9/2 Astros (Backe) v Cubs (Z!) 7:05 WGN

[David]

This may be helpful for thr bunt/ no bunt debate

 

http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html

 

 

Those are numbers. They don't mean anything. You want a runner at second, period.

 

Wait, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. You don't seem like the type that would be in favor of bunting there

 

Come on... seriously?

[BCVM22]

Yay.

 

Win, please?

[bcl412]

I don't know if I hate the name Ty or Wiggington more.

[Vanilla Ice]

This may be helpful for thr bunt/ no bunt debate

 

http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html

 

 

Those are numbers. They don't mean anything. You want a runner at second, period.

 

Wait, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. You don't seem like the type that would be in favor of bunting there

 

WOOSH

[David]

I love Woody

[haubrich91]

Please end this. I have school tomorrow.

[WilcoFan]

From fangraphs

 

Win probablity after Ramirez walk- 71%

 

win probablity after DeRoa bunt- 63%

 

 

Those are very nice numbers.

 

You want a guy in scoring position.

 

You can say what you want, but statistics show that bunting decreases your chances of winning

 

That's very nice. Good for statistics.

 

Bill Plashke, is that you?

 

Nothing like utterly distorting my point. In THIS SITUATION, you bunt.

[CubsBears29]

Good inning, Woody.

 

Now PLZ end this, Cubbies!(?)

[OleMissCub]

I like our chances this inning.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Can we PLEASE end it here. I dont want it to come down to Cotts or Lieber vs. the heart of the Astros lineup.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I don't know if I hate the name Ty or Wiggington more.

He's no Ty Griffin, that's for sure.

[Ski]

I fear this will be the extent of the positive news this evening.

 

Brewers lost

 

I fear it will be the extent of the positive news post-10:45 PM Central?

To recap:

 

-My wireless internet, which has been broadcasting its signal whenever it feels like it, has been working for half an hour

-The Brewers lost

-3 days until Friday.

-I get a large paycheck tomorrow

 

Coming up at 11-Cubs win? Stay tuned to find out.

[chuckywang]

win probablity with man on first, no outs, in bottom of the ninth- 71%

 

win probablity with man on second, one out, in bottom of the ninth- 70%

 

not a huge difference, but it doesn't help

 

Not a big difference, but it proves your point. Bunting lessons the chances of scoring a run.

 

The difference in those numbers can be explained by randomness. It could very well by 1% the other way if the ball had took a few different bounces throughout the years.

[bcl412]

From fangraphs

 

Win probablity after Ramirez walk- 71%

 

win probablity after DeRoa bunt- 63%

 

 

Those are very nice numbers.

 

You want a guy in scoring position.

 

You can say what you want, but statistics show that bunting decreases your chances of winning

 

That's very nice. Good for statistics.

 

Bill Plashke, is that you?

 

Nothing like utterly distorting my point. In THIS SITUATION, you bunt.

 

They just showed you that in that situation you don't bunt.

[Vanilla Ice]

From fangraphs

 

Win probablity after Ramirez walk- 71%

 

win probablity after DeRoa bunt- 63%

 

 

Those are very nice numbers.

 

You want a guy in scoring position.

 

You can say what you want, but statistics show that bunting decreases your chances of winning

 

That's very nice. Good for statistics.

 

Bill Plashke, is that you?

 

Nothing like utterly distorting my point. In THIS SITUATION, you bunt.

uh no, based on this exact situation, it still lowers your win probability.

[bcl412]

win probablity with man on first, no outs, in bottom of the ninth- 71%

 

win probablity with man on second, one out, in bottom of the ninth- 70%

 

not a huge difference, but it doesn't help

 

Not a big difference, but it proves your point. Bunting lessons the chances of scoring a run.

 

The difference in those numbers can be explained by randomness. It could very well by 1% the other way if the ball had took a few different bounces throughout the years.

 

Doesn't it show that it doesn't matter if you bunt or not thought?

Edited September 3, 2008 by bcl412

[Guest]

I fear this will be the extent of the positive news this evening.

 

Brewers lost

 

I fear it will be the extent of the positive news post-10:45 PM Central?

 

I have ice cream!

 

I hate you.

[BCVM22]

Any chance that Riot-Fuku-Sori-[Fontenot] drive in a run here?

[Derwood]

WGN America, I ask you. Who you crapping? Do they really think anyone is excited for this rebranding of an incredibly lame network?

[WilcoFan]

From fangraphs

 

Win probablity after Ramirez walk- 71%

 

win probablity after DeRoa bunt- 63%

 

 

Those are very nice numbers.

 

You want a guy in scoring position.

 

You can say what you want, but statistics show that bunting decreases your chances of winning

 

That's very nice. Good for statistics.

 

Bill Plashke, is that you?

 

Nothing like utterly distorting my point. In THIS SITUATION, you bunt.

 

They just showed you that in that situation you don't bunt.

 

 

Because of a statistically insignificant 1% difference. Nothing like being a slave to the numbers.

[Guest]

Come on, start talking about Michael Brenly's homer yesterday so Bob can go on about it.

[Vanilla Ice]

win probablity with man on first, no outs, in bottom of the ninth- 71%

 

win probablity with man on second, one out, in bottom of the ninth- 70%

 

not a huge difference, but it doesn't help

 

Not a big difference, but it proves your point. Bunting lessons the chances of scoring a run.

 

The difference in those numbers can be explained by randomness. It could very well by 1% the other way if the ball had took a few different bounces throughout the years.

for it to change, over thirty years, it would probably take at least 250 balls to take a different bounce.

 

Also, the bunt might not get down right.

 

AND, they took the bat out of DeRo's hands and gave it to Mcgehee

[DivineBovine]

Just win so we can all watch 90210.

[Outshined_One]

Daytona had today's game canceled. They get a mulligan on game 1.

[SouthSideRyan]

win probablity with man on first, no outs, in bottom of the ninth- 71%

 

win probablity with man on second, one out, in bottom of the ninth- 70%

 

not a huge difference, but it doesn't help

 

Not a big difference, but it proves your point. Bunting lessons the chances of scoring a run.

 

The difference in those numbers can be explained by randomness. It could very well by 1% the other way if the ball had took a few different bounces throughout the years.

 

Ahh but what those #s don't account for is taking the bat out of the hands of a good major leaguer like Mark DeRosa and putting it into the hands of a worthless sack of crap like Casey McGehee.