- 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
Bunting and college baseball
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:13 pm
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:13 pm
LINK
A good article on why teams should not bunt in the high run scoring environment of college baseball. I especially like having a college run expectancy chart.
A good article on why teams should not bunt in the high run scoring environment of college baseball. I especially like having a college run expectancy chart.
6
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:25 pm to Baloo
5 pages
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:27 pm to Baloo
Well, you can bunt if you think you have the pitching to keep the score low.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:30 pm to Baloo
I'd read a similar article on that before. Beats the hell outta runnin back to the dugout with ya bat in ya hand, that's fa sho.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:32 pm to DEANintheYAY
this argument has been brought up numerous times on this board, and these stats always get brought up.
I want to know, why coaches continue to bunt if this is the cold hard facts. Coaches who have played in, coached, and watched THOUSANDS of baseball games in their lifetime. Why?
I, myself, am a fan of the bunt in certain situations. Early in the game, not really. But there are a few circumstances where i wouldnt get mad about it if the situation called for it.
I want to know, why coaches continue to bunt if this is the cold hard facts. Coaches who have played in, coached, and watched THOUSANDS of baseball games in their lifetime. Why?
I, myself, am a fan of the bunt in certain situations. Early in the game, not really. But there are a few circumstances where i wouldnt get mad about it if the situation called for it.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:35 pm to Lester Earl
But there are more things under the coach's control than that. He knows more stats for each situation, such as lefty-righty matchups, speed of the base-runners, etc....
Also very important is the starting pitching and the probability of it being a close game.
Also very important is the starting pitching and the probability of it being a close game.
This post was edited on 6/11/09 at 6:37 pm
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:42 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
this argument has been brought up numerous times on this board, and these stats always get brought up.
I want to know, why coaches continue to bunt if this is the cold hard facts. Coaches who have played in, coached, and watched THOUSANDS of baseball games in their lifetime. Why?
I, myself, am a fan of the bunt in certain situations. Early in the game, not really. But there are a few circumstances where i wouldnt get mad about it if the situation called for it.
Well, the stats may indicate that but not all teams are the same. Those stats are in the aggregate and don't necessarily take into consideration individual team characteristics. A team with more power may be more likely to score a man on first, however other teams with less power may not and thus bunting helps.
In the aggregate the stats are true...
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:43 pm to LSUJuice
quote:
But there are more things under the coach's control than that. He knows more stats for each situation, such as lefty-righty matchups, speed of the base-runners, etc....
im not knocking the coaches...i want an explanation from the other side who totally opposes the bunt, on why they think coaches still call for it
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:49 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
I want to know, why coaches continue to bunt if this is the cold hard facts.
Because the coaching profession is inherently change-adverse. Becuase the last thing the coaching profession wants is to take advice from a bunch of pointy-headed nerds.
Like any institution, baseball hates change. More than any other sport, baseball is anti-innovation. People still bitch about the DH, and that was 40 friggin years ago. Coaches aren't changing because they have never looked at the data and even if they did, they refuse to believe it, and will find a way to rationalize why their experience does not match with the data.
Bunting costs a team runs. It's giving away outs. It's not the worst outcome of an at bat, but it's close.
Now, admittedly, this article does leave out one of the positives of buting in college: putting pressure on a defense to make plays. College defenses are much worse than their pro counterparts at turning batted balls into outs. It is more likely a defensive team will make an error.
Bunting is a way a college coach exerts more control over the game. It seems right up the alley of a coach of the average college coach. Coaches like control, as a general rule.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:54 pm to Baloo
quote:
Now, admittedly, this article does leave out one of the positives of buting in college: putting pressure on a defense to make plays. College defenses are much worse than their pro counterparts at turning batted balls into outs. It is more likely a defensive team will make an error.
This is a huge part of it. I know when I watch Fullerton play it seems like they are ALWAYS pressuring the defense. You really have to make plays and play solid defense or else the wheels will come off quickly.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 6:56 pm to Baloo
quote:
Becuase the last thing the coaching profession wants is to take advice from a bunch of pointy-headed nerds.
you really think thats the reason?
seems they took doctors advice to limit pitch counts and not over work pitchers like they used to throughout baseball history. Not exactly the same, but its pretty close.
ive also heard a lot of coaches & GM's recently quoting these new speciality stats that were pretty much unheard of 20-25 years ago. Maybe not unheard of, but not respected.
doesnt seem like they are totally against something that helps them win or stay on top.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 7:01 pm to Lester Earl
It took Bill James 20 to 30 years to make a dent. And I do think it was easier to make the case with pitch counts because the investment was being destroyed. When a pitcher goes down, particularly if they are under contract longterm, that costs a team money.
Bunting isn't costing anyone a dime.
Bunting isn't costing anyone a dime.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 8:10 pm to Baloo
quote:
Because the coaching profession is inherently change-adverse. Becuase the last thing the coaching profession wants is to take advice from a bunch of pointy-headed nerds
Truer words have never been spoken.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 8:13 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
seems they took doctors advice to limit pitch counts and not over work pitchers like they used to throughout baseball history. Not exactly the same, but its pretty close.
I think he is talking more about baseball strategy or game planning. A coach will always take the opinion of a medical doctor over his own on a "health issue"; however, is very resistant in taking the advice of a math/statistics major when it comes to baseball "strategy".
Posted on 6/11/09 at 9:00 pm to Baloo
You guys are confusing 'bunting' with 'sacrificing.'
I agree that laying down a sac bunt in college baseball is rarely called for but bunting for a hit is a good idea in the right situation and should be employed more often.
IE, if the batter is a lefty with good speed and the 3B is playing back or has a rep as a poor fielder then I'm sending the bunt his way. The drag bunt to 1B is also a lost art. Very high percentage success when the 1B is playing deep.
You also need to consider the surface and the tilt of the dirt on the lines. High grass is good for bunting. Line tilts can be checked by rolling the ball down each line before batting practice and seeing how the dirt plays.
I agree that laying down a sac bunt in college baseball is rarely called for but bunting for a hit is a good idea in the right situation and should be employed more often.
IE, if the batter is a lefty with good speed and the 3B is playing back or has a rep as a poor fielder then I'm sending the bunt his way. The drag bunt to 1B is also a lost art. Very high percentage success when the 1B is playing deep.
You also need to consider the surface and the tilt of the dirt on the lines. High grass is good for bunting. Line tilts can be checked by rolling the ball down each line before batting practice and seeing how the dirt plays.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 9:03 pm to Baloo
a productive out >>>>>>>>>>>>> a non-productive out
especially when success is a 70% failure rate (i,e, .300 BA)
especially when success is a 70% failure rate (i,e, .300 BA)
Posted on 6/11/09 at 9:07 pm to Baloo
If you read the comments below the article, I think this one is especially valuable:
quote:
Does an out and a runner advance equate to a sacrifice bunt attempt? No, come on, I spent dozens of pages in The Book, which you cite and supposedly read, explaining in painstaking detail that you CAN’T analyze whether a bunt attempt is correct or not by just looking at the RE (run expectancy) or WE (win expectancy) after an out and a runner advance! Did you actually read that chapter?
How many singles and ROE’s occur in college baseball (and with this particular batter) when he attempts a bunt?
How often does he make an out and NOT advance the runner?
How often does he bunt into a DP?
If he bunts some percentage of the time, how much does he increase his team’s WE or RE when he doesn’t bunt, because now the defense must play in a little expecting a bunt in similar situations?
All of these questions need to be answered in order to figure out how often (it is not a “yes or no” question) a bunt should be attempted, given the game situation, ambient conditions, and the personnel involved (pitcher, runner, batter).
Just looking at RE or WE charts will not answer the question I am afraid.
So let’s hold off on those emails to the head coach.
I will say though, that given the high run environment, it is likely that the bunt is rarely warranted, but it is also possible that because of the worse defense in college ball (I assume, but maybe not), and greater speed by the batters, that there are more singles and ROE’s on a bunt attempt to cancel out the effect of the higher run environment. Again, we just don’t know until the proper analysis is done.
Posted on 6/11/09 at 9:09 pm to Rouge
quote:
a productive out >>>>>>>>>>>>> a non-productive out especially when success is a 70% failure rate (i,e, .300 BA)
So a walk isnt a successful outcome?
Posted on 6/11/09 at 9:11 pm to cory4513
quote:i'm failing to see where you're going there, except for my need to possibly use a metric like a .370 OBP
So a walk isnt a successful outcome?
Posted on 6/11/09 at 9:13 pm to Rouge
You said that failure rate is usually 70% when a person has a .300 BA , implying that a walk is a failed outcome.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News