That ball was damn near in the batters boxQuote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
Printable View
That ball was damn near in the batters boxQuote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
Hey! Lets bunt our .300/.405/.567 in SEC play hitter!
Didn't score after 1st and 2nd NO outs. Why? Giving away outs.
Hopefully blue ready to go home. Call strikesQuote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyQuid
Don't judge a move by the results.., where have I heard that? HahaQuote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
Yea that's why we didn't score ** I'm sorry u can't say that by not bunting there we score.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
Um, we have a better chance to.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyQuid
We know how to judge it.. We have the ability to say one move is better than anotherQuote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
You are kidding right. You do realize you have a much better chance of scoring statistically speaking with second and third and one out then runner on second and no outs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
This does not fall into your usual line of thinking with a runner on first and nobody out.
We win!! Despite Cohen's best efforts!!!
Get the brooms out tomorrow!
That may be but u can't say that's why we didn't score just sounds stupid. Was right call in that situation. And anyway, we win.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
You score less runs. And you assume 100% bunt success. Obviously bunts are not 100% successful.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
While you assume 100% hit success...Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
That is a fair point. I am assuming you are successful with the bunt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
But you do not score less. Not with a lefty-righty matchup on deck and a guy that is not going to be doubled up. Now full disclosure, you do leave first base open which allows for a free pass to set up the double play, and because big boy was in the hole any ground ball not through would be a double play. This aint checkers, its chess.
Yeah..... That's a really unintelligent statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
http://www.boydsworld.com/data/ert.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
You score less
Actual thinking like a real baseball person. This is refreshing.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
This is the dumbest thing you have ever posted. It proves you are wrong. You do understand up by two in the bottom of the eighth we are not playing for MULTIPLE runs. I'm not trying to hang a crooked number up there and no baseball manager in the history of the game is trying to do that (yes, even with a suspect bull pen-but mind you, our pen has become more solid lately with Fitts and the emergence of Mintz). You are trying to add AN insurance run, and if you get more, then great. The charts prove you are more likely to score A run with second and third and one out than first and second and no outs. Its okay to bunt in some situations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
This is a tired meme that really doesn't make sense. Playing for one doesn't increase your chances of scoring.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
The move two over bunt would be okay if we had Robson or Spruill up.. Not Hump.
1. So you disagree with the chart you posted to attempt to make your point? Because the chart you posted absolutely says its increases your chance of scoring.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty
2. If Spruill is up, we have much bigger issues then deciding whether or not to bunt because Cohen has lost his mind or everybody else on the team quit.
3. I do appreciate your baseball knowledge, we just disagree on this point. And your chart supports my line of thinking.
Having runners there increases your chances of scoring 2%. To get runners there you MUST have a successful sac bunt which can't be done at a 95% rate. Meaning bunting does not increase your chances.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say