Sac Bunt vs Straight Steal

[bulldogcountry1]

Others have mentioned it, but I was surprised to look back and see where we stacked up, as far as SB. Given our offensive "approach", it seems that just doesn't make sense that we were near the bottom of the league. We've heard Cohen talk about being aggressive on the base paths, but the results don't reflect that. Maybe I misread his quote, and he actually said "absolutely freaking clueless". Either way, I would like to see some statistics that show a comparison of straight stealing second versus the sacrifice bunt and what it leads to, as far as runs.

On the surface, stealing seems to involve more risk, but the reward could be much higher (unless you immediately bunt him over to 3rd). You also aren't giving away an out. Obviously, not all baserunners are created equal, but neither are all bunters. Over the course of the season, it seems like stealing could lead to more big innings and be more beneficial than laying down the bunt (outside of a traditional bunt situation), but I could be wrong. What say you?

[messageboardsuperhero]

It's one of my biggest beefs with Cohen's philosophy. He says we are "an attacking, aggressive" team, and yet we are tops in the league in sac bunting. Straight steals and hit and runs are aggressive- sac bunting is boring, passive baseball and the antithesis of what he claims for us to be. There are limited times and places for a sac bunt, but we totally abuse it.

[HereComesTheSpiral]

You would think with all of the slappy hitters we had that couldn't get a ball out of the infield, we would do more hit and run to try and get someone out of position.

[blacklistedbully]

Others have mentioned it, but I was surprised to look back and see where we stacked up, as far as SB. Given our offensive "approach", it seems that just doesn't make sense that we were near the bottom of the league. We've heard Cohen talk about being aggressive on the base paths, but the results don't reflect that. Maybe I misread his quote, and he actually said "absolutely freaking clueless". Either way, I would like to see some statistics that show a comparison of straight stealing second versus the sacrifice bunt and what it leads to, as far as runs.

On the surface, stealing seems to involve more risk, but the reward could be much higher (unless you immediately bunt him over to 3rd). You also aren't giving away an out. Obviously, not all baserunners are created equal, but neither are all bunters. Over the course of the season, it seems like stealing could lead to more big innings and be more beneficial than laying down the bunt (outside of a traditional bunt situation), but I could be wrong. What say you?

I don't believe one can make a relevant statistical comparison. Though you acknowledge, "not all baserunners are created equal", I think you're vastly underestimating just how much that really matters, as do other factors, such as opposing pitchers and catchers faced, etc.

If you could find a team that tried the two different philosophies, using the same personnel, versus the same opposition, and in a sample size significant enough for both approaches to not be so subject to anomalies, then you perhaps could draw some worthwhile conclusion. But that approach would also likely need to be viewed with a skeptical-eye, as you couldn't account for the impact individual players relative performance on a given day might have had. Sometimes pitchers just don't have their stuff for whatever reason. Often the way a team plays is dependent on score and situation, which can certainly change the way they approach the game.

Anyway, those are my initial thoughts.

[RossDawg82]

For cohens coaching method to work you need soon to be major league pitchers. If you don't have that you will lose a lot of games 8-2