Lou explodes in the post game.

[jacey]

i didn't see a problem with the sac bunt at the time it happened. what i had a problem with was the poor execution of that attempt. sometimes you live by the sword, you die by the sword. Soto is great but i see them wanting to move pie into scoring position in order to score him on a single. oh well....its fun to analyze and discuss what was going on in the minds of those who made the call.

[UMFan83]

i didn't see a problem with the sac bunt at the time it happened. what i had a problem with was the poor execution of that attempt. sometimes you live by the sword, you die by the sword. Soto is great but i see them wanting to move pie into scoring position in order to score him on a single. oh well....its fun to analyze and discuss what was going on in the minds of those who made the call.

 

The problem I have is that a sac bunt lowers the odds that the Cubs score that inning (i think), and your asking it from a person who hasn't had a sac bunt in his career and also has an over .500 SLG % for the season.

[David]

i didn't see a problem with the sac bunt at the time it happened. what i had a problem with was the poor execution of that attempt. sometimes you live by the sword, you die by the sword. Soto is great but i see them wanting to move pie into scoring position in order to score him on a single. oh well....its fun to analyze and discuss what was going on in the minds of those who made the call.

 

The problem I have is that a sac bunt lowers the odds that the Cubs score that inning (i think), and your asking it from a person who hasn't had a sac bunt in his career and also has an over .500 SLG % for the season.

 

 

This is the part I take issue with most. The miniscule percent difference (while I'd rather they go the way the numbers say to go) isn't what bothers me so much. Plus, Kyle (I think - or maybe it was Wilco...too lazy to look) made a good point the other night in that those percentages are also set up by the fact, for instance, that a bunt is expected a lot of times in those situations, so the surprise element in hitting away, for instance, probably plays somewhat of a role.

 

Had they bunted with Theriot or something, I probably would've been *meh* with it, instead of irate.

[SouthSideRyan]

Same thing I screamed about with DeRosa, if you're so damn intent on giving up an out and taking the bat out of a good hitter's hands, then go all the way and take the bat out of the hitter's hands. Literally give the bat to somebody on the bench who can lay down an effective bunt.

[CarolinaCubFan]

Same thing I screamed about with DeRosa, if you're so damn intent on giving up an out and taking the bat out of a good hitter's hands, then go all the way and take the bat out of the hitter's hands. Literally give the bat to somebody on the bench who can lay down an effective bunt.

 

Lou being old school, a major league hitter should be able to lay a bunt down. In Little League, Babe Ruth, High School, and College, batting practice never changed. You lay down a couple bunts and then the coaches let you swing away. It's not something I did in game situations very often, but if the boss calls for it, you better be able to do it.

[biittner77]

Same thing I screamed about with DeRosa, if you're so damn intent on giving up an out and taking the bat out of a good hitter's hands, then go all the way and take the bat out of the hitter's hands. Literally give the bat to somebody on the bench who can lay down an effective bunt.

 

Especially with expanded rosters.

[Section538]

Why is it that when people defend the sac bunt, they always assume an attempted sac bunt will be a successful sac bunt?

 

Makes no sense to me either.

 

I look at it like this (seems like a no-brainer..): How many times out of 10 will he successfully get the sac bunt down and GIVE UP AN OUT vs how many times will he get a hit?

 

Open and shut case - stupid call.

 

ps - I'm sure there's some metrics at Baseball Prospectus on this, but I'm too lazy to look it up.

[Moises a loo]

Same thing I screamed about with DeRosa, if you're so damn intent on giving up an out and taking the bat out of a good hitter's hands, then go all the way and take the bat out of the hitter's hands. Literally give the bat to somebody on the bench who can lay down an effective bunt.

Too bad Dempster was already in the lineup. Man, I'd love to see this place if they ever pinch-hit for Soto with a pitcher.

[chopsx9]

Why is it that when people defend the sac bunt, they always assume an attempted sac bunt will be a successful sac bunt?

 

Makes no sense to me either.

 

I look at it like this (seems like a no-brainer..): How many times out of 10 will he successfully get the sac bunt down and GIVE UP AN OUT vs how many times will he get a hit?

 

Open and shut case - stupid call.

 

ps - I'm sure there's some metrics at Baseball Prospectus on this, but I'm too lazy to look it up.

 

In same situation the next inning Soriano hit away to the same DP result. Certainly not saying I wanted Soriano to bunt...just saying.

 

I don't mind the sac bunt as much as some here but I certainly do question asking Soto to do it.

[wade]

Why is it that when people defend the sac bunt, they always assume an attempted sac bunt will be a successful sac bunt?

 

Makes no sense to me either.

 

I look at it like this (seems like a no-brainer..): How many times out of 10 will he successfully get the sac bunt down and GIVE UP AN OUT vs how many times will he get a hit?

 

Open and shut case - stupid call.

 

ps - I'm sure there's some metrics at Baseball Prospectus on this, but I'm too lazy to look it up.

 

In same situation the next inning Soriano hit away to the same DP result. Certainly not saying I wanted Soriano to bunt...just saying.

 

I don't mind the sac bunt as much as some here but I certainly do question asking Soto to do it.

 

Soriano did GIDP, but he wasn't trying to make an out on purpose like Geo was told to do. I agree with you in that you never know what would happen with every circumstance every time- Geo swinging away coulda been a GIDP too, but it's the giving up of the out on purpose(especially with a guy that can hit it out of the park) that riles some of us.

[chopsx9]

Why is it that when people defend the sac bunt, they always assume an attempted sac bunt will be a successful sac bunt?

 

Makes no sense to me either.

 

I look at it like this (seems like a no-brainer..): How many times out of 10 will he successfully get the sac bunt down and GIVE UP AN OUT vs how many times will he get a hit?

 

Open and shut case - stupid call.

 

ps - I'm sure there's some metrics at Baseball Prospectus on this, but I'm too lazy to look it up.

 

In same situation the next inning Soriano hit away to the same DP result. Certainly not saying I wanted Soriano to bunt...just saying.

 

I don't mind the sac bunt as much as some here but I certainly do question asking Soto to do it.

 

Soriano did GIDP, but he wasn't trying to make an out on purpose like Geo was told to do. I agree with you in that you never know what would happen with every circumstance every time- Geo swinging away coulda been a GIDP too, but it's the giving up of the out on purpose(especially with a guy that can hit it out of the park) that riles some of us.

 

Oh I absolutely agree that asking Soto to bunt was questionable at best, because of his power and maybe more so because I don't think he has any particular past success as a bunter. As someone said earlier if you decide that the bunt is the play there, bring someone in who can. The only thing I can think is maybe the plan was one bunt attempt and then swing away (I don't recall what pitch in the at bat it was), but that is also questionable for the same reasons.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'd love to see someone attempt to do a run-expectancy chart that splits up bunts into "expected" and "less expected" situations somehow.

 

There was a study a few years ago that showed that while a successful sac bunt is a slight loss for the offense, the net gain from misfields vs. failed bunts narrows the gap.

 

Presumably a misfield is more likely when a position player is up (and the infield is back) than the pitcher or Rey Ordonez, so that would perhaps make that effect even more pronounced.

[CuseCubFan69]

Is there statistical information on Soto with a man at first with no outs and then who was after Soto with a man on second with 1 out? Of course you would have to figure in Soto and the percentage of chance of him laying down a successful bunt as well into the equation and the hitters behind him and how they hit. So, which one has a better chance of scoring that 1 run in this exact situation?

[wade]

Is there statistical information on Soto with a man at first with no outs and then who was after Soto with a man on second with 1 out? Of course you would have to figure in Soto and the percentage of chance of him laying down a successful bunt as well into the equation and the hitters behind him and how they hit. So, which one has a better chance of scoring that 1 run in this exact situation?

 

You could probably look at each player (I think Fontenot was due up after Soto, then the pitcher's spot- another reason why it was dumb), but the stuff I've read that has dampened my enthusiasm on the sac bunt in general was based on years of stats, not samples of players like you're talking about. The years of data would be better, I'd think.

 

I'm not totally opposed to the bunt, but with Geo there and two spots in the order behind him before you'd find as good a hitter coming up, it's just bad. I wouldn't bunt Geo in that spot if Pie had been on second with no outs (which I think is an even more obvious bunt situation late in a game)

[CuseCubFan69]

Is there statistical information on Soto with a man at first with no outs and then who was after Soto with a man on second with 1 out? Of course you would have to figure in Soto and the percentage of chance of him laying down a successful bunt as well into the equation and the hitters behind him and how they hit. So, which one has a better chance of scoring that 1 run in this exact situation?

 

You could probably look at each player (I think Fontenot was due up after Soto, then the pitcher's spot- another reason why it was dumb), but the stuff I've read that has dampened my enthusiasm on the sac bunt in general was based on years of stats, not samples of players like you're talking about. The years of data would be better, I'd think.

 

I'm not totally opposed to the bunt, but with Geo there and two spots in the order behind him before you'd find as good a hitter coming up, it's just bad. I wouldn't bunt Geo in that spot if Pie had been on second with no outs (which I think is an even more obvious bunt situation late in a game)

 

I wouldn't think of bunting him in that situation either, especially if he was swinging the bat well that game. It would be pretty cool to see the breakdown of the numbers though and not a general bunting stat.

[Stu]

Why is it that when people defend the sac bunt, they always assume an attempted sac bunt will be a successful sac bunt?

 

Makes no sense to me either.

 

I look at it like this (seems like a no-brainer..): How many times out of 10 will he successfully get the sac bunt down and GIVE UP AN OUT vs how many times will he get a hit?

 

Open and shut case - stupid call.

 

ps - I'm sure there's some metrics at Baseball Prospectus on this, but I'm too lazy to look it up.

 

In same situation the next inning Soriano hit away to the same DP result. Certainly not saying I wanted Soriano to bunt...just saying.

 

I don't mind the sac bunt as much as some here but I certainly do question asking Soto to do it.

 

Soriano did GIDP, but he wasn't trying to make an out on purpose like Geo was told to do. I agree with you in that you never know what would happen with every circumstance every time- Geo swinging away coulda been a GIDP too, but it's the giving up of the out on purpose(especially with a guy that can hit it out of the park) that riles some of us.

 

Not only that, one of the faster runners in the league was on first, and he could have scored on a double.

[Mizzou]

Is there statistical information on Soto with a man at first with no outs and then who was after Soto with a man on second with 1 out? Of course you would have to figure in Soto and the percentage of chance of him laying down a successful bunt as well into the equation and the hitters behind him and how they hit. So, which one has a better chance of scoring that 1 run in this exact situation?

Closest thing you're going to find unless you're Fred...

 

Soto with a runner on 1st and only 1st -- .271/.340/.448/.788

Fontenot with a runner on 2nd and only 2nd -- .313/.522/.688/1.209

 

This is with no outs, one out, and two outs.

 

I'm not sure how much you can really gather from this info, but there ya go.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Is there statistical information on Soto with a man at first with no outs and then who was after Soto with a man on second with 1 out? Of course you would have to figure in Soto and the percentage of chance of him laying down a successful bunt as well into the equation and the hitters behind him and how they hit. So, which one has a better chance of scoring that 1 run in this exact situation?

Closest thing you're going to find unless you're Fred...

 

Soto with a runner on 1st and only 1st -- .271/.340/.448/.788

Fontenot with a runner on 2nd and only 2nd -- .313/.522/.688/1.209

 

This is with no outs, one out, and two outs.

 

I'm not sure how much you can really gather from this info, but there ya go.

has nothing to do with men on base, but...

Soto with 0 outs -- 355/403/609/1013

Fontenot with 1 out -- 381/459/631/1090

 

let the kid swing the damn bat

[CuseCubFan69]

Is there statistical information on Soto with a man at first with no outs and then who was after Soto with a man on second with 1 out? Of course you would have to figure in Soto and the percentage of chance of him laying down a successful bunt as well into the equation and the hitters behind him and how they hit. So, which one has a better chance of scoring that 1 run in this exact situation?

Closest thing you're going to find unless you're Fred...

 

Soto with a runner on 1st and only 1st -- .271/.340/.448/.788

Fontenot with a runner on 2nd and only 2nd -- .313/.522/.688/1.209

 

This is with no outs, one out, and two outs.

 

I'm not sure how much you can really gather from this info, but there ya go.

 

So a hit is increased by .042 by doing this, if the bunt was successful and I'm sure we don't have a good sample of Soto and his bunting record. Thanks Mizzou.