- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:24 am to Doc Fenton
quote:
I intend to meltdown during CWS over all sorts of little inconsequential things, and nobody better call me inconsistent!!
I see. Not sure that distinguishes you from 95% of the Rantards on this board....
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:25 am to Doc Fenton
You're better than this.
At least I thought you were.
At least I thought you were.
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:30 am to aaronb023
"Never tell anyone outside the Family what you are thinking again."
:|
:|
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:35 am to Doc Fenton
And he other thing is, the sacrifice bunt also has to be executed.
Put me on the non team bunt side.
This post was edited on 5/25/13 at 9:36 am
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:40 am to MrWiseGuy
Yep. Not only is your "run expectancy" higher with a man on 1st and 0 outs than with a man on 2nd and 1 out, but your percentage chance of scoring at least 1 run is also higher.
So it's a lose-lose in most situations, unless you have a sub-.100 NL pitcher up to bat or something.
EDIT: I'm guessing you got those charts from this article.
And all that is assuming that sac bunts go 100% perfectly. I'm all for quasi-sac bunts where you try to sneak in a hit on a lazy third baseman, but come on. Sac bunts should be very rare unless you are trying to advance the go-ahead run in the bottom of the last inning.
So it's a lose-lose in most situations, unless you have a sub-.100 NL pitcher up to bat or something.
EDIT: I'm guessing you got those charts from this article.
quote:
This is also the case when a runner is sacrificed from 1st base to 2nd to avoid the double play. With a runner on 1st and 0 outs a team is expected to score .941 runs while a team with a runner on 2nd and 1 out is expected to score only .721 runs. These differences are even larger (23% decreased run expectancy), and again, this is real.
quote:
Another common situation is the bunt with nobody out and a man on 1B. If the bunt is successful, the odds of scoring just one run move from 44.1% to 41.8%, a decrease of 2.3%.
And all that is assuming that sac bunts go 100% perfectly. I'm all for quasi-sac bunts where you try to sneak in a hit on a lazy third baseman, but come on. Sac bunts should be very rare unless you are trying to advance the go-ahead run in the bottom of the last inning.
This post was edited on 5/25/13 at 9:45 am
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:43 am to MrWiseGuy
quote:
MrWiseGuy
Look bro, don't bring numbers, percentages and stats into this......a tradition of stupid decisions and doing what we were taught when we were young makes a whole lot more sense.
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:44 am to josh336
bunting never worked on RBI baseball on the nintendo. therefore, I am on team No Bunt
This post was edited on 5/25/13 at 9:45 am
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:45 am to AstroTiger
quote:
if Stevenson or Laird had been up, he would have bunted. 100% guaranteed.
He said he will never do it. And I've seen him coach like this before with much lesser hitters up.
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:51 am to Golfer
Early in the game, I'm for no bunt. In the 9th, you probably bunt unless Katz or someone of the like is up. Situations are all different.
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:54 am to Golfer
He let Laird hit away a few weeks ago in the 8th or 9th down 1
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:57 am to AstroTiger
It's not just the bunt situation. It's the fact raph is a dp machine and everyone knew that's what was going to happen
Posted on 5/25/13 at 9:59 am to More beer please
Everyone thought it could happen, no one knew it would happen
Posted on 5/25/13 at 10:00 am to MrWiseGuy
I think the statistics showing the disadvantages of bunting are great. I'm not a proponent of giving away outs.
However..the stats encompass all teams...lets say in the AL or NL or whatever. I think the stats should be tallied for individual teams...then correlate the numbers with things like BA, slugging, OBP etc. I think those numbers might reveal that teams with few sluggers, lower BA and OBP should bunt more to help manufacture runs.
Of course LSU does not fall in that category. This team should rarely bunt. I'd much rather hit and run with our team.
However..the stats encompass all teams...lets say in the AL or NL or whatever. I think the stats should be tallied for individual teams...then correlate the numbers with things like BA, slugging, OBP etc. I think those numbers might reveal that teams with few sluggers, lower BA and OBP should bunt more to help manufacture runs.
Of course LSU does not fall in that category. This team should rarely bunt. I'd much rather hit and run with our team.
Posted on 5/25/13 at 10:01 am to Sandperson
Yes I know that gap hits were rare in this game.
There is no reason we shouldn't have shelled this freshman relief pitcher though.
We've hit much better off of much better pitching.
I'd lean more towards team bunt in the game we played against Stanek.
But yesterday, we should have hit Oxycotton.
There is no reason we shouldn't have shelled this freshman relief pitcher though.
We've hit much better off of much better pitching.
I'd lean more towards team bunt in the game we played against Stanek.
But yesterday, we should have hit Oxycotton.
Posted on 5/25/13 at 10:03 am to josh336
people were calling it in the game thread. shite he had already done it twice that game. It's just the type of hitter he is, grounders and line drives.
Posted on 5/25/13 at 10:03 am to Swat5
Posted on 5/25/13 at 10:04 am to More beer please
You still have to give him the chance to hit, he's one of your best hitters
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News