Bug that needs to be fixed immediately!

[damientheomen3]

Originally Posted by Hazza

Does the AI steal bases when it has a 10 run lead?

in MLB 09 the show i stole with an 8 run lead, and the commentator flipped out, so i did it 5 more times to see how he would react. funny stuff.

[Doctor No]

Originally Posted by Jah

If you were up at the plate, would you bunt when down 6-0 in the 8th inning of a no-hit bid? Wouldn't you rather hit the crap out of the ball to break up the no-hitter?? Seriously.

You're making it sound like those are the only two options (get a hit by hitting the ball hard, or getting a hit via bunt). Given those two options, of course you'd take the hard hit.

But those aren't the only two options, and if hitting the crap out of the ball to break up a no-hitter was that easy, it would have happened innings earlier. Seriously.

[BMW]

Originally Posted by Jah

And where am I saying anywhere that the batter is supposed to get up there and not try...or strike out on purpose...or not give his all??? All I'm saying is that I'd rather see the guy swing away and get his hit that way, as opposed to bunting when way behind in a late-inning no-hit game. I bet it hasn't happened often over the years...and if you guys would rather get up there and bunt when down 6-0...get your hit...and have the next few guys go out and you lose the game anyway...then great for you...you got your bunt single and you're a winner!! And you and your teammates can have a big party!!!

"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."

It doesn't really matter how you get on base, just that you get on. Unless you have the ability to hit a 7-run homer with no one on base. And there's no mercy rule in major league baseball, so even if it's the ninth inning, it shouldn't matter if you're down by one run or ten runs.

If the pitcher is so nasty that day that he is unhittable, your best resource may be to catch them off balance with a bunt. So why beat down the "thinking" player? The don't bunt "rule" is really a BS macho thing. Would it be unseemly for Carlos Delgado or David Ortiz to poke a bloop single through the hole in an infield shift? If Jose Reyes makes really poor contact should he jog down to first base because it's not much of a "real" hit?

A no hitter is supposed to be an achievement, and bottom line is that a good baseball club should be able to execute all aspects of the game well. If your club can't field bunts maybe they don't deserve to pitch a no hitter.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by Jah

If you were up at the plate, would you bunt when down 6-0 in the 8th inning of a no-hit bid?

If the manager told me to bunt, or if I had the option to choose and thought it was the best way to get on base, yes.

Originally Posted by Jah

Wouldn't you rather hit the crap out of the ball to break up the no-hitter?? Seriously.

I'd always rather do what's best for the team. Which is, usually, to get on base any way I can. The objective is for the team to win, not to grunt and show how macho you can be personally.

Originally Posted by Jah

Like I said in the previous post...enjoy your bunt single, but I sure hope it leads to a 7-run rally to win the game.

I have enjoyably laid down successful bunts that have led to winning games in late innings. I have even bunted a guy home from second once with the winning run. Bunting is a dying art, and a good, speedy bunter can really mess up the other team. You should not demean it. Speaking as a long-time third baseman, while the scariest guy to see at the plate is the power hitter who hits Warp Two line drives towards third base which you may not see before they get to you, the second scariest guy is the good bunter with speed who can also hit for average.

You don't play much real baseball, do you?

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by BMW

It doesn't really matter how you get on base, just that you get on...If your club can't field bunts maybe they don't deserve to pitch a no hitter.

It's always a pleasure to see people on here who understand real baseball.

[Jah]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

If the manager told me to bunt, or if I had the option to choose and thought it was the best way to get on base, yes.

I'd always rather do what's best for the team. Which is, usually, to get on base any way I can. The objective is for the team to win, not to grunt and show how macho you can be personally.

I have enjoyably laid down successful bunts that have led to winning games in late innings. I have even bunted a guy home from second once with the winning run. Bunting is a dying art, and a good, speedy bunter can really mess up the other team. You should not demean it. Speaking as a long-time third baseman, while the scariest guy to see at the plate is the power hitter who hits Warp Two line drives towards third base which you may not see before they get to you, the second scariest guy is the good bunter with speed who can also hit for average.

You don't play much real baseball, do you?

All good points, Mal - I just have a different opinion. And yes, I've played a lot of real baseball - from Little League to college (briefly) to semi-pro...sorry if I have a difference of opinion.

Throughout this discussion, I've been speaking in the context of the OP - down by several runs, late in the game of a no-hit bid. From there, it spiraled into World Series games, the art of bunting (a dying art, like you said), and all kinds of other stuff. I'm all for bunting in close games, regardless of whether a no-hitter is being pitched, but - when several runs behind - I'd like to see the guy swing away, rather than bunt purely to break up the no-hitter. And you guys are right, the team should be able to field the bunt, etc. - all good points, but I simply disagree on bunting as related to the original situation. And because I disagree, that doesn't mean I don't know anything about real baseball.

I did a little research and discovered the following speedsters (and mostly good bunters) were on teams and in the lineup when their teams were no hit: Rickey Henderson (1990), Davey Lopes (1981), Lou Brock (1978), and Kenny Lofton (1993). I wonder if any of these guys attempted a bunt late in the game...we don't know for sure, but I'd wager against it...and I wouldn't consider any of these guys "losers" or "giving up" for not doing so.

The way I look at it...as a team, by the eighth inning of a game, you have had more than 20 unsuccessful at-bats. If the score is something like 6-0, a bunt in this instance is a cheap way of breaking up a no-hitter (IMHO!)…and if I was the on-deck hitter, I would be PISSED. I would assume the pitcher would drill me, and he would have every right to do so. Again, you may agree or disagree with all that "code" or "macho" stuff, but it's just the way I feel...as someone who has played the game off and on for several years.

If you can't swing the bat and earn your way on 20+ times before that at-bat, then show some pride and keep swinging. No matter what you guys say, I believe it is a matter of respect for your team and teammates, the game, and the achievements of an opposing player. He stymied you for 7 innings, so tip your cap and keep taking your licks up there. I know…you guys just want to get on base any way you can, regardless of the situation, and respect doesn’t matter and you're there to win (your opinions, which I respect)...but I wonder if Clemente or Mays or Aaron or Williams or DiMaggio would ever attempt a bunt to break up a no-hitter in the 8th or 9th inning? Somehow I doubt it.

[Simmo13]

I have a feeling that Johnny Bench broke up (or attempted to) a Cubs no-hit bid in the 8th or 9th with a bunt...I remember watching a Cubs broadcast several years ago where the pitcher (Holzman or Fergie?) was interviewed and said he had no problem with it and expected an opponent to try and get on base any way he could in such a situation. Perhaps someone else has more complete details?

[Malleus Dei]

Ben Davis did it against Curt Schilling in the eighth inning of a Diamondbacks-Padres game in 2001. The macho grunters all went wild over it, even though the successful bunt brought the tying run up to bat.


Let me recommend this article to everyone:

Cook: Baseball etiquette should be pitched

"If you missed the Davis-Schilling controversy, you missed one of the most bizarre and ridiculous stories of the baseball season. Schilling had retired 22 consecutive batters and was leading, 2-0, when Davis bunted for a single. It was a good play by Davis, getting on base any way he could against a guy who had been unhittable, bringing the tying run to the plate. But to the Diamondbacks, it was an egregious breach of baseball etiquette."

"What about respect for trying to win the game? Like the Diamondbacks, the Padres are fighting for first place in the National League West. As terrific as Schilling was Saturday night, the Padres still had a chance to win in the eighth inning. But they needed baserunners. Give Davis credit for getting on, for rattling Schilling enough that he walked the next hitter. The Padres might have picked up an important win if Dave Magadan or Mike Darr had followed with a big hit instead of making outs."

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by Jah

If the score is something like 6-0, a bunt in this instance is a cheap way of breaking up a no-hitter (IMHO!)…and if I was the on-deck hitter, I would be PISSED. I would assume the pitcher would drill me, and he would have every right to do so.

If I was on deck, I would be thrilled. Woot, it's a chance to get a rally started, a chance to shake up or knock out their pitcher, and a chance at an RBI. Plus, since I almost always batted third, if I get HBP it puts two runners on with the 4-5-6 sluggers coming up!

[Mattymo]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

So, if Ken Griffey Jr. comes up and your pitcher has a No-No in the 8th and you move your infield all around so that you have 3 infielders on the right side of the field and this is the 3rd time he has had to face that: is it bad form for him to lay down the bunt to the left side and walk to first for his single? I would prefer not to endure the embarrassment of my team being no-hit rather than having to worry about Curt Schilling's feelings or his support of some 'code.' I say if the defense won't play you straight up, "Bunt it Griff!" Or if that is your best opportunity to get on base, go for it. Why give up all your options? The game ain't over! Plus, my team will protect me with their own retaliation anyway. Schilling has to bat in the NL!

Bum

Griffey has too much class, and has been around baseball way too long, to do something like that.

[Mattymo]

Originally Posted by Doctor No

You're making it sound like those are the only two options (get a hit by hitting the ball hard, or getting a hit via bunt). Given those two options, of course you'd take the hard hit.

But those aren't the only two options, and if hitting the crap out of the ball to break up a no-hitter was that easy, it would have happened innings earlier. Seriously.

Well then why didn't the hitters try bunting in the 2nd inning? 4th inning? The 6th? If it's so easy...

[BMW]

Originally Posted by Jah

From there, it spiraled into World Series games, the art of bunting (a dying art, like you said), and all kinds of other stuff. I'm all for bunting in close games, regardless of whether a no-hitter is being pitched, but - when several runs behind - I'd like to see the guy swing away, rather than bunt purely to break up the no-hitter.

If the score is something like 6-0, a bunt in this instance is a cheap way of breaking up a no-hitter (IMHO!)

If you can't swing the bat and earn your way on 20+ times before that at-bat, then show some pride and keep swinging ... I wonder if Clemente or Mays or Aaron or Williams or DiMaggio would ever attempt a bunt to break up a no-hitter in the 8th or 9th inning? Somehow I doubt it.

I don't envy your position trying to defend it. The code is basically borne out of a player's frustration not out of any kind of logic.

It amounts to:

If I were a pitcher I don't want a guy laying down a bunt in the late innings if the purpose is solely to ruin my chance to get a no-hitter. And if you don't do it to me, we won't do it to you. So lets all not do it to each other.

The problems are:

1. It's really difficult to prove whether someone's intent is to simply break up a no hitter, or if it is to win the game. Pretty much because laying down a successful bunt hit helps you win games. There's just no disputing that. It can't possibly help you lose games. Even if the batter were to come out and say that the sole purpose that it was to ruin so-and-so's no-hitter, it's impossible to divorce the bunt from the greater chance to win.
   
2. You could argue that bunting in that situation is not "honorable." But you could also argue that not doing what you feel gives you the best chance to get on base is not "honorable." Sports are no longer sports if its not a true contest where both sides strive to win. So it's kind of a wash, honor-wise. Maybe even in favor of the latter, because I can't see how the spirit of legitimate sporting contests could be trumped by a gentleman's agreement.
   
3. Logic wise, there's just no comparison. If a pitcher is so good that none of your first 20 hitters have made good contact with the ball all day long, you're foolish not to try something else. If a bunt single didn't earn your way on base, it would be against the rules and you'd be called out for trying. And frankly, if pitchers are expecting the good fortune that no one would dare bunt during their late inning no-hit bid while they were up 6-0, what better time to do it? Not only do you have a high chance of getting on base, there's a real chance that you'll completely get the pitcher off his game.

Clemente, Aaron, Mays, Williams and DiMaggio were amongst the most gifted hitters who ever lived. Aaron, Williams and Mays all went a decade-plus without laying down sacrifice bunts. So they probably aren't good examples of who would or wouldn't have attempted bunts to break up no hitters. They probably didn't bunt much period, since a player like that just needs to connect with one mistake pitch to put it over the fences. No different than it is today when Alex Rodriguez doesn't bunt. It gets dropped from their toolset.

Also, while not disputing any of those guys, I think it's dangerous to equate greatness in playing sports with greatness of other qualities. They were all great players, but it doesn't necessarily mean that ergo, they were great human beings, great fathers, great role-models or even great managers and coaches. Personally flying aid to the Caribbean, for instance, makes be respect Clemente as a great human being, but he'd still be a great human being even if he had 1,000 career hits instead of 3,000 career hits.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by BMW

Sports are no longer sports if its not a true contest where both sides strive to win.

Exactly. If you aren't trying 100% at all times to win, go take up snowboarding or something. I sure don't want you on any team I play on or manage.

And to all of you who still play: if you're down 6-0 in the 9th, don't you dare give up. Cleveland was once down by 8 runs in the bottom of the 9th inning with 2 outs and no men on base, and still came back to win it. Back in 1990, I watched the Phillies, down 11-3 in the 9th, score 9 runs to win the game 12-11.

Never give up.

[Mattymo]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

Exactly. If you aren't trying 100% at all times to win, go take up snowboarding or something. I sure don't want you on any team I play on or manage.

And to all of you who still play: if you're down 6-0 in the 9th, don't you dare give up. Cleveland was once down by 8 runs in the bottom of the 9th inning with 2 outs and no men on base, and still came back to win it. Back in 1990, I watched the Phillies, down 11-3 in the 9th, score 9 runs to win the game 12-11.

Never give up.

I'm not trying to incite a riot here...but I don't think that Jah EVER suggested quitting.

If you are down 6-0 in the 9th in a no-hitter, I say do what you would do if you wre down 6-0 in the 9th (or 8th, or 7th) when there's NOT a no-hitter. You shouldn't do anything different because a no-hitter (or perfect game) is being thrown.

Someone in this thread made the point if a fielder should purposely bobble a ball over the fence if a guy has already hit 3 grand slams in a game. Well we all know that's rediculous, that's ALLOWING a competitor to succeed. I don't think going up there and putting a good swing on the ball is allowing a pitcher to succeed.

There's no point in trying to end a no-hitter just for the sake of ending a no-hitter. If you didn't bunt in your other 3 ABs, why bunt now? Were you NOT trying to help your team win earlier in the game?

And don't forget...down 6-0, you're going to need a hit that's NOT a bunt in order to win the game. So SOMEONE is going to have to hit a double in the gap...or at least a few guys are going to have to get the ball out of the infield.

[Tony M]

Originally Posted by Mattymo

And don't forget...down 6-0, you're going to need a hit that's NOT a bunt in order to win the game. So SOMEONE is going to have to hit a double in the gap...or at least a few guys are going to have to get the ball out of the infield.

But the bunt might just shake the pitcher up enough that the following batters can take advantage.

[bababui]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

Never give up.

Yet you gave up the good fight posting your opinions in OT.

Which Malleus Dei are we to believe?

[BMW]

Originally Posted by Mattymo

And don't forget...down 6-0, you're going to need a hit that's NOT a bunt in order to win the game. So SOMEONE is going to have to hit a double in the gap...or at least a few guys are going to have to get the ball out of the infield.

If you're down 6-0, you need to get runners on base, period. It's academic that, yes, someone along the way is going to need to drive in runs. Statistically (and just common sense) dictates that it's easier to score runs once you put guys on base.

Hence, why you should try to get guys on base. If you feel that when you come to the plate (or while at the plate) that you have a good chance to get on base by driving a pitch and rack up a double or better, great. If you think you have an even better chance to get on base by dropping down a bunt, then do that, even if you have to shatter someone's ego.

[Mattymo]

Originally Posted by BMW

If you're down 6-0, you need to get runners on base, period. It's academic that, yes, someone along the way is going to need to drive in runs. Statistically (and just common sense) dictates that it's easier to score runs once you put guys on base.

Hence, why you should try to get guys on base. If you feel that when you come to the plate (or while at the plate) that you have a good chance to get on base by driving a pitch and rack up a double or better, great. If you think you have an even better chance to get on base by dropping down a bunt, then do that, even if you have to shatter someone's ego.

And as I said, if it's something you'd do down six runs when there is NOT a no-hitter going, then by all means feel free to lay down the bunt.

Would you do it down 8-2? 17-11? Fine. But if the answer is "no", then you should NOT do it just because it's a no-hitter.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by BMW

If you feel that when you come to the plate (or while at the plate) that you have a good chance to get on base by driving a pitch and rack up a double or better, great. If you think you have an even better chance to get on base by dropping down a bunt, then do that, even if you have to shatter someone's ego.

That's it in a nutshell. Do what you need to do to do the job you're up there to do.

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by Mattymo

Griffey has too much class, and has been around baseball way too long, to do something like that.

That may be true, but change the name to Jim Edmonds, who has no class, and give me the answer. I don't have a problem with the bunt, but I understand the argument against it. Never stop trying to win anyway you can within the confines of the rules.

Jah, if you drill the next batter cause I bunted in that situation, you better wear pads the next time you walk up there...

Bum