Should Dusty have asked Edwin to bunt?

[westofyou]

If that's your plan, then make enough of a commitment to your own plan to send a good bunter to the plate to execute it.

Yep.. that's an issue... but send the PH who can bunt up there and the pitcher gets 2 strikes and you're in a new barrel of pickles.

The better solution would be for the man who doesn't hit 70EBH a year to learn to bunt.

[blumj]

Yep.. that's an issue... but send the PH who can bunt up there and the pitcher gets 2 strikes and you're in a new barrel of pickles.

The better solution would be for the man who doesn't hit 70EBH a year to learn to bunt.

Sure, if you could snap your fingers and magically make it happen in the moments before the AB. It's no solution at all if you can't.

[SteelSD]

In this particular situation, if there are runners on 2nd and 3rd, a walk to set up the double play would also put the winning run on base.

Generally speaking, intentional walks don't happen in this situation. So avoiding the DP is a fairly valid consideration.

Putting the winning Run on 1st base when up by 2 Runs in that scenario is far less damaging to the defense than we think. Doing so, results in a WP gain of only 0.016 and the situation is still extremely dire for the offense.

If staying out of a DP scenario needs to be a primary consideration for the offense with none out, then enabling such a scenario certainly should be a primary consideration for the defense as well. And the offense can never stay out of such a scenario should the defense choose to make it happen.

I'd suggest that walking the next hitter after a successful SH in that situation should be utilized more if the DP actually is a primary consideration. But that's the thing. Personally, I feel that "staying out of the DP scenario" is most often just code for "we thought that trading that Out for those extra bases was a good idea at the time".

[Team Clark]

I voted "no". But a wacky thought came to me. What if Dusty is in a way "calling out" the entire team by calling for that bunt? What if he's announcing that we're going to bunt any time I think we should, and you all had better improve your technique if you don't want to be humiliated.

I know that's a reach, but is it possible that there's any truth to it?

Excellent point. Granted Edwin came thorugh with a HR. He was just as likely, IMO, to make an out instead of hitting the HR. (DUH) Fortunately, he came through.

Since when do we not expect players to only be able to execute SOME of the fundamentals? ESPECIALLY just days after ST!!

Even Griffey can bunt well.

[Raisor]

I don't care if EddieE was the best bunter in the history of baseball, I wouldn't want him bunting in that situation, period.

[puca]

This is going to be a long year.

[blumj]

Since when do we not expect players to only be able to execute SOME of the fundamentals?

Since what we may expect doesn't alter reality?

[princeton]

I'm sure EE has taken tons of bunting practice since he was in high school, all the way up through the minors and I'll bet he was practicing plenty for Narron last year. He's probably as good as he can be at it right now (which who knows how good is that). I doubt it's from lack of trying.

more a lack of motivation than a lack of opportunity.

my experience is that all players prefer to swing than to bunt, and it takes some motivation (such as looking really bad in a big bunt situation?) to want to learn. Otherwise, you're just going through the motions

interestingly, many players that learn to bunt well do so in their mid-to-late 20's-- Corey Patterson couldn't bunt well just a couple of years ago, for instance.

if you keep stressing the fundamentals to young players, they just might grow up one day and come unDunn for you

[RollyInRaleigh]

more a lack of motivation than a lack of opportunity.

my experience is that all players prefer to swing than to bunt, and it takes some motivation (such as looking really bad in a big bunt situation?) to want to learn. Otherwise, you're just going through the motions

interestingly, many players that learn to bunt well do so in their mid-to-late 20's-- Corey Patterson couldn't bunt well just a couple of years ago, for instance.

if you keep stressing the fundamentals to young players, they just might grow up one day and come unDunn for you

That has been my experience with players. Good post.

[Patrick Bateman]

Yea the DBacks are stupid for having their players bunt. All that stupidity led them to the NL Championship series. I don't, nor will I ever, understand why people think that bunting, especially in a situation like the other night, is stupid.

As often as the Bill James want to disregard small ball and bunting it still is very useful in today's game. It was great that Edwin hit a HR but I think it is also as likely that he could have hit into a double play.

Laying down a successful bunt decreased the Reds chances of winning that game. That's just based on probabilities.

Does it really need to go further than that? Especially considering the odds of EE even getting a successful bunt down were poor?

If it works, you shoot yourself in the foot. If it fails, your just wasting valuable chances. It's a lose-lose proposition in that situation.

[bucksfan2]

Laying down a successful bunt decreased the Reds chances of winning that game. That's just based on probabilities.

Does it really need to go further than that? Especially considering the odds of EE even getting a successful bunt down were poor?

If it works, you shoot yourself in the foot. If it fails, your just wasting valuable chances. It's a lose-lose proposition in that situation.

I find that very interesting. I don't see how laying down a successful bunt would decrease the reds chances of winning. In a computerized model you may be correct but on that given day we may never know had Edwin been successful would the reds have won.

[WMR]

I find that very interesting. I don't see how laying down a successful bunt would decrease the reds chances of winning. In a computerized model you may be correct but on that given day we may never know had Edwin been successful would the reds have won.

That's why you should use all of the data available to you to make the most intelligent, informed decision possible.

[dabvu2498]

That's why you should use all of the data available to you to make the most intelligent, informed decision possible.

However, actually, the data shows the bunt does increase win expectancy here. Though not by alot:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showp...6&postcount=37

[WMR]

Is that taking into consideration WHO you've got coming up after EE or is it assuming all batters at an equal value?

[dabvu2498]

Is that taking into consideration WHO you've got coming up after EE or is it assuming all batters at an equal value?

Strictly based on the historical data from 1977 to 2006.

Like I've said before, in that situation, given all the variables I can think of, I wouldn't have asked EE to bunt. Of course, I'm sure none of us are really thinking of ALL the variables.

I was alluding to Austin Kearns' assertion above that a successful bunt decreases win expectancy. Given the historical data, it doesn't.