bunting

fredbeene · 03-13-2019, 08:37 AM

how can i tell how many attempted bunt hits and bunt, attempted sf hits and hits are executed?

I have NO WAY of knowing if any strategies set at team or player level are being done.

TomVeal · 03-14-2019, 11:45 AM

More importantly, there's no way to see how successful bunting strategies are. I don't know, though, whether any real life statistics track the results of bunts, though it's hard to believe that the sabremetricians have overlooked them.

Dyzalot · 03-14-2019, 01:01 PM

My understanding, unless it has changed recently, is that the "sabremetricians" determined a long time ago that most of the time it isn't optimal to sac bunt. I remember Bill James running numbers back in the day on even the use of pitchers sac bunting all of the time and he determined that at best the strategy was a "wash" even for them.

jimmysthebestcop · 03-14-2019, 03:05 PM

Yeah pretty much no bunting, no hit and run, no stealing, no pitching around, and no intentional walks.

Dyzalot · 03-14-2019, 03:14 PM

I'm pretty sure that sabremetricians would be pretty happy with how often and how successfully the Red Sox stole bases last year. I don't think they rule all of those things out completely. It is just that they've shown the value of those strategies to be far less or far more situational than conventional baseball wisdom had assumed.

BirdWatcher · 03-14-2019, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

I'm pretty sure that sabremetricians would be pretty happy with how often and how successfully the Red Sox stole bases last year. I don't think they rule all of those things out completely. It is just that they've shown the value of those strategies to be far less or far more situational than conventional baseball wisdom had assumed.

Exactly! I think the upshot is that a successful stolen base is a definite plus in enhancing a team's scoring chances. A caught stealing: well, obviously a minus. So it's not the stealing of bases that the advanced metrics folk really frown upon. It's just that mathematical models show that a certain success rate is needed for this to be probabilistically wise. The general rule, as I understand it, is that a player needs to have something approaching an 80% success rate for him to be providing value to his team in attempting to steal bases.

(Now me, as a fan, well, I love the stolen base. And sometimes I say wisdom be damned. But I get their point and I can't find fault with the rationality of their arguments. Few people who know me have ever accused me of being rational to a fault.

)

03-13-2019, 08:37 AM	#1
fredbeene All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 1,610 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	bunting how can i tell how many attempted bunt hits and bunt, attempted sf hits and hits are executed? I have NO WAY of knowing if any strategies set at team or player level are being done.

03-14-2019, 11:45 AM	#2
TomVeal All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Spanaway, Washington Posts: 1,239	More importantly, there's no way to see how successful bunting strategies are. I don't know, though, whether any real life statistics track the results of bunts, though it's hard to believe that the sabremetricians have overlooked them.

03-14-2019, 01:01 PM	#3
Dyzalot All Star Starter Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,735	My understanding, unless it has changed recently, is that the "sabremetricians" determined a long time ago that most of the time it isn't optimal to sac bunt. I remember Bill James running numbers back in the day on even the use of pitchers sac bunting all of the time and he determined that at best the strategy was a "wash" even for them.

03-14-2019, 03:05 PM	#4
jimmysthebestcop Banned Join Date: Jun 2018 Posts: 1,728 Infractions: 0/2 (5)	Yeah pretty much no bunting, no hit and run, no stealing, no pitching around, and no intentional walks.

03-14-2019, 03:14 PM	#5
Dyzalot All Star Starter Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,735	I'm pretty sure that sabremetricians would be pretty happy with how often and how successfully the Red Sox stole bases last year. I don't think they rule all of those things out completely. It is just that they've shown the value of those strategies to be far less or far more situational than conventional baseball wisdom had assumed.