Re: 4374 vs. 3 x 9 x 162
Originally Posted by defender
Just to clarify (and this is nothing to do with the post above), I am not making a watch the game vs. computer or old school vs. new school, it is purely a math argument.
As for the quote above, the implication is that if the best outcome of a bunt is worse than the current state, not bunting must be better.
I don't think total run data is useful for the true calculation a manager is making. Bunting is rare. Overall only 1% of PA's. The most common time is no outs man on first (374 bunts in 4992 PAs 2013 NL), only 7.5% of the time. 3rd and 4th hitters, only 12 bunts total all year in the NL.
The best hitters don't bunt, and I would bet managers bunt less against the worst pitchers. The 5th hitter has 16 bunts, the 9th hitter has 572. That seems to indicate managers are doing some calculations.
If you throw out the three best hitters on the team, it might turn out the run is more likely to score with one out from second, than first with no outs. Also consider, that the manager may want to make the move to put pressure on the the other team and keep momentum with his team.
The data RMR is talking about is not "total Run" data. It's probability-based using historical PBP date from actual Base/Out state events. And yes, you can separate into subsets of hitters (example: remove pitchers from the mix).
The data already includes what you think it doesn't include.
"The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer
"The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”