8/9 - Cubs (Hendricks) vs Mets (Peterson): 6:10pm, Marquee

[UMFan83]

Just now, TomtheBombadil said:

Vs the real master stroke of Barnhart? 

Why does Morel’s 2 week K rate suddenly come into play here? Why play him at all if struggling so bad over a whole two weeks in a 162? 

I just threw that out as an alternate option if you must have a bunt there. The real answer is no one needed to bunt there. 
 

and I’m going to withhold answering the second question because a) it’s stupid and b) I really don’t feel like spending the next 2 days doing this with you

[UMFan83]

6 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

 

Even if you assume Morel is 70% to fail in that situation and so is Nico + Happ with 2 outs, you've given yourself coinflip odds of tying the game and probably only a little bit less than that of taking the lead.  Madrigal or a catcher had to take that plate appearance, so a DP is a serious risk no matter what and it will take an uncommon result to move the runners over without a bunt.  So you remove the DP risk and trade the odds of one of those guys driving in the runner for the increased chance at both tying the game and taking the lead.  It's a good decision.

Sorry you are a brilliant baseball mind but you won’t be able to convince me that David Ross managed that situation optimally

[Irrelevant Dude]

By the way, it's not the first time this week that Morel stared at a fastball right down the middle of the plate for Strike 3.  There is simply no excuse for taking that pitch. If your plan at the plate is to sit on an off speed pitch and take the strikeout if a guy throws a fastball, then that's a bad plan.

[WhyCantWeWin]

You just don't bunt with a guy in scoring position lol. He's already in scoring position and the next guy can be intentionally walked to bring the force play into effect. But the Mets didn't have to do that due to Ross's poor lineup construction and decision making. 

[Stratos]

Someone tell Wesneski to throw 70% sliders.  They're just sitting on that BP fastball.

[thawv]

9 hours ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Have you looked at Alvarez' framing vs Amaya? There's a large disparity.

 

Amaya misses some friggin easy ones. Just screwed Kyle again.

Framing and bad umpiring is why they need the automated strike zone.  I'm not sure why they don't want to get the calls right.  The technology has been there for years.  What's the delay???

 

[thawv]

11 hours ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

This pains me to suggest because he’s my favorite player on the current Cubs team, but:

If the Cubs offered the Mariners Morel for George Kirby in the off season, which team doesn’t walk away as a better team?

It would take a staggering amount more than Morel to get Kirby.  

[Jason Ross]

I missed most of the game, but was able to jump in during the 9th inning.  You can chalk me way up as "new school" when it comes to baseball strategies and we can consider "outs" to be the game clock as we can consider every team starts with 27, and when you're out of outs, it's game over.  We wouldn't see an NFL team voluntarily declining time when they were losing and had the ball, and I think of giving up outs in the same, general fashion.  With that said I think there are times in which bunting can make some sense (so the NFL analogy isn't meant to be a perfect one) and I think last night we can probably accept the decision to bunt vs not bunt as an example of one that had logic behind it.

Using updated run matrixes, teams are expected to score 1.435 runs when there are 0 outs, and runners on first and second.  Teams are expected to score 1.39 runs when runners are on second and third with 1 out.  The overall difference between the two situations is pretty minimal and you're trading the fear of the double play, which is a runner on 3rd base and 2 outs (.380 runs) for the difference if you fail to score a run immediately with the first hitter after the first hitter.  Full updated 2022 run scoring expectancy can be found here.  Madrigal is a high GB% player, Amaya is a speed risk with a 26th percentile sprint speed.  Bickford is a pretty FB heavy pitcher, so you can both argue that lessens the possibility of a double play, but also helps Morel who's a fly ball centric hitter to get the sacfly.

I'm not sure I'd have called for the bunt, but I don't think the call was illogical, and it seems more of a coin-flip choice to me that didn't work.  Sometimes you're just kind of damned if you do, damned if you don't, and I'm not sure there's enough faulty logic behind the bunt call that it falls under "a bad decision" and moreso falls under a "decision that just didn't work".  

Edited August 10, 2023 by 1908_Cubs

[CubUgly]

9 hours ago, UMFan83 said:

I hate when I can see a bad decision in real time, predict how it plays out and then it happens exactly like that.  

Morel was the DH, PH Gomes there if you have to.  Makes no sense that he would purposely punt 33% of his remaining outs then put one of the worst people for contact up there

Yeah, I had several issues both with the lineup and in game coaching decisions tonight - I thought bringing in Wesneski when he did was a real head scratcher, given his issues with lefties.  But ultimately you have Happ (why is he still hitting 3rd) and Morel crapping the bed twice with RISP, Swanson all of a sudden in New York looking like Baez and he and Belli both swinging at ball 4 in the 8th.  There were several opportunities to overcome what I think were bad decisions and honestly against the guys who were pitching we should have, so more on the players.  And I don't want to hear the 16 games in a row stuff - this time of year everyone is a bit tired.  Miss me with that. 

[CubinNY]

glad I went to bed before the 9th. I would have had a hard time sleeping. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

55 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

glad I went to bed before the 9th. I would have had a hard time sleeping. 

This series was a 12-6 cold shower man. Total bummer.

[BearDown1223]

1 hour ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I missed most of the game, but was able to jump in during the 9th inning.  You can chalk me way up as "new school" when it comes to baseball strategies and we can consider "outs" to be the game clock as we can consider every team starts with 27, and when you're out of outs, it's game over.  We wouldn't see an NFL team voluntarily declining time when they were losing and had the ball, and I think of giving up outs in the same, general fashion.  With that said I think there are times in which bunting can make some sense (so the NFL analogy isn't meant to be a perfect one) and I think last night we can probably accept the decision to bunt vs not bunt as an example of one that had logic behind it.

Using updated run matrixes, teams are expected to score 1.435 runs when there are 0 outs, and runners on first and second.  Teams are expected to score 1.39 runs when runners are on second and third with 1 out.  The overall difference between the two situations is pretty minimal and you're trading the fear of the double play, which is a runner on 3rd base and 2 outs (.380 runs) for the difference if you fail to score a run immediately with the first hitter after the first hitter.  Full updated 2022 run scoring expectancy can be found here.  Madrigal is a high GB% player, Amaya is a speed risk with a 26th percentile sprint speed.  Bickford is a pretty FB heavy pitcher, so you can both argue that lessens the possibility of a double play, but also helps Morel who's a fly ball centric hitter to get the sacfly.

I'm not sure I'd have called for the bunt, but I don't think the call was illogical, and it seems more of a coin-flip choice to me that didn't work.  Sometimes you're just kind of damned if you do, damned if you don't, and I'm not sure there's enough faulty logic behind the bunt call that it falls under "a bad decision" and moreso falls under a "decision that just didn't work".  

Thanks for this data.  I was originally pissed at the decision, especially with the immediate outcome.

But I've reversed course since last night.  The team wasn't doing anything and with one hit from Morel/Hoerner/Happ, we are winning the game.  And with a Morel fly ball, we are tied.  I think Ross was going for the Win right there and things didn't work out.  We would all be screaming if Nick grounded into a double play, so at this point, I'm fine with the decision.  

If this were the 7th or 8th, I would disagree with the decision, but at this point, I think I'm okay with it in the 9th and against that pitcher.

[Jason Ross]

7 minutes ago, BearDown1223 said:

Thanks for this data.  I was originally pissed at the decision, especially with the immediate outcome.

But I've reversed course since last night.  The team wasn't doing anything and with one hit from Morel/Hoerner/Happ, we are winning the game.  And with a Morel fly ball, we are tied.  I think Ross was going for the Win right there and things didn't work out.  We would all be screaming if Nick grounded into a double play, so at this point, I'm fine with the decision.  

If this were the 7th or 8th, I would disagree with the decision, but at this point, I think I'm okay with it in the 9th and against that pitcher.

Yep.  I think there's a good chance we're having the same re-litigation of the situation in the event that the Cubs didn't bunt.  Maybe they score, maybe they don't, but I think it's probably a near 50/50 call.  Wesneski coming out to face lefties?  That's kind of dumb.  Bunting in the 9th?  I can see the logic behind it.

[UMFan83]

50 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Yep.  I think there's a good chance we're having the same re-litigation of the situation in the event that the Cubs didn't bunt.  Maybe they score, maybe they don't, but I think it's probably a near 50/50 call.  Wesneski coming out to face lefties?  That's kind of dumb.  Bunting in the 9th?  I can see the logic behind it.

I don't see a lot of people arguing when the Cubs don't bunt. 

The run expectancy info is helpful, but of course every situation has different variables.  There were many more decisions that were made in the 9th inning that led to Madrigal PH for Amaya and Morel being allowed to hit.  For instance if your concern there is double play avoidance, you mention Amaya's speed but not that his GB/FB ratio is 0.68 this year compared to Madrigal's 1.21.  Maybe you don't like Amaya there as he's been slumping a bit of late.  Yan Gomes GB/FB rate is even lower at 0.51.

Maybe if Madrigal had started the game and was due up there I'd consider a bunt more, but my complaint comes down to Ross PHing him into the game specifically to bunt so that a high K% batter who has been particularly striking out a lot lately can be put into a situation where putting the ball in play is required is suboptimal for me.  

My complaint that's only a complaint in hindsight is Ross mentioning that Nico came after Morel and is a good bet to get a run home with 2 outs.  And he's right except Nico got pitched around which is actually pretty obvious in retrospect knowing Happ is on deck.  

[Jason Ross]

14 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

I don't see a lot of people arguing when the Cubs don't bunt. 

The run expectancy info is helpful, but of course every situation has different variables.  There were many more decisions that were made in the 9th inning that led to Madrigal PH for Amaya and Morel being allowed to hit.  For instance if your concern there is double play avoidance, you mention Amaya's speed but not that his GB/FB ratio is 0.68 this year compared to Madrigal's 1.21.  Maybe you don't like Amaya there as he's been slumping a bit of late.  Yan Gomes GB/FB rate is even lower at 0.51.

Maybe if Madrigal had started the game and was due up there I'd consider a bunt more, but my complaint comes down to Ross PHing him into the game specifically to bunt so that a high K% batter who has been particularly striking out a lot lately can be put into a situation where putting the ball in play is required is suboptimal for me.  

My complaint that's only a complaint in hindsight is Ross mentioning that Nico came after Morel and is a good bet to get a run home with 2 outs.  And he's right except Nico got pitched around which is actually pretty obvious in retrospect knowing Happ is on deck.  

Yeah, RD Matrixes shouldn't be used as entire gospel, and should be contextual, but are over huge sample sizes and give you a really good baseline of what to generally expect; the overall change from the bunt probably isn't meaningful in and of itself.  Like you said, there are other things involve.  I think the overall point I'm making is that I think there's plenty of argument on both sides that there probably wasn't a clearly correct/incorrect call.   All of the smaller things are good enough to maybe slightly push you one direction, or slightly pull you another, but not enough for me to think that the decision was "wrong".   I also don't normally argue when the Cubs don't bunt, as stated, I think bunting is basically dumb always.  But if Amaya or Madrigal (if you still PH him) hits into a double play, there would be people who'd be saying "how can you do that?  Just bunt and stay out of it!" and I'd probably still have the same general feeling I have now. 

I'm not a Ross-defender on everything (I've had plenty to complain about), either.  I just think the choice last night is probably close enough to a coin flip that I can buy either side of the debate.  

Edited August 10, 2023 by 1908_Cubs

[Transmogrified Tiger]

16 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

My complaint that's only a complaint in hindsight is Ross mentioning that Nico came after Morel and is a good bet to get a run home with 2 outs.  And he's right except Nico got pitched around which is actually pretty obvious in retrospect knowing Happ is on deck.  

Ross's full quote mentioned they pitched around Nico and that brings up Happ(one of the best OBP options on the team) with the bases loaded, which is a matchup they like and will absolutely take.

[thawv]

23 hours ago, 1908_Cubs said:

I missed most of the game, but was able to jump in during the 9th inning.  You can chalk me way up as "new school" when it comes to baseball strategies and we can consider "outs" to be the game clock as we can consider every team starts with 27, and when you're out of outs, it's game over.  We wouldn't see an NFL team voluntarily declining time when they were losing and had the ball, and I think of giving up outs in the same, general fashion.  With that said I think there are times in which bunting can make some sense (so the NFL analogy isn't meant to be a perfect one) and I think last night we can probably accept the decision to bunt vs not bunt as an example of one that had logic behind it.

Using updated run matrixes, teams are expected to score 1.435 runs when there are 0 outs, and runners on first and second.  Teams are expected to score 1.39 runs when runners are on second and third with 1 out.  The overall difference between the two situations is pretty minimal and you're trading the fear of the double play, which is a runner on 3rd base and 2 outs (.380 runs) for the difference if you fail to score a run immediately with the first hitter after the first hitter.  Full updated 2022 run scoring expectancy can be found here.  Madrigal is a high GB% player, Amaya is a speed risk with a 26th percentile sprint speed.  Bickford is a pretty FB heavy pitcher, so you can both argue that lessens the possibility of a double play, but also helps Morel who's a fly ball centric hitter to get the sacfly.

I'm not sure I'd have called for the bunt, but I don't think the call was illogical, and it seems more of a coin-flip choice to me that didn't work.  Sometimes you're just kind of damned if you do, damned if you don't, and I'm not sure there's enough faulty logic behind the bunt call that it falls under "a bad decision" and moreso falls under a "decision that just didn't work".  

I don't have a problem so much with the bunt either.  It's completely neutral.  I would have thought about putting a pitcher in to bunt, and had Madrigal, a contact hitter bat for Morel, who is poor at making contact.  The runner on 3B would certain be in "going on contact" mode, and Madrigal almost certainly would have put the ball in play.  There was also the hit an run option with Madrigal, instead of bunting.  Again, he would have likely made contact, AND the ball may have found the hole where the infield vacated because the runners were on the move.  That's the option that I would have chosen. 

[Jason Ross]

4 minutes ago, thawv said:

I don't have a problem so much with the bunt either.  It's completely neutral.  I would have thought about putting a pitcher in to bunt, and had Madrigal, a contact hitter bat for Morel, who is poor at making contact.  The runner on 3B would certain be in "going on contact" mode, and Madrigal almost certainly would have put the ball in play.  There was also the hit an run option with Madrigal, instead of bunting.  Again, he would have likely made contact, AND the ball may have found the hole where the infield vacated because the runners were on the move.  That's the option that I would have chosen. 

The only pitcher in the MLB who;s has even so much as thought of picking up a baseball bat in the last 18 months is Shohei Ohtani, and we don't have him, so I'd assume putting them in a bunting situation would be a terrible idea and asking for failure.  Bunting requires some skill, and some practice still, and throwing whatever pitcher in that situation hoping it's like riding a bike when the game is riding on that bunt, feels like a pretty hefty gamble.  I'm also not sure a player like Madrigal, far more likely to put the ball on the ground, when you need a sacrifice fly (infield would be instructed to immediately look home) is a great plan, either, with runners on 2nd and 3rd.  Maybe Morel wasn't the best choice either with his swing and miss, but you had a hitter who's at least geared to hitting fly balls; a ground ball on the infield is not really much of a difference than a strikeout there unless it finds a hole.

Edited August 11, 2023 by 1908_Cubs