MLB Chatter Thread

[Cowboysrock55]

So, say you bunt and get on, then what? Do you bunt every batter? If not, why not? It's because swinging away gives you a better shot at scoring runs. You don't manufacture runs by bunting every batter. No team has ever done that. Ever.

So your odds are better bunting. Think stats here for a second. You need to swing eventually. That I agree with but you first need base runners. Wouldn't you be better off bunting first and then hitting with guys on base to score runs? It's not as easy to bunt runs in. We all know that. But better to take the better odds to get base runners on and then let guys swing. And he'll you may knock the pitcher out of the game before it's said and done.

Not bunting if it gives you better odds is really just giving up.

 

[Genghis Khan]

You're talking about a game where your hitters are batting with a 0% chance against that pitcher though.

That's not necessarily true though, particularly as the game goes on and the pitcher might tire.

And that bunt hit won't matter down that many runs. They're just going to ignore the runner anyway.

If you want to come back you have to drive the ball and get extra base hits. Get the manager thinking about the bullpen.

All the bunt does is potentially break up the no hitter.

That's why it's different when they're only down a couple runs. You get a runner on in THAT situation? They have to pay attention.

 

[Cotton]

So your odds are better bunting. Think stats here for a second. You need to swing eventually. That I agree with but you first need base runners. Wouldn't you be better off bunting first and then hitting with guys on base to score runs? It's not as easy to bunt runs in. We all know that. But better to take the better odds to get base runners on and then let guys swing. And he'll you may knock the pitcher out of the game before it's said and done.

Not bunting if it gives you better odds is really just giving up.

Again, if bunting gives you a better shot, then why don't teams do it all the time instead of rarely? It doesn't make any sense.

 

[Genghis Khan]

So your odds are better bunting.

That depends entirely on the batter, the situation, and the defensive alignment.

But all that aside, you bunt to get on, but then what? You think they're going to hold the runner on or care at all what he does on the bases? They're going to act like he's not even there. So you still have to get hits and drive the ball.

Nothing changes other than the no-hitter is gone.

That's why it's cheap.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Not bunting if it gives you better odds is really just giving up.

You haven't changed the game one iota by bunting.

That's what you bunters are missing.

 

[NoDak]

People don't bunt all the time because it is easily defended if expected. And that's the main point... IF EXPECTED. Dropping a bunt down catching the defense on their heels is good strategy. Bunting as a main source of scoring runs will ultimately fail and get the manager fired.

Bunting to break up a no hitter, especially if down by a lot of runs as this scenario was talking about, only makes you a petty asshole.

 

[Cotton]

People don't bunt all the time because it is easily defended if expected. And that's the main point... IF EXPECTED. Dropping a bunt down catching the defense on their heels is good strategy. Bunting as a main source of scoring runs will ultimately fail and get the manager fired.

Bunting to break up a no hitter, especially if down by a lot of runs as this scenario was talking about, only makes you a petty asshole.

It would hold no strategy at all. You would be bunting just to break up the no hitter. You wouldn’t be trying to win the game. And this insinuation that it’s a winning strategy down by 8 is silly at best.

 

[1bigfan13]

Bunting to break up a no hitter, especially if down by a lot of runs as this scenario was talking about, only makes you a petty asshole.

I'm ok with that.

Those who know me IRL already know I'm petty af.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

You haven't changed the game one iota by bunting.

That's what you bunters are missing.

That bunter represents a run once he is on base. When you trail by 8, you need runners.
All the same as a hitter who gets on base. That's the point. You do what gives you the best chance of getting base runners in that situation.. Extra base hits don't do much when trailing that much. Not unless you have guys on base first.

All I'm saying is do what gives you the best chance to get guys on base. If that's bunting do it. And I'm assuming that's the case otherwise you all wouldn't be upset about a bunt messing up a no hitter. But yeah some guys you absolutely have a better chance if you let them swing as opposed to bunting.

 

[Cotton]

Extra base hits don't do much when trailing that much.

You have this exactly backwards. Putting runners in scoring position is less important than a bunt attempt? Come on, man. You're smarter than this, and now I feel like you're arguing just to argue.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

You haven't changed the game one iota by bunting.

That's what you bunters are missing.

Not true, a guy on base is a guy on base. Shit, it's like you all didn't watch the movie money ball...

 

[Cowboysrock55]

You have this exactly backwards. Putting runners in scoring position is less important than a bunt attempt? Come on, man. You're smarter than this, and now I feel like you're arguing just to argue.

You're bunting to get on base. That's like saying you shouldn't take a walk. Guys on base are how you win games. It's really not complicated. And unlike when you're trailing 1-0 and a homerun or 2 hits changes everything, they don’t when down by large numbers.

Now if you think you shouldn't try to win down 8-0 in the middle of a no hitter. Then go ahead, keep swinging.

 

[Cotton]

You're bunting to get on base. That's like saying you shouldn't take a walk. Guys on base are how you win games. It's really not complicated. And unlike when you're trailing 1-0 and a homerun or 2 hits changes everything, they don’t when down by large numbers.

Now if you think you shouldn't try to win down 8-0 in the middle of a no hitter. Then go ahead, keep swinging.

You're wrong, and now you are all over the place with your argument. Attempting a bunt is more important than extra base hits to you. You just said that. Your argument is invalid.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

You're wrong, and now you are all over the place with your argument. Attempting a bunt is more important than extra base hits to you. You just said that. Your argument is invalid.

Don't pull your Schmitty "you're wrong" argument. I didn't say it's more important. But trailing 8-0 it is the same thing. The guy on first represents 1 run. The guy who hits a triple is also 1 run. Again, you're the old guy who doesn't understand analytics if you can't understand this simple fact.

Now tell me that it's an asshole move. Fine, I get that argument. Your odds of winning are slim at best regardless so you can claim bunting is cheap. But I say it doesn't matter if the guy ends up on base. The goal is the same. Getting a guy on base is all that matters at that point if you want to win.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Not true, a guy on base is a guy on base. Shit, it's like you all didn't watch the movie money ball...

You're so confused.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Don't pull your Schmitty "you're wrong" argument. I didn't say it's more important. But trailing 8-0 it is the same thing. The guy on first represents 1 run. The guy who hits a triple is also 1 run. Again, you're the old guy who doesn't understand analytics if you can't understand this simple fact.

Now tell me that it's an asshole move. Fine, I get that argument. Your odds of winning are slim at best regardless so you can claim bunting is cheap. But I say it doesn't matter if the guy ends up on base. The goal is the same. Getting a guy on base is all that matters at that point if you want to win.

You keep bringing up analytics. Analytics HATES bunting.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

You keep bringing up analytics. Analytics HATES bunting.

No but it values the base runner regardless. It hates bunting because your odds of getting on base while bunting suck. But if you tell me you think it's bullshit to bunt in the middle of a no hitter I assume it's because you think the guy has a better chance of getting on base bunting than getting a base hit otherwise. If you think your odds are better to get a hit swinging then bunting, then why does it upset people?

 

[Cowboysrock55]

You're so confused.

No, I'll be honest, I really don't think you guys understand what I'm saying. I'm either communicating it poorly or you all don't understand basic arithmetic. Or you all are just so stuck in your ways that you can't think beyond that.

It's really just math. But you do have to assume the the odds of a base hit bunt are better in this particular situation then a traditional hit. I've explained why I'm making that assumption.

 

[Cotton]

Guy on third is the same as a guy on first. Noted.

 

[Cotton]

Attempting to bunt is the same/less than extra base hits. Noted.