You cant use MLB stats for college players. MLB players are more efficient in every aspect of the game- including bunt defense. Plus there is a wider talent discrepancy in college baseball team to team than there is in MLB

You dont include the human element- those percentages differ in the late innings with the game on the line vs earlier in the game when players are more relaxed

You think Hunter Renfroe was even remotely clutch

[Will James]

Oh I see So bunting him to 3rd increased his chances of scoring from 70 to 73 percent. I see now.

If the bunt is successful....

[Will James]

Will, here is where you go horribly wrong:

You cant use MLB stats for college players. MLB players are more efficient in every aspect of the game- including bunt defense. Plus there is a wider talent discrepancy in college baseball team to team than there is in MLB

You dont include the human element- those percentages differ in the late innings with the game on the line vs earlier in the game when players are more relaxed

You think Hunter Renfroe was even remotely clutch

Bunters are much worse in college.

[Will James]

I'm not assuming a successful bunt dumbass. It's the right CALL. If it doesn't work it doesn't work but it's the right call.

Taking every time with a 3-2 count is the right call because you could get a walk. Sometimes they throw a strike but its still the right CALL*

[Coach34]

Bunters are much worse in college.

so is bunt defense and pitchers throwing strikes

[I seen it dawg]

Taking every time with a 3-2 count is the right call because you could get a walk. Sometimes they throw a strike but its still the right CALL*

I'm now convinced of 2 things...you've never played real baseball and you are 13

[I seen it dawg]

Taking every time with a 3-2 count is the right call because you could get a walk. Sometimes they throw a strike but its still the right CALL*

It's only a 50% chance you get a walk if you take. It's either a ball or a strike. Not applicable to the ass kicking you are taking.

[Will James]

It's only a 50% chance you get a walk if you take. It's either a ball or a strike. Not applicable to the ass kicking you are taking.

Still looking for your proof

[Bully13]

I'm now convinced of 2 things...you've never played real baseball and you are 13

taking everytime you have 3-2? you've lost me on that one will

[Will James]

taking everytime you have 3-2? you've lost me on that one will

It was ***

[I seen it dawg]

Still looking for your proof

The 2 things in this thread we disagreed on I explained ad nauseum. Go back and read them you twerp. You have refuted one of them only with a chart which reinforced my point!

[Will James]

The 2 things in this thread we disagreed on I explained ad nauseum. Go back and read them you twerp. You have refuted one of them only with a chart which reinforced my point!

Opinions are not proof

[I seen it dawg]

You threw out a chart which incorrectly explains your position. I've explained mine which is correct. I'm done arguing with you because you can't begin to understand how the game of baseball is played.

[Homedawg]

Bunters are much worse in college.

Pitchers are doing half the bunting or more.
Eta, meaning in pro ball.

[Will James]

Pitchers are doing half the bunting or more.
Eta, meaning in pro ball.

I collected data from between 2008-2013. I classified things simply: a good bunt is a fair ball in play, and a bad bunt is a foul bunt or a missed bunt. Of course, not all fair bunts are good bunts. Of course, this misses out on bunts that were pulled back at the last second. This tracks only bunts that were committed to. Over the six years, there’s a sample of more than 36,000.
The breakdown:


Overall: 49.7% fair bunts
Pitchers: 49.9%
Non-Pitchers: 49.6%

The sample for pitchers is about 10,000. The sample for non-pitchers is about 26,000. There’s basically no difference. About half the time they’ve committed to a bunt, they’ve bunted the ball in play. That means that, half the time, they’ve messed up.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-truth-about-bunting/

[bgdog]

Honest question, why do people still try to argue with WJ? He has never ever conceded a point, admitted a mistake, acknowledged he was wrong. When people argue with him he just becomes way more entrenched in his point of view, resorts to name calling, etc. All that happens is that smug, self-satisfied child makes a thread unbearable.

So why argue?

[Will James]

acknowledged he was wrong.

FIP isn't as important in college as I thought

[Homedawg]

I collected data from between 2008-2013. I classified things simply: a good bunt is a fair ball in play, and a bad bunt is a foul bunt or a missed bunt. Of course, not all fair bunts are good bunts. Of course, this misses out on bunts that were pulled back at the last second. This tracks only bunts that were committed to. Over the six years, there’s a sample of more than 36,000.
The breakdown:


Overall: 49.7% fair bunts
Pitchers: 49.9%
Non-Pitchers: 49.6%

The sample for pitchers is about 10,000. The sample for non-pitchers is about 26,000. There’s basically no difference. About half the time they’ve committed to a bunt, they’ve bunted the ball in play. That means that, half the time, they’ve messed up.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-truth-about-bunting/

Clarification from you, bc not reading all that link crap, so included in the numbers is if one guy bunts and fouls it back or takes it, and then the next pitch he successfully gets it down then he's 50%? Am I reading that correct.

[Will James]

Clarification from you, bc not reading all that link crap, so included in the numbers is if one guy bunts and fouls it back or takes it, and then the next pitch he successfully gets it down then he's 50%? Am I reading that correct.

If you pull back and take it is NOT included. Foul bunts are "bad"

So only 50% are in fair territory. As was noted, not even all fair bunts result in the positive play. Say you pop a bunt up to the pitcher or bunt it hard right at the pitcher, etc., its part of the 50% good but obviously ends with bad results.

[Homedawg]

So a foul bunt or a missed bunt give a you this 50% number of bunts fail? Why not try pulling up how many guys went to the plate and sacrificed? No matter how many pitches it took? The 50% number u are using is skewed. It's like saying a hitter fouls off two pitches and then gets a hit and he's hitting .333 for that at bat. He's not he was 1.000 for that particular ab.

[Homedawg]

To add if he fouls it off and it's caught, I get it that's a poor bunt and should be an unsuccessful attempt. But not for strictly fouling it off. I knew there was a catch no way 50% of all sac bunts resulted in outs or didn't advance the runner. I actually like the stats u brought to the table, but they are not showing the whole picture. Plus one size doesn't fit all. Who is on deck! Who is pitching? Who is running? Lots of factors that a computer doesn't tell u.

[I seen it dawg]

I collected data from between 2008-2013. I classified things simply: a good bunt is a fair ball in play, and a bad bunt is a foul bunt or a missed bunt. Of course, not all fair bunts are good bunts. Of course, this misses out on bunts that were pulled back at the last second. This tracks only bunts that were committed to. Over the six years, there’s a sample of more than 36,000.
The breakdown:


Overall: 49.7% fair bunts
Pitchers: 49.9%
Non-Pitchers: 49.6%

The sample for pitchers is about 10,000. The sample for non-pitchers is about 26,000. There’s basically no difference. About half the time they’ve committed to a bunt, they’ve bunted the ball in play. That means that, half the time, they’ve messed up.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-truth-about-bunting/

And none of this has anything to do with the argument. You are trying to turn it in another direction because you got your ass kicked in the relevant argument and you've got nothing because you don't understand the game of baseball.

[Will James]

And none of this has anything to do with the argument. You are trying to turn it in another direction because you got your ass kicked in the relevant argument and you've got nothing because you don't understand the game of baseball.

Quickly review the specific point that you are right and I am wrong again. Just saying something over and over doesn't make it true.

Your correctness is based on a successful bunt. We know that the odds of a successful bunt do not come close to justifying the action based on the expected run table. Those are the facts. We are talking about the BEST PERCENTAGE PLAY and the numbers back me up every time.

[I seen it dawg]

You win. And bgdog is right...can't have a discussion with you because you are never wrong. And I'm fine with that because I wasn't convinced before but I damn sure am now...you don't know jackshit about how the game is really played. You are beneath arguing with on the finer points of baseball. Keep spitting useless graphs and shit and leave the baseball discussions to people that have a clue. Great job at updating the game thread so stick to that, you have truly found your usefulness to this board.

[Will James]

You win. And bgdog is right...can't have a discussion with you because you are never wrong. And I'm fine with that because I wasn't convinced before but I damn sure am now...you don't know jackshit about how the game is really played. You are beneath arguing with on the finer points of baseball. Keep spitting useless graphs and shit and leave the baseball discussions to people that have a clue. Great job at updating the game thread so stick to that, you have truly found your usefulness to this board.

Yeah I didn't think you could either

[MarketingBully01]

You win. And bgdog is right...can't have a discussion with you because you are never wrong. And I'm fine with that because I wasn't convinced before but I damn sure am now...you don't know jackshit about how the game is really played. You are beneath arguing with on the finer points of baseball. Keep spitting useless graphs and shit and leave the baseball discussions to people that have a clue. Great job at updating the game thread so stick to that, you have truly found your usefulness to this board.

I should save this post and we can post it anytime anyone disagrees with Will James.

[Todd4State]

Because he gets as many groundballs as Kendall Graveman and K's 2 batters per inning. Thats the stuff the big boy scouts are looking for. He could walk into a pro bullpen TODAY.

And as I type he K's the side

LOL. No he couldn't- and he wouldn't. Don't get me wrong- he's good, but no.

[Todd4State]

Your table doesn't mean shit because of the situation the game was in. Also you can't just take 2 percentages and divide by 2...what in the samshit is that? The % increases from man on 2nd with no outs to man on 3rd with 1 out. But more dramatically so I would imagine when the defense HAS to stop that run in the late innings and what it causes the pitcher and defense to have to do (human element). It's situational baseball not algorithms and calculators. You'll never get it.

If we had not bunted, we reduce the chance of almost guaranteeing ourselves that the runner gets to third and we would have potentially dropped our chances of scoring by about 20% using that chart.

Not to mention the multiple ways you can score from third base.

But what the hell do I know?

[Todd4State]

Will, here is where you go horribly wrong:

You cant use MLB stats for college players. MLB players are more efficient in every aspect of the game- including bunt defense. Plus there is a wider talent discrepancy in college baseball team to team than there is in MLB

You dont include the human element- those percentages differ in the late innings with the game on the line vs earlier in the game when players are more relaxed

You think Hunter Renfroe was even remotely clutch

There are no Alabama A&M's in MLB either. You are correct- there is a wider variance between the best team and the worst team in both leagues.

[Will James]

If we had not bunted, we reduce the chance of almost guaranteeing ourselves that the runner gets to third

Aha here is where I can AGREE with something. You're absolutely right bunting right there gave us a much better chance of having the runner get to 3rd base. BUT it did not give us the best chance of him scoring, because you have to factor in the percentages of a failed bunt.

[engie]

I have no problem with the 8th inning bunt because I have no problem playing for one run up 3 right there when Holder had just brought the go-ahead run to the plate in that very inning.

Hate it in alot of the situations that Cohen uses it -- but that wasn't one of them...

[MarketingBully01]

I have no problem with the 8th inning bunt because I have no problem playing for one run up 3 right there when Holder had just brought the go-ahead run to the plate in that very inning.

Hate it in alot of the situations that Cohen uses it -- but that wasn't one of them...

Agreed, Engie, agreed.

[dawgs]

You win. And bgdog is right...can't have a discussion with you because you are never wrong. And I'm fine with that because I wasn't convinced before but I damn sure am now...you don't know jackshit about how the game is really played. You are beneath arguing with on the finer points of baseball. Keep spitting useless graphs and shit and leave the baseball discussions to people that have a clue. Great job at updating the game thread so stick to that, you have truly found your usefulness to this board.

he's backed up by years of empirical data. almost always, it's not worth giving up the out to advance a runner. i said ALMOST always. but up 4-1 with a man on 2nd and 0 outs, you shouldn't be sacrificing the out imo.

[dawgs]

Will, here is where you go horribly wrong:

You cant use MLB stats for college players. MLB players are more efficient in every aspect of the game- including bunt defense. Plus there is a wider talent discrepancy in college baseball team to team than there is in MLB

You dont include the human element- those percentages differ in the late innings with the game on the line vs earlier in the game when players are more relaxed

You think Hunter Renfroe was even remotely clutch

i agree that the wider discrepancy skews some of the numbers, but they still have a place. just take them in the proper context.

that said, while MLB defenses are much better at bunt defense, they are also much better bunters. so in the end, i'd say things are a wash.

[preachermatt83]

LOL. No he couldn't- and he wouldn't. Don't get me wrong- he's good, but no.

I disagree. I have to agree with Will on this. There is no doubt in my mind Lingo could be effective right now in a pro bullpen.

[shoeless joe]

I disagree. I have to agree with Will on this. There is no doubt in my mind Lingo could be effective right now in a pro bullpen.


Some folks live in la-la land or have no idea what the stuff of a big leaguer actually looks like. Lindgren could without a doubt develop into a big league guy. Right now he's a good AA pitcher. He would prolly have success at that level. I guess because professional hitters make it look easy folks think they are comparable to college guys but they get paid the big bucks for a reason.

Not to mention the part of actually playing ball for a livin. It's not easy and some guys mentally can't do it. Not saying lindgren fall in this category, but it's the reason more folks miss than make the big leagues.

I guess some of you don't know enough to realize what it takes. It's a fine line but consistently on that level is hard to achieve.

Ex: better college player- Mitch Moreland or Stephen head?
Better pro-Mitch Moreland or Stephen head?

[Will James]

no idea what the stuff of a big leaguer actually looks like.

Lindgren couldn't come in and get a LHB out every game? He strikes out about half of the hitters he faces. He is better than Girodo was and thats saying something. People cannot even put the ball in play against him, he has a 6.2 K/BB ratio, he gets as many groundballs as Kendall Graveman...

He would be effective RIGHT NOW in a big league pen. His stuff is that nasty. He is currently 12th in the league in K's... throwing less than 20 innings!

[shoeless joe]

Lindgren couldn't come in and get a LHB out every game? He strikes out about half of the hitters he faces. He is better than Girodo was and thats saying something. People cannot even put the ball in play against him, he has a 6.2 K/BB ratio, he gets as many groundballs as Kendall Graveman...

He would be effective RIGHT NOW in a big league pen. His stuff is that nasty. He is currently 12th in the league in K's... throwing less than 20 innings!

Since graveman and girodo aren't in the bigs...or AAA...or AA...I don't seem how comparing to them is helping your stance on this. Lindgren is good no doubt, he's damn good. But he is not currently a major league ready pitcher.

[Homedawg]

Look I love lindgren and have been sayin he's a great draft pick and has a chance. But it's a chance not a sure thing. Bj Wallace was a filthy as any lhp I've ever seen. He had more pitches than jacob and he never made triple a. Long long way from the big leagues.