Why don't MLB teams take a page from UT

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually trailing by 1 run is usually a pretty bad time to bunt. The reason is that the 2nd run is exactly as valuable as the first run

[/ QUOTE ]

whatever

[DougOzzzz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually trailing by 1 run is usually a pretty bad time to bunt. The reason is that the 2nd run is exactly as valuable as the first run

[/ QUOTE ]

whatever

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this not completely logical?

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
Score 1 run: 50% chance of winning

[/ QUOTE ]

and the whiff...

what team you play for matters. the better the team, the more value trying the game has. and who is coimming up to hit. and who will or won't be pitching.

[DougOzzzz]

Well, duh.

The whole thing is completely simplified, obviously. On average, it's 50%.

Edit:
I doubt there are any teams good enough where this changes things in favor of bunting. 1. No team would be expected to win more than 60% or so in extra innings. Maybe a little better if you have a super stud reliever and you're playing the Devil Rays or something. 2. You're really, really hurting your chances of scoring 2 runs when bunting. Much more than you're helping your chances of scoring 1 run.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A sacrifice, while lowering your overall run expectancy, increases the chance of scoring one run


[/ QUOTE ]

No, it doesn't. (see the stats post above)

[/ QUOTE ]

Not entirely true. Specifically, a man on 3rd with 1 out is more likely to score than a man on 2nd with 0 outs. The chart posted supports this (.667 vs. .633). This is really the only clear cut case where bunting increases your run scoring probability.

Looking at Bulldog's table 1+2 with 0 outs has a lower run scoring probability than 2+3 with 1 out. The difference is even greater than 2 with 1 out vs. 3 with 1 out, though that contradicts what I have read at baseball prospectus. The point though is that moving the runner from 2nd to 3rd has more value than moving the runner from 1st to 2nd, even though the latter is the more common bunting scenario. And it's almost never a good idea to bunt with at least 1 out, or scoring at least 1 run isn't MUCH more important than scoring many runs.

The other scenarios all depend on the right combination of batter and on deck guy (weak hitter sacrificing, ichiro type on deck would be best for the sac bunt).

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread starting off talking about bunting every time the leadoff batter got on base. The stats posted previously showed that you score more runs and have fewer scoreless innings when you have a runner on first w/0 out, than a runner on 2nd w/1 out. That is what I am referring to.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A sacrifice, while lowering your overall run expectancy, increases the chance of scoring one run


[/ QUOTE ]

No, it doesn't. (see the stats post above)

[/ QUOTE ]

check this table

Your run expectancy goes down. you score 2+ runs less often, but 1 run more often.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, so you posted some stats regarding a specific team, and regarding pitchers hitting...

Look at the post above where the stats for all players in MLB were included - you'll see teams scored more runs and had fewer scoreless innings with a runner on first w/0 out, than with a runner on second w/1 out.

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A sacrifice, while lowering your overall run expectancy, increases the chance of scoring one run


[/ QUOTE ]

No, it doesn't. (see the stats post above)

[/ QUOTE ]

check this table

Your run expectancy goes down. you score 2+ runs less often, but 1 run more often.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, so you posted some stats regarding a specific team, and regarding pitchers hitting...

Look at the post above where the stats for all players in MLB were included - you'll see teams scored more runs and had fewer scoreless innings with a runner on first w/0 out, than with a runner on second w/1 out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when do Placido Polanco and Bill Mueller pitch?

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A sacrifice, while lowering your overall run expectancy, increases the chance of scoring one run


[/ QUOTE ]

No, it doesn't. (see the stats post above)

[/ QUOTE ]

check this table

Your run expectancy goes down. you score 2+ runs less often, but 1 run more often.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, so you posted some stats regarding a specific team, and regarding pitchers hitting...

Look at the post above where the stats for all players in MLB were included - you'll see teams scored more runs and had fewer scoreless innings with a runner on first w/0 out, than with a runner on second w/1 out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when do Placido Polanco and Bill Mueller pitch?

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said they did. I said it referred to a specific team (the Phillies) and to pitchers hitting (which it does in the last stat - all NL pitchers) (I missed that he included Mueller).

Looking more closely, I also fail to see how this backs up your argument. The tables clearly show that your team is more likely to score if you swing than if you bunt (except for pitchers, which is obvious).

[Jack of Arcades]

1 run

bunting: 24%
mueller: 15.4%

So your chance of scoring exactly one run goes up. I've never said anything different.

[Bill C]

[ QUOTE ]
Major leaguers can't even bunt any more. It's because bunting isn't sexy. Swinging for the fences is.

[/ QUOTE ]

It ain't about sex. It's about money. Ain't no money in bunting. The UT players want to WIN THE GAME. Many in MLB could care less; they want stats so they can score a new contract for more $$.

bc