Sandberg interview

[scarey]

He sac bunted with his 3 hitter after the first two guys reached base. In the top of the 1st.

 

When did this actually happen? I feel like it was hyperbole thrown out by someone at some point and has turned into the definitive proof that he would be a terrible manager. Hell, even if that's what the box score actually reads, we don't even know if in that particular situation the number three hitter was someone that had decent speed and thought he could reach by sneaking in a bunt that turned into a SH.

[dew1679666265]

He sac bunted with his 3 hitter after the first two guys reached base. In the top of the 1st.

 

When did this actually happen? I feel like it was hyperbole thrown out by someone at some point and has turned into the definitive proof that he would be a terrible manager. Hell, even if that's what the box score actually reads, we don't even know if in that particular situation the number three hitter was someone that had decent speed and thought he could reach by sneaking in a bunt that turned into a SH.

 

I don't remember which game it was, but it was during his time managing the Smokies. I was listening to the radio when the play happened and was pretty stunned, to be honest. And there was no doubt that it was a sacrifice, Mick Gillispie called it that way from the start.

[Guest]

He sac bunted with his 3 hitter after the first two guys reached base. In the top of the 1st.

 

When did this actually happen? I feel like it was hyperbole thrown out by someone at some point and has turned into the definitive proof that he would be a terrible manager. Hell, even if that's what the box score actually reads, we don't even know if in that particular situation the number three hitter was someone that had decent speed and thought he could reach by sneaking in a bunt that turned into a SH.

 

Last year. Search function isn't working or I'd dig it up. In doing a google site search I found it might've been the 4 hitter after the first 3 guys got hits, but the principle is the same. My fuzzy memory was that it was not someone with wheels.

[scarey]

He sac bunted with his 3 hitter after the first two guys reached base. In the top of the 1st.

 

When did this actually happen? I feel like it was hyperbole thrown out by someone at some point and has turned into the definitive proof that he would be a terrible manager. Hell, even if that's what the box score actually reads, we don't even know if in that particular situation the number three hitter was someone that had decent speed and thought he could reach by sneaking in a bunt that turned into a SH.

 

Last year. Search function isn't working or I'd dig it up. In doing a google site search I found it might've been the 4 hitter after the first 3 guys got hits, but the principle is the same. My fuzzy memory was that it was not someone with wheels.

 

Do you understand why I have a hard time believing that's what really happened? If that is absolutely what happened without any alterior motive and that is what Sandberg would do at the Major League level, then it would have to be the dumbest most stuborn managerial decision ever made. No exageration. I don't care who the manager was, I have to believe there's an explanation if this is without a shadow of a doubt what happened. It could have been a 6 year old making the decision and I would not believe it.

[dew1679666265]

Do you understand why I have a hard time believing that's what really happened? If that is absolutely what happened without any alterior motive and that is what Sandberg would do at the Major League level, then it would have to be the dumbest most stuborn managerial decision ever made. No exageration. I don't care who the manager was, I have to believe there's an explanation if this is without a shadow of a doubt what happened. It could have been a 6 year old making the decision and I would not believe it.

 

As TT said, it could have been the 4 hitter instead of the 3 hitter, but otherwise that's exactly what happened. The runners beforehand reached base and then Sandberg had a sac bunt laid down to move the runners over. If there was another reason for doing it, I haven't heard Ryno give why.

[SouthSideRyan]

Game in question:

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?sid=milb&t=g_log&gid=2009_05_07_tenaax_msbaax_1

[scarey]

Do you understand why I have a hard time believing that's what really happened? If that is absolutely what happened without any alterior motive and that is what Sandberg would do at the Major League level, then it would have to be the dumbest most stuborn managerial decision ever made. No exageration. I don't care who the manager was, I have to believe there's an explanation if this is without a shadow of a doubt what happened. It could have been a 6 year old making the decision and I would not believe it.

 

As TT said, it could have been the 4 hitter instead of the 3 hitter, but otherwise that's exactly what happened. The runners beforehand reached base and then Sandberg had a sac bunt laid down to move the runners over. If there was another reason for doing it, I haven't heard Ryno give why.

 

But seriously, take Sandberg's name out of the equation. Wouldn't you think something unusual happened here? A missed sign? An attempt at a bunt base hit? There's plenty of explanations that make more sense than "Sandberg was giving up an out to move his base runners over with his 4 hitter so his 5 hitter could drive them in".

[Guest]

Thank you SSR. Wright is not exactly a slugger, but given that the sacrifice went 5-4, my guess is that it wasn't a surprise bunt.

 

In searching for the game, I found someone pointing out Sandberg calling for back-to-back sac bunts in a playoff game last year.

[dew1679666265]

Do you understand why I have a hard time believing that's what really happened? If that is absolutely what happened without any alterior motive and that is what Sandberg would do at the Major League level, then it would have to be the dumbest most stuborn managerial decision ever made. No exageration. I don't care who the manager was, I have to believe there's an explanation if this is without a shadow of a doubt what happened. It could have been a 6 year old making the decision and I would not believe it.

 

As TT said, it could have been the 4 hitter instead of the 3 hitter, but otherwise that's exactly what happened. The runners beforehand reached base and then Sandberg had a sac bunt laid down to move the runners over. If there was another reason for doing it, I haven't heard Ryno give why.

 

But seriously, take Sandberg's name out of the equation. Wouldn't you think something unusual happened here? A missed sign? An attempt at a bunt base hit? There's plenty of explanations that make more sense than "Sandberg was giving up an out to move his base runners over with his 4 hitter so his 5 hitter could drive them in".

 

I thought it was pretty crazy as well and thought for sure I had misheard. But as I said, Mick made it pretty clear that it was a sac bunt.

[SouthSideRyan]

Do you understand why I have a hard time believing that's what really happened? If that is absolutely what happened without any alterior motive and that is what Sandberg would do at the Major League level, then it would have to be the dumbest most stuborn managerial decision ever made. No exageration. I don't care who the manager was, I have to believe there's an explanation if this is without a shadow of a doubt what happened. It could have been a 6 year old making the decision and I would not believe it.

 

As TT said, it could have been the 4 hitter instead of the 3 hitter, but otherwise that's exactly what happened. The runners beforehand reached base and then Sandberg had a sac bunt laid down to move the runners over. If there was another reason for doing it, I haven't heard Ryno give why.

 

But seriously, take Sandberg's name out of the equation. Wouldn't you think something unusual happened here? A missed sign? An attempt at a bunt base hit? There's plenty of explanations that make more sense than "Sandberg was giving up an out to move his base runners over with his 4 hitter so his 5 hitter could drive them in".

 

Why would you take Sandberg's name out of the equation? His stated philosophies and managerial record show that "giving up an out to move his baserunners over with his 4 hitters so his 5 hitter could drive them in" was exactly what he was doing.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Do you understand why I have a hard time believing that's what really happened? If that is absolutely what happened without any alterior motive and that is what Sandberg would do at the Major League level, then it would have to be the dumbest most stuborn managerial decision ever made. No exageration. I don't care who the manager was, I have to believe there's an explanation if this is without a shadow of a doubt what happened. It could have been a 6 year old making the decision and I would not believe it.

 

As TT said, it could have been the 4 hitter instead of the 3 hitter, but otherwise that's exactly what happened. The runners beforehand reached base and then Sandberg had a sac bunt laid down to move the runners over. If there was another reason for doing it, I haven't heard Ryno give why.

 

But seriously, take Sandberg's name out of the equation. Wouldn't you think something unusual happened here? A missed sign? An attempt at a bunt base hit? There's plenty of explanations that make more sense than "Sandberg was giving up an out to move his base runners over with his 4 hitter so his 5 hitter could drive them in".

Ty Wright spent the vast majority of the season batting 3-5 and had 7 sac bunts. He was also 3 for 7 bunting without those sacs so he was either bunting for a hit more often than he should or trying to sacrifice a bunch more. Based on Sandberg's comments in the past, I would go with the latter.

[scarey]

Game in question:

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?sid=milb&t=g_log&gid=2009_05_07_tenaax_msbaax_1

 

Ty Wright? I suspect he was trying to get on via sac bunt especially considering that was his one and only SH of the year.

 

Edit: Minor league splits shows that as his only SH of the year while baseballcube shows he had 7 as Bob Sanders states.

Edited June 9, 2010 by scarey

[dew1679666265]

There was also no indication from Mick Gillispie (the Smokies' PBP guy) that Ryno was upset with Ty Wright or anything like that. From the way he reported it, it was a sac bunt called from the dugout.

[dew1679666265]

Game in question:

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?sid=milb&t=g_log&gid=2009_05_07_tenaax_msbaax_1

 

Ty Wright? I suspect he was trying to get on via sac bunt especially considering that was his one and only SH of the year.

 

He had 7 sacrifice bunts in 2009.

[scarey]

There was also no indication from Mick Gillispie (the Smokies' PBP guy) that Ryno was upset with Ty Wright or anything like that. From the way he reported it, it was a sac bunt called from the dugout.

 

Well, I guess not only is he a terrible manager, he is at a sub-human intelligence.

[CUBZ99]

If you look at the game log, there were no outs and a runner on second base when Wright bunted. Unless I get confirmation from Ryno or Wright themselves, I refuse to believe that any manager would be dumb enough to call for a sac bunt in that situation. What would be the purpose? Is everyone completely ruling out the possibility that Wright made the decision on his own or that he was bunting for a hit?

[CUBZ99]

Game in question:

 

http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?sid=milb&t=g_log&gid=2009_05_07_tenaax_msbaax_1

 

Ty Wright? I suspect he was trying to get on via sac bunt especially considering that was his one and only SH of the year.

 

He had 7 sacrifice bunts in 2009.

 

Look at the overall team stats though. In Tennessee's div.

 

Sac Bunt's

 

Tennesee 58

Hunstville 55

Carolina 53

Chatanooga 65

West Tenn. 53

 

I don't see any vast difference between what Tenn and the rest of the division did.

[scarey]

I also want to point out that people seeking salvation in Trammell may be in for a disappointment. In his three years managing Detroit, Trammell averaged only sightly less sac bunts per year than Piniella did the last three years as a Cub for an NL team. If Trammell is bunting that much with a DH, I have to figure he'll be bunting at a Dusty Baker like rate.

[Guest]

He sac bunted with his 3 hitter after the first two guys reached base. In the top of the 1st.

 

When did this actually happen? I feel like it was hyperbole thrown out by someone at some point and has turned into the definitive proof that he would be a terrible manager. Hell, even if that's what the box score actually reads, we don't even know if in that particular situation the number three hitter was someone that had decent speed and thought he could reach by sneaking in a bunt that turned into a SH.

It happened at least once last year and I was AT the game in Jackson TN. At another game he was kicked out while making a pitching change in the 3rd inning.

 

You should read the minor league threads. You can feel whatever you want, Sandberg is a moronic manager.

[J.R.]

=D>

 

I love the zeal with which the facts were sought in the Sandberg case.

[dew1679666265]

If you look at the game log, there were no outs and a runner on second base when Wright bunted. Unless I get confirmation from Ryno or Wright themselves, I refuse to believe that any manager would be dumb enough to call for a sac bunt in that situation. What would be the purpose? Is everyone completely ruling out the possibility that Wright made the decision on his own or that he was bunting for a hit?

 

Like I said, Mick didn't indicate that Ryno was annoyed or angry at Ty Wright when he laid down the bunt. That means either he called for the bunt or didn't disapprove of the decision. It could have been otherwise, but everything points to Sandberg calling for the sacrifice.

[dew1679666265]

I also want to point out that people seeking salvation in Trammell may be in for a disappointment. In his three years managing Detroit, Trammell averaged only sightly less sac bunts per year than Piniella did the last three years as a Cub for an NL team. If Trammell is bunting that much with a DH, I have to figure he'll be bunting at a Dusty Baker like rate.

 

I don't know about anybody else, but I don't think Lou sac bunts way too often. He tends to let the wrong guys steal sometimes (Theriot when he's not having success) and he hits and runs a bit too much, but I don't think he overly sac bunts all that much.

[Sammy Sofa]

I also want to point out that people seeking salvation in Trammell may be in for a disappointment. In his three years managing Detroit, Trammell averaged only sightly less sac bunts per year than Piniella did the last three years as a Cub for an NL team. If Trammell is bunting that much with a DH, I have to figure he'll be bunting at a Dusty Baker like rate.

 

I don't know about anybody else, but I don't think Lou sac bunts way too often. He tends to let the wrong guys steal sometimes (Theriot when he's not having success) and he hits and runs a bit too much, but I don't think he overly sac bunts all that much.

 

Yeah, it seems the issue with small ball with Lou is the hit and run and too many attempts stealing with the wrong players and at the wrong times. He doesn't really call for many sac bunts.

 

And who is "seeking salvation" in Trammell?

[scarey]

I also want to point out that people seeking salvation in Trammell may be in for a disappointment. In his three years managing Detroit, Trammell averaged only sightly less sac bunts per year than Piniella did the last three years as a Cub for an NL team. If Trammell is bunting that much with a DH, I have to figure he'll be bunting at a Dusty Baker like rate.

 

I don't know about anybody else, but I don't think Lou sac bunts way too often. He tends to let the wrong guys steal sometimes (Theriot when he's not having success) and he hits and runs a bit too much, but I don't think he overly sac bunts all that much.

 

Yeah, it seems the issue with small ball with Lou is the hit and run and too many attempts stealing with the wrong players and at the wrong times. He doesn't really call for many sac bunts.

 

And who is "seeking salvation" in Trammell?

 

My point was Lou has been managing an NL team and had comparable sac bunt numbers to Trammell who was managing an AL team.

 

And there's plenty of people that have said "I hope they just give the job to Trammell instead". They've even done it in this thread. If you want to challenge the wording itself (specifically 'salvation'), I guess you have a case against me. But I'm pretty sure you understood what I meant: there are people who feel Trammell would be the better candidate.

[Sammy Sofa]

My point was Lou has been managing an NL team and had comparable sac bunt numbers to Trammell who was managing an AL team.

 

I don't know why you're getting hung up on total sac bunt numbers. The point with the Sandberg incident isn't the general use of a sac bunt as opposed to who he was having sac bunt and what were the circumstances. You keep approaching this like people here are denouncing the sac bunt as some kind of baseball kryptonite. It's just one part of the game and it can be used well. The hit and run can also be used well, but it can also be used very poorly, as we've seen with Lou.

 

And there's plenty of people that have said "I hope they just give the job to Trammell instead". They've even done it in this thread. If you want to challenge the wording itself (specifically 'salvation'), I guess you have a case against me. But I'm pretty sure you understood what I meant: there are people who feel Trammell would be the better candidate.

 

Of course there are. I'm one of them.