And actually, this is one of the few times I think bunting is a good idea.

I can't believe this.Just because it is the usual course of action does not mean it's the appropriate thing to do in this particular situation.

And actually, this is one of the few times I think bunting is a good idea.

I can't believe this.Just because it is the usual course of action does not mean it's the appropriate thing to do in this particular situation.

 

I'm almost completely opposed to bunting, but in a close game in the 9th, when the value of one base goes up, I think it's probably best to do it. I mean, basically, I look at it as if he's on third with one out, anything to the right on the ground or in the air further than about 150 feet scores a run.

And actually, this is one of the few times I think bunting is a good idea.

I can't believe this.Just because it is the usual course of action does not mean it's the appropriate thing to do in this particular situation.

 

I don't think that's the reason he's making the point. I think bobbob is taking into account the fact that it's a high leverage situation. In the bottom of the 9th with the home team down 4-3, 1 run is ALOT more valuable to the home team than in the bottom of the 6th with the same score.

Ensam had a great chart about bases reached with out(s) and probability of scoring.

 

Suffice to say, runners on 3rd with less than 2 outs = very very good. Very very good + trailing in the 9th = easy decision.

Ensam had a great chart about bases reached with out(s) and probability of scoring.

 

Suffice to say, runners on 3rd with less than 2 outs = very very good. Very very good + trailing in the 9th = easy decision.

 

 

That wasn't me that posted it, but I agree...you play the percentages. You bunt in that situation with a hitter like Treanor at the plate.

Especially since, let's be honest, Matt Treanor is a pretty awful major league hitter.

From a Net-Expected Runs Value Chart:

 

- Expected Runs in Initial Situation (Runner on 2nd, no outs): 1.1138 runs

- Expected Runs After Successful Bunt (Runner on 3rd, 1 out): 0.920 runs

- Expected Runs if Treanor Gets Out (Runner on 2nd, 1 out): 0.720 runs

 

These are independent of inning and score, so bottom of the 9th, 1 run game (a high leverage stuation) alters how strictly you ought to abide by the chart.

 

Link: http://www.harvardmagazine.com/lib/02mj/images/ball.jpg

Especially since, let's be honest, Matt Treanor is a pretty awful major league hitter.

 

 

Not really. He has a career OBP of .329, so the chance of him doing something in that situation was actually average. You add the chance of him hitting a sac fly to right that moves Hermida to RF, or a grounder on the rightside, or an error, and he's pobably going to have somewhere around a 36%-37% of doing something in that situation that doesn't result in a bad out. In baseball terms that really isn't bad at all.

 

But the chance of Amezaga scoring Hermida on third with 1 out is going to wayyy out weigh that. Personally my only complaint would be to have Wood ph for Amezaga since he has more power, but then if Wood doesn't do anything that leaves the only PH options as Olivo and Ross if Wood fails, and considering the fact that a chance of a DP right there is very rare, not something I can really complain about.

We need a Bobby Cox type manager. He gives it all for his team, and he doesn't hide sh*t. If he see's his pitcher is struggling in the first couple of innings he'll take him out before the game gets out of his teams hand. He gives his team a chance to win, instead of leaving someone out there to try to prove themselves or to fix their problems during the game. I don't know about you guys, but i think Fredi is way too "soft" to be a manager. He's extremely nice, he doesn't seem to push his players enough to be winners, he doesn't seem to make the big in-game decisions that need to be made in order to win. Fredi needs to prove himself next season because this team at the beginning of the season had great potential to do some damage, and well that hasn't really happened. Fredi needs to step it up a notch next season.

 

Just my opinion

 

 

The big difference is Bobby Cox is in the middle of a pennant and Fredi Gonzalez is nowhere near contention. Guys like RVH and Olsen need to left out there so they can figure things out. That's how players develop.

Bobby's always like that, year round. Whether it's spring training, the regular season or the playoffs. It has nothing to do with being in contention. The Minor leagues is where you figure things out, up in the majors you need to be ready man there's no fooling around. Unfortunately there's ALOT of fooling around with Fredi, but i'm sure Fredi is the way he is because he listens to his Boss(LORIA). All i know is that Fredi needs to step it up, this team needs to win in order to get fans in the seat and that's the only way we can get a stadium. We've got a hell of a team man, there's no excuses.

Hermida said in a post-game interview that he was running on contact when Amezaga lined out, which prevented him from not getting doubled off third.

 

My question is, is there any real logic behind running him on contact with a man on third, one out, and the infield in?

 

If Amezaga hits a ground ball, either Hermida is thrown out at the plate (he is not especially fast) or it goes into the outfield and Hermida scores anyway.

 

If he hits a line drive, Hermida is doubled off third (which is what happened), or if the liner goes to the OF and is caught Hermida doesn't have a chance to go back to third and tag up.

 

If he hits a fly ball, Hermida also doesn't have a chance to go back and tag up.

 

If he hits a clean single, Hermida will score anyway, regardless of whether he goes on contact.

 

So where is the logic in having Hermida go on contact in that situation? Maybe I am missing something.

After striking out Bonds twice why did Vandy give him anything to hit? And why did they let him pitch to him? I thought he was seriously pushing his luck. I also agree that they should have pinch hit for Vandy. Oh well, it was nice to have a big crowd.

 

Ehhhh. If we walk Bonds and he ends up scoring, you/others say, Vandy struck him out twice already and now youre just gonna give him a free pass?!!!??! Stupid Fredi!!!!

Hermida said in a post-game interview that he was running on contact when Amezaga lined out, which prevented him from getting doubled off third.

 

My question is, is there any real logic behind running him on contact with a man on third, one out, and the infield in?

 

If Amezaga hits a ground ball, either Hermida is thrown out at the plate (he is not especially fast) or it goes into the outfield and Hermida scores anyway.

 

If he hits a line drive, Hermida is doubled off third (which is what happened), or if the liner goes to the OF and is caught Hermida doesn't have a chance to go back to third and tag up.

 

If he hits a fly ball, Hermida also doesn't have a chance to go back and tag up.

 

If he hits a clean single, Hermida will score anyway, regardless of whether he goes on contact.

 

So where is the logic in having Hermida go on contact in that situation? Maybe I am missing something.

 

Aside from Vizquel (and even including Vizquel now) it's not a particularly strong defensive infield. Having the runner go on contact forces the issue with fielders and can draw a bad throw. For reference on this, see any Dan Uggla throw home on a bang-bang or sure out play over the last 2 months.

 

Also, having the runner go on contact makes speed less of an issue since the runner (in theory) has a better jump than he would normally.

 

That said, I must say I agree with you that sending the runner on contact isn't a good idea with the scenario we had last night. His value is that there are myriad ways to score him, several without the benefit of a hit.

So, anyone here want to take the managers job and see if they can do it better?

After striking out Bonds twice why did Vandy give him anything to hit? And why did they let him pitch to him? I thought he was seriously pushing his luck. I also agree that they should have pinch hit for Vandy. Oh well, it was nice to have a big crowd.

 

Ehhhh. If we walk Bonds and he ends up scoring, you/others say, Vandy struck him out twice already and now youre just gonna give him a free pass?!!!??! Stupid Fredi!!!!

Maybe others, not me. I am generally not overly critical. In this situation he's a rookie pitcher and he was shaky so I thought that was pushing it and I would have rather taken a chance with someone (anyone) other than Bonds.

So, anyone here want to take the managers job and see if they can do it better?

Can't be much harder than managing on MLB 2K7...

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT:I hope nobody took me seriously

All I know is that the mouths of everyone around me in Sec 144 dropped wide open with a big "Oh no - what exactly happened there?".

 

Even Hutton was speechless when I reviewed he game tape from TV.

 

Tough loss.

Here we go again!Bottom of the 9th,no outs and a man in second.Any logical person would have Treanor take his swings,especially with the way he's been hitting but no,Fredi the retard decides once again to just give away an out to the Giants by having Treanor bunt.Then there came the double play to end the game.When does this stupid crap end??? :banghead

 

Treanor came thru big time with a runner on 2nd in the 9th today, like the all time great that he is.

Here we go again!Bottom of the 9th,no outs and a man in second.Any logical person would have Treanor take his swings,especially with the way he's been hitting but no,Fredi the retard decides once again to just give away an out to the Giants by having Treanor bunt.Then there came the double play to end the game.When does this stupid crap end??? :banghead

 

Treanor came thru big time with a runner on 2nd in the 9th today, like the all time great that he is.

Yeah, I know, man.

We should bat him, like, 4th or something.

Here we go again!Bottom of the 9th,no outs and a man in second.Any logical person would have Treanor take his swings,especially with the way he's been hitting but no,Fredi the retard decides once again to just give away an out to the Giants by having Treanor bunt.Then there came the double play to end the game.When does this stupid crap end??? :banghead

 

Treanor came thru big time with a runner on 2nd in the 9th today, like the all time great that he is.

 

yeah, donde esta kansukee

Here we go again!Bottom of the 9th,no outs and a man in second.Any logical person would have Treanor take his swings,especially with the way he's been hitting but no,Fredi the retard decides once again to just give away an out to the Giants by having Treanor bunt.Then there came the double play to end the game.When does this stupid crap end??? :banghead

 

Treanor came thru big time with a runner on 2nd in the 9th today, like the all time great that he is.

 

yeah, donde esta kansukee

And your point is?The team is playing like crap.I mean,getting swept by the putrid Giants is about as low as you can get_at this pace they could end the season at 20 or more under .500.

And your point is?The team is playing like crap.I mean,getting swept by the putrid Giants is about as low as you can get_at this pace they could end the season at 20 or more under .500.

 

Damn, we forfeited tomorrow's game?

Here we go again!Bottom of the 9th,no outs and a man in second.Any logical person would have Treanor take his swings,especially with the way he's been hitting but no,Fredi the retard decides once again to just give away an out to the Giants by having Treanor bunt.Then there came the double play to end the game.When does this stupid crap end??? :banghead

 

Treanor came thru big time with a runner on 2nd in the 9th today, like the all time great that he is.

 

yeah, donde esta kansukee

And your point is?The team is playing like crap.I mean,getting swept by the putrid Giants is about as low as you can get_at this pace they could end the season at 20 or more under .500.

 

They havent been swept yet. But there isnt much that you do know.

Ok,brain fart here but you get my point.They they have played it certainly feels like we have been swept.

From 1977-2006:

 

Home team down 1 in the 9th with a man on first & no outs, win expectancy is 32.0% (1678 game sample size)

 

Home team down 1 in the 9th with a man on second and 1 out, win expectancy is 28.1% (991 game sample size)

 

Same situation except man on 2nd to lead off w/ no outs, win exp is 40.9% (357 games)

 

Same situation except man on 3rd w/ 1 out, win exp is 37.7% (247 games)

From 1977-2006:

 

Home team down 1 in the 9th with a man on first & no outs, win expectancy is 32.0% (1678 game sample size)

 

Home team down 1 in the 9th with a man on second and 1 out, win expectancy is 28.1% (991 game sample size)

 

Same situation except man on 2nd to lead off w/ no outs, win exp is 40.9% (357 games)

 

Same situation except man on 3rd w/ 1 out, win exp is 37.7% (247 games)

And this is exactly why bunting was not the automatic best move.