I get that small ball is Cohen's schtick

[MSDawg34]

but for Christ's sake we should not be bunting the runners over EVER in the 2nd inning, especially against Alcorn. Everyone here wants to know where the runs are, well I can tell you they do not come when we give outs away constantly bunting. The 2nd could have developed into a big 6-8 run inning and put this thing away but a failed bunt ending in a double play screwed that.

My baseball philosophy mirrors that of Bill James (sabermetrics) in that I do not buy into the men on 1st and 2nd no outs automatic bunt. To me that hinders a huge inning drastically. I understand it later in a close game where only 1 run is needed or to provide a little cushion but never early in the game and never against a caliber pitcher that Alcorn puts out there.

I also believe that OPS (on base % + slugging) is the key offensive statistic and have argued on this board from the beginning of the season that our OPS will improve from the Super Regional season last year

 

[MSDawg34]

but for Christ's sake we should not be bunting the runners over EVER in the 2nd inning, especially against Alcorn. Everyone here wants to know where the runs are, well I can tell you they do not come when we give outs away constantly bunting. The 2nd could have developed into a big 6-8 run inning and put this thing away but a failed bunt ending in a double play screwed that.

My baseball philosophy mirrors that of Bill James (sabermetrics) in that I do not buy into the men on 1st and 2nd no outs automatic bunt. To me that hinders a huge inning drastically. I understand it later in a close game where only 1 run is needed or to provide a little cushion but never early in the game and never against a caliber pitcher that Alcorn puts out there.

I also believe that OPS (on base % + slugging) is the key offensive statistic and have argued on this board from the beginning of the season that our OPS will improve from the Super Regional season last year

 

[drt7891]

My baseball philosophy mirrors that of Bill James (sabermetrics) in that I do not buy into the men on 1st and 2nd no outs automatic bunt. To me that hinders a huge inning drastically

 

[MSDawg34]

If I were coach I would have just let Frazier hit away, which would have resulted in men on 1st and 2nd with one out. Especially after a few failed attempts at the hit and run. Either way what are the odds of a line out there 15%? What are the odds of a resulting out on a sac bunt 95%?

Weak example DRT

 

[drt7891]

out... you know... hitting away... resulted in a triple play... and many times, results in a double play when we do nothing but hit ground balls. Which would you rather have... second and third with one out, or third with two outs? Even worse than that, three outs, like exactly what happened Sunday? If I'm playing it safe, I know what choice I'd make.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

I've seen some interviews where he seems to be obsessive about stats and playing percentages, so I'm sure he's aware that Sabermetrics says don't do sacrifice bunts ever (well, at least in the general case)

 

[drt7891]

gets you second and third with one out? That also takes the double play out of the mix. If my team is struggling to put the ball in play, why would I consistently let them "swing away" to further hurt our chances of scoring runs? I'm not saying NEVER swing away, but you can't tell me this club hasn't struggled hitting the ball. I'd play it safe any chance I got.

 

[MSDawg34]

The point of my original post was arguing against it so early in the game against a vastly inferior opponent

Secondly we can play the what if game with the triple play; what if Frazier's p-rod was a foot in either direction of the 1B. Then we have a man on 2nd with 2 runs across the plate and 0 outs and our 2-3-4 hitters coming up.

Unlike any other sport sometimes "that's baseball" holds true

 

[MSDawg34]

dealing with the ERT (Expected Run Table) It was found that with men on 1st and 2nd with 0 outs the average runs per inning is a full .10 higher than that where there are runners on 2nd and 3rd with 1 out.

There are many analyses that can be made from ERT's but Im only dealing with the incessant sac bunting we have seen under Cohen with men on 1st and 2nd with 0 outs.

Other than that and the stubbornness of some of the pitchers we sometimes see (Girodo should never see the field unless the game has a 10+ run difference winning or losing) I fully support Cohen

 

[KurtRambis4]

you Cohen was going w info that suggested he called a hit & run on that play.

 

[8dog]

on the college game. I see bunts screwed up all the time in college. Hell, Ole Miss bunted their way to a game 1 victory in the 2005 Super Regional over the eventual national champtions b/c they couldn't field the damn thing.

 

[FlabLoser]

steppingstoneku

 

[patdog]

that hitting instead of bunting in that situation is the wrong move. The fact is, over time, you will score more runs with men on 1st and 2nd and no outs than you will with men on 2nd and 3rd with one out. Unless you just have a terrible hitter at the plate, you're better off swinging away with men on 1st and 2nd and no outs. Exception is in a late game situation where you only need 1 run.

 

[Foronce]

I mean now we are bitching cause we didn't score 18 runs against alcorn st.

I have no idea what Cohen was thinking and most of the time I don't either, but my God if we are going to start second guess every single detail ...we are better off letting the indian spirits allow piss rockets hit our baserunners.

I would look at the situation like this. I bitched earlier in the year that he let Frost hit in the b8 costing us perhaps a game, now with 4 important injuries down I am starting to think he was right giving Frost the opportunity's early in the year, even though we lost the game. Knowing you can beat an alcorn team by 12 truly means nothing, but working on sac bunting could help us down the line ...also by keeping the game close it allowed us to put a small amount of pressure on some young pitchers and let them get some quality work ...where as lingo pitching in the 8 up 14 really doesn't have any pressure. I know if you can beat a team by 14 you should be a team by 14 most of the time, but this team has lots of offensive issues at the moment. So making them play that way in 'easier' games may settle them down in the 'SEC' games ...just a different way to look at it

 

[gotoman]

First post on SixPack.
Baseball is a funny game. You throw the ball, you hit the ball, you catch the ball. Got it?
Bunting is a fundamental part of the game and from what I've seen, Cohen plays that type of game. Nothing wrong with it. Some may want to do other things and that's fine too. There is no concrete way.
Also, it was a good time to get more experience in a situation that wasn't going to cost us much if failed.
Do I agree with all Cohen does? Heck, no! But that's all part of the game. Nothing wrong with having a different approach to game situations.
I understand the disagreements, but the nit-picking is sometimes just for the sake of negativity.

 

[drt7891]

I don't blame Cohen for trying small ball to try to get SOMETHING going. This board has bitched every game except a handful about how we struggle to hit the ball and score runs, and I quite frankly don't care if there is a marginal advantage of hitting with runners at first and second with no outs, its marginal AT BEST. I'd rather move the runner to third with one out where ANYTHING outside the infield scores you a run.

It also takes the double play out of order, and although I haven't checked the numbers, I would almost bet we are in the top 1/2 in the SEC in grounding into Double Plays. I'm just saying... if we are struggling as much as we are to put the ball in play, why risk a rally-killing double or even triple play by swinging away in that situation?

Also, I'm not saying we should bunt EVERY SINGLE TIME in that situation, because obviously, it depends on who is in the lineup, as well as how Cohen feels the team is hitting, but he is completely justified in trying to manufacture runs early in the game when it's close.

 

[patdog]

The difference between a .350 hitter and a .300 hitter is only a hit per week. But which one would you rather have up there if you needed a hit? You do understand that the risk of hitting into a double play (or even a triple play) is already taken into account in comparing the run production of the two situations don't you? Fact is, bunting is almost never a good play unless you have a terrible hitter at the plate or are in the 9th inning and need 1 run. Even then, the advantage of bunting is even more marginal than the advantage of swinging away in every other situation.

 

[patdog]

Link</p>

 

[8dog]

though I think everything is situational. 2 things:

1. This still doesn't take into account what Im saying: college bunt defense is worse than pros. So in college, you have more bunts that lead to a runner on second without an additional out.

2. I would think the percentage certainly goes up with runners on 1st and no out b/c most people hit in that situations with their best hitters. If we have matthew britton up, we need to bunt regardless of what the numbers say.

I like sabermetrics but sometimes they are as blindly married to numbers as some people are to perception.

 

[patdog]

1. Yes it does take into account that college bunt defense is worse than the pros. Runs scored is runs scored. It take everything into account.

2. Agree completely. If you've got a .178 hitter at the plate you bunt if anybody's on base. Those are averages for all college hitter. If you've got a hitter who's a lot better or worse than average, you've got to take that into account.

 

[8dog]

"1. Yes it does take into account that college bunt defense is worse than the pros. Runs scored is runs scored. It take everything into account."

Maybe Im misunderstanding the stat, but my understanding is that the buns is not favored b/c, in a basic situation, you have a greater chance to score with a man on 1st with 0 outs than you do with a man on 2nd with 1 out. It assumes you are giving up the out and the defense is making the play. Correct?

However, bunt defense is probably not as good in college so there is a greater chance that after the bunt you might have runners on 1st and 2nd with 0 outs or even better. Therefore, your odds of scoring are much greater. That decrease in defensive ability likely closes over overcomes the gap in the percentage difference.

 

[patdog]

But you also have to take into account that college bunters aren't usually all that good either. So while you would often wind up with men at 1st and 2nd with 0 outs, you would also often wind up with a man at 1st and 1 out, and sometimes nobody on base with 2 outs.

 

[OneParticularHarbor]