2014 SEC Games Bunt Numbers!!!

[Smitty]

This is shocking and infuriating at the same damn time. It's bad.. Real bad... Makes what we are doing this year EVEN WORSE THAN WE IMAGINED!!!! Last year Cohen got away from bunting the man over from first, and with good reason when we see the results. BUT, he LOVED bunting the man over from 2nd.


Man on 1st, 0 outs
Boyd says you score 49% of the time here.
We bunt 6 times.. We score just 1 time.... Zero instances of scoring multiple runs...
Boyd says to score 49%, we score just 17% bunting.

We DONT BUNT 86 times.. We score 40 times... 20 instances of scoring multiple runs..
Boyd says to score 49%, we score 47% not bunting. HALF of those times we have a big inning (2+ runs).


Man on 2nd, 0 outs
Boyd says you score 70% of the time here.
We bunt 11 times.. We score just 4 times.. Zero instances of scoring multiple runs...
Boyd says to score 70%, we score just 36% bunting.

We DONT BUNT 5 times.. We score 4 times.. 2 instances of scoring multiple runs..
Boyd says to score 70%, we score 80% not bunting. HALF of those times we have a big inning (2+ runs).


So we bunt one man over 17 times last year, scoring just 5 times, having ZERO big innings (2+ runs). This has been our bread and butter this year!! Cohen! WTF! DO NOT BUNT ONE MAN OVER ANYMORE!


1st and 2nd, 0 outs
Boyd says you score 71% of the time here.
We bunt 10 times.. We score 6 times.. 4 instances of multiple runs.
Boyd says to score 71%, we score 60%.. 4/6 big innings with 2 already on base.

We DONT BUNT 10 times.. We score 8 times.. 5 instances of multiple runs.
Boyd says to score 71% of the time, we score 80% of the time.. 5/8 big innings.

.
.
So in conclusion, it is what we have come to expect. The one man bunting over is a stupid, run-draining play. We base a TON of our offense on this play, much moreso this year than last. Offense is supposed to be UP this year, yet we are doing the opposite.

We already have FOUR move one man over bunts in SEC play in 3 games.. We only had 17 in 30 games last year.

[Irondawg]

it's late so maybe my brain isn't working but On the 1st scenario where is the 86 times coming from?

[I seen it dawg]

Hope you bloodied your keyboard with your head.

[starkvegasdawg]

Can we get Fitts to put that in a power point presentation?

[SapperDawg]

Man on 1st, 0 outs
Boyd says you score 49% of the time here.
We bunt 6 times.. We score just 1 time.... Zero instances of scoring multiple runs...
Boyd says to score 49%, we score just 17% bunting.

We DONT BUNT 86 times.. We score 40 times... 20 instances of scoring multiple runs..
Boyd says to score 49%, we score 47% not bunting. HALF of those times we have a big inning (2+ runs).

Am I reading this correctly?

Condition 1: with a man on first and no outs in SEC play we had 92 total ABs. Out of the 92 ABs, we did not bunt 86 times or 93% of all ABs in this condition.

[War Machine Dawg]

Am I reading this correctly: with a man on first and no outs in SEC play we had 92 total ABs. Out of the 92 ABs, we did not bunt 86 times or 93% of all ABs in this condition?

Looks like you've got it right. And Smitty said clearly that Cohen got away from bunting one man over from first last season. He's reverted back this season.

[War Machine Dawg]

This is shocking and infuriating at the same damn time. It's bad.. Real bad... Makes what we are doing this year EVEN WORSE THAN WE IMAGINED!!!! Last year Cohen got away from bunting the man over from first, and with good reason when we see the results. BUT, he LOVED bunting the man over from 2nd.


Man on 1st, 0 outs
Boyd says you score 49% of the time here.
We bunt 6 times.. We score just 1 time.... Zero instances of scoring multiple runs...
Boyd says to score 49%, we score just 17% bunting.

We DONT BUNT 86 times.. We score 40 times... 20 instances of scoring multiple runs..
Boyd says to score 49%, we score 47% not bunting. HALF of those times we have a big inning (2+ runs).


Man on 2nd, 0 outs
Boyd says you score 70% of the time here.
We bunt 11 times.. We score just 4 times.. Zero instances of scoring multiple runs...
Boyd says to score 70%, we score just 36% bunting.

We DONT BUNT 5 times.. We score 4 times.. 2 instances of scoring multiple runs..
Boyd says to score 70%, we score 80% not bunting. HALF of those times we have a big inning (2+ runs).


So we bunt one man over 17 times last year, scoring just 5 times, having ZERO big innings (2+ runs). This has been our bread and butter this year!! Cohen! WTF! DO NOT BUNT ONE MAN OVER ANYMORE!


1st and 2nd, 0 outs
Boyd says you score 71% of the time here.
We bunt 10 times.. We score 6 times.. 4 instances of multiple runs.
Boyd says to score 71%, we score 60%.. 4/6 big innings with 2 already on base.

We DONT BUNT 10 times.. We score 8 times.. 5 instances of multiple runs.
Boyd says to score 71% of the time, we score 80% of the time.. 5/8 big innings.

.
.
So in conclusion, it is what we have come to expect. The one man bunting over is a stupid, run-draining play. We base a TON of our offense on this play, much moreso this year than last. Offense is supposed to be UP this year, yet we are doing the opposite.

We already have FOUR move one man over bunts in SEC play in 3 games.. We only had 17 in 30 games last year.

[Ralph]

Ok, I'm a believer now.

Personally, I think cohens our man, just wish he'd change plate approach.

[HSVDawg]

I agree with the general premise of the post. Bunting one runner over is not good practice except in a very select few situations (for instance, leadoff double in the bottom of the 9th in a tie game).

[Drugdog]

Will anybody get this info to The Coaches?

[LC Dawg]

I'm shocked we had that many 1st and 2nd no out situations. Did any of those not involve a walk or an error?

[smootness]

The frustrating thing is, this should all be pretty obvious based on simple observation.

[RougeDawg]

Hilarious. But wait, if you question Cohen or show how he is holding us back, you are an idiot and should be bashed and shamed back into submission!!!!!!! Todd, Engie, ISeenIT, et.al where are you on this one? Maybe they are thinking up and composing all their apologies to Smitty, myself and others on here who've seen this from the beginning.

The 0 out bunting with a man on 1st has it's place in the game and can be defended in certain situations, but bunting with 0 outs and a man on 2nd is never acceptable unless you are drag bunting for a hit. Never should sacfirice in that situation, ever. The chances from scoring from 2nd with 0 outs are astronomically high, so why would you give up an out to roughly keep your odds the same of scoring 1 run?

[RougeDawg]

I agree with the general premise of the post. Bunting one runner over is not good practice except in a very select few situations (for instance, leadoff double in the bottom of the 9th in a tie game).

No, you never bunt with man on 2nd and 0 outs. Best play is for hitter to choke up, spread out feet, and use a safe hit and run type approach. Hit the ball on the ground to the right side of the infield. You have a chance of getting a hit and still move the runner over. If you happen to pop the ball up to the right side of the field the runner has a chance to tag and move up. You absolutely cannot give up an out with a runner on 2nd and no outs. Giving up that out, even while moving the runner over, greatly diminishes the chances of scoring a run.

[Really Clark?]

Hilarious. But wait, if you question Cohen or show how he is holding us back, you are an idiot and should be bashed and shamed back into submission!!!!!!! Todd, Engie, ISeenIT, et.al where are you on this one? Maybe they are thinking up and composing all their apologies to Smitty, myself and others on here who've seen this from the beginning.

The 0 out bunting with a man on 1st has it's place in the game and can be defended in certain situations, but bunting with 0 outs and a man on 2nd is never acceptable unless you are drag bunting for a hit. Never should sacfirice in that situation, ever. The chances from scoring from 2nd with 0 outs are astronomically high, so why would you give up an out to roughly keep your odds the same of scoring 1 run?

I agree with you somewhat but there are situations where you definitely should consider bunting the guy from 2nd to 3rd even if you sacrifice the out. Not to mention the fact that statistically the attempt of bunting for a hit in that situation, like you said, is a good play because runners at 1st and 3rd with no outs is the exact same run expectancy I believe as runner on 2 with no outs. But if you are down one or tied late I want to get that guy over to third because I also bring in the ability to score on the WP or error from the bunt play itself. A good bunt and put pressure on the fielder to make a good throw as well. You are talking about sacrificing .17 runs by having the runner at 3rd with 1 out vs runner at 2nd with 0 outs. Late in the game it's a good trade off. Especially with the added pressure on the defense and the pitcher.

[War Machine Dawg]

I agree with the general premise of the post. Bunting one runner over is not good practice except in a very select few situations (for instance, leadoff double in the bottom of the 9th in a tie game).

^^^This guy gets it.^^^

[messageboardsuperhero]

I'm surprised with how few times we bunted men from 1st to second last year.

But yes, I think the fact that we're sac bunting far too much right now should be very clear at this point.

[Really Clark?]

No, you never bunt with man on 2nd and 0 outs. Best play is for hitter to choke up, spread out feet, and use a safe hit and run type approach. Hit the ball on the ground to the right side of the infield. You have a chance of getting a hit and still move the runner over. If you happen to pop the ball up to the right side of the field the runner has a chance to tag and move up. You absolutely cannot give up an out with a runner on 2nd and no outs. Giving up that out, even while moving the runner over, greatly diminishes the chances of scoring a run.

Not just picking on you as I already said I agree with your above approach mostly, but unless I'm misremembering I think you have a slightly higher percentage of scoring one run with a runner on 3rd and 1 out vs runner on 2 and 0 outs. Your total run expectancy is a little less but the ability to score 1 run goes up. Tied game bottom of 9th would be the perfect time to consider bunting a man to 3rd. Not saying the other approach is bad or invalid but you have choices.

[shoeless joe]

Hilarious. But wait, if you question Cohen or show how he is holding us back, you are an idiot and should be bashed and shamed back into submission!!!!!!! Todd, Engie, ISeenIT, et.al where are you on this one? Maybe they are thinking up and composing all their apologies to Smitty, myself and others on here who've seen this from the beginning.

The 0 out bunting with a man on 1st has it's place in the game and can be defended in certain situations, but bunting with 0 outs and a man on 2nd is never acceptable unless you are drag bunting for a hit. Never should sacfirice in that situation, ever. The chances from scoring from 2nd with 0 outs are astronomically high, so why would you give up an out to roughly keep your odds the same of scoring 1 run?

We all know from your posts that you're smarter than Cohen and a much better coach...hell if somebody doubts it they can just ask you...but your second paragraph makes zero sense. If it is ok, on occasion, to play for a runner on 2nd with 1 out...how is it NEVER ok to play for a runner at 3rd with 1 out?

Fact: there are more ways,therefore it's easier, to score from third versus second regardless of the number of outs.

Just so it's clear, I am not against buntin, but I do think we use it too much and in situations where there is a better play

[maroonmania]

And the deal is this is something that could easily improve our overall run production if the coaches would just chill out on all the sacrifice bunting in almost every situation with a baserunner. For those that want to harp on the bullpen and nothing but the bullpen for every aspect of all of our woes (i.e. Todd4State and a few others), there is nothing so concrete like this that can be done to help that problem. All you can dor there is keep changing out who you use in the pen until you find someone who can throw strikes while not getting slapped all over the yard.