***OFFICIAL - WORLD BASEBALL CLASSIC FINAL GAME THREAD - USA v JAPAN - WINNER TAKE ALL*** (1 Viewer)

[ChiefD]

I would prefer to have seen a hit and run there - put some pressure on the defense. Granted, it still may have been a double play as it was hit hard and directly to second - but maybe sending the runner shifts the second baseman enough where it’s a hit

Or send Witt for a stolen base.

 

[Jayrok]

And if Betts bunts him over you may be taking the bat out of Trout's hands to set up the double play. Everyone wanted to see Trout vs Ohtani in that spot. Hindsight is 20/20 of course.

If they want to put the go ahead run on first then by all means I let them

Agreed. That would bring Goldschmidt to the plate. Then Arenado, then Schwarber.

 

[otb_lifer]

WHAT DID WE DROP ON THEM, FERTILIZER??!?!?

 

[Spartans Rule]

Mookie Betts is one of the best players in baseball. He should not ever be bunting.

And this is why American baseball has turned into the boring pile of crap it is.

You get a man on second with two chances to scratch across a run to tie a CHAMPIONSHIP game.

But no....we don't want to hurt Betts' feelings because we are asking to give himself up for the sake of the team. Come on.

He wouldn't be giving himself up for the sake of the team. He'd be hurting the team for the sake of the old-school baseball crowd that wants to romanticize self-defeating strategy.

And there's nothing exciting about bunting. He taps the ball harmlessly in front of the plate, Witt moves up a base, and now we didn't get to watch Mookie Betts face Shohei Ohtani. Forget the math of it, that's just no fun.

 

[Spartans Rule]

I would prefer to have seen a hit and run there - put some pressure on the defense. Granted, it still may have been a double play as it was hit hard and directly to second - but maybe sending the runner shifts the second baseman enough where it’s a hit

Or send Witt for a stolen base.

Now this I could get behind. You want second base that bad, just take it. Don't waste Mookie Betts to do it.

 

[Capella]

He wouldn't be giving himself up for the sake of the team. He'd be hurting the team for the sake of the old-school baseball crowd that wants to romanticize self-defeating strategy.

don’t use this emoji much anymore

 

[ChiefD]

Mookie Betts is one of the best players in baseball. He should not ever be bunting.

And this is why American baseball has turned into the boring pile of crap it is.

You get a man on second with two chances to scratch across a run to tie a CHAMPIONSHIP game.

But no....we don't want to hurt Betts' feelings because we are asking to give himself up for the sake of the team. Come on.

He wouldn't be giving himself up for the sake of the team. He'd be hurting the team for the sake of the old-school baseball crowd that wants to romanticize self-defeating strategy.

And there's nothing exciting about bunting. He taps the ball harmlessly in front of the plate, Witt moves up a base, and now we didn't get to watch Mookie Betts face Shohei Ohtani. Forget the math of it, that's just no fun.

I just think there is a time and place for new school analytics and a time and place for old timey baseball. This was one of those times for old timey baseball.

The double play there just kills you, as we saw it play out. I know we will never agree on this, and that's fine.

I would have liked to see us put pressure on the defense there. As the 2014 and 2015 Royals proved - action baseball can make teams do weird things sometimes.

 

[tri-man 47]

I'm in line with the unconventional approach of trying a bunt ..or at least a hit and run. The fact that no one is thinking about Betts bunting could make it that much more effective. I'd suggest that there would have been a good chance that Betts even gets a bunt single out of it. Ohtani is pitching in an unusual situation (for him) and was certainly honed in on getting through Betts and then dealing with Trout. Fielding a bunt would have been one of the last things on his mind.

 

[Cowboysfan8]

He’s one of the best players in baseball. This isn’t 1936, the guy on first is scoring on a ball in the gap.

And if he’s sacrificed to 2nd all you need is a seeing eye grounder to score him

And let’s not act like there were a bunch of stiffs coming up after Betts

 

[jobarules]

I wouldnt have bunted but I said last night them not even attempting to steal with Turner in the 7th (I think) and next two batters got out on 2 pitches or with Witt in the 9th (why pinch run) was bad managing. I doubt the catcher wouldve gotten either one if they had good jump.

 

[humpback]

That's where analytics suck.... They have their place but man in a game like this you need to go gut/old school once in a while

I just think there is a time and place for new school analytics and a time and place for old timey baseball. This was one of those times for old timey baseball.

The double play there just kills you, as we saw it play out. I know we will never agree on this, and that's fine.

I would have liked to see us put pressure on the defense there. As the 2014 and 2015 Royals proved - action baseball can make teams do weird things sometimes.

Just curious, but why do you think "this" was a time to go against analytics (which presumably gives you the "best" odds) and instead "go with your gut"? If anything I'd think it would be the opposite, you want to remove some of the emotion during bigger/more important moments.

Obviously a double play there hurts, but so does a failed sacrifice attempt. A quick search shows that Betts has 4 sacrifice bunts in his career (zero in the post season) and his last one was in 2015. He's only grounded into a double play in just over 1% of his plate appearances in his career. Ohtani isn't exactly easy to bunt on either (zero sac bunts given up last year).

It's easy to say it was a mistake after seeing how it played out, but even more people would be screaming it was a mistake if he popped up his bunt attempt or struck out trying.

 

[tri-man 47]

^ Good points, @humpback , regarding Betts' bunts and Ohtani's fielding. Makes for a good debate!

 

[timschochet]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

 

[belljr]

That's where analytics suck.... They have their place but man in a game like this you need to go gut/old school once in a while

I just think there is a time and place for new school analytics and a time and place for old timey baseball. This was one of those times for old timey baseball.

The double play there just kills you, as we saw it play out. I know we will never agree on this, and that's fine.

I would have liked to see us put pressure on the defense there. As the 2014 and 2015 Royals proved - action baseball can make teams do weird things sometimes.

Just curious, but why do you think "this" was a time to go against analytics (which presumably gives you the "best" odds) and instead "go with your gut"? If anything I'd think it would be the opposite, you want to remove some of the emotion during bigger/more important moments.

Obviously a double play there hurts, but so does a failed sacrifice attempt. A quick search shows that Betts has 4 sacrifice bunts in his career (zero in the post season) and his last one was in 2015. He's only grounded into a double play in just over 1% of his plate appearances in his career. Ohtani isn't exactly easy to bunt on either (zero sac bunts given up last year).

It's easy to say it was a mistake after seeing how it played out, but even more people would be screaming it was a mistake if he popped up his bunt attempt or struck out trying.

All valid points. And I felt that way before the Dp happened so this is not a "result of the play" secodn guess. I just didn't type in time. I felt it was a great time to try something

 

[Capella]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

Tim, Babe Ruth was playing against auto mechanics. If he ever saw a pitch like that slider Ohtani threw to Trout they would have called the cops.

 

[jobarules]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

LMFAOOOOOOOOOO

Ruth played against fat white slobs who just put the ball in play and barely topped the 90s. Lets be serious here. When its all said and done Ohtani may be the best player in the history of baseball.

I only mention the white thing to point out Ruth didnt play against black, Latino, or Asian stars like they do today.

 

[timschochet]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

LMFAOOOOOOOOOO

Ruth played against fat white slobs who just put the ball in play and barely topped the 90s. Lets be serious here. When its all said and done Ohtani may be the best player in the history of baseball.

I only mention the white thing to point out Ruth didnt play against black, Latino, or Asian stars like they do today.

I think you and Capella make valid points. I was only trying to point out, when people make comparisons between Ohtani and Ruth, that Ruth didn’t really try to be both a pitcher and a hitter. He switched from one to the other. Ohtani is pretty unique in that regard.

 

[Moe.]

Mookie Betts is one of the best players in baseball. He should not ever be bunting.

I betcha he stares right through that sign.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

Tim, Babe Ruth was playing against auto mechanics. If he ever saw a pitch like that slider Ohtani threw to Trout they would have called the cops.

Ruth also didn’t have the benefit of modern nutrition, supplements, training, equipment, analytics, rest days, recovery, etc. We have no idea what Ruth could or couldn’t have done if he had all those benefits and played in today’s game. And we have no idea what any guy playing today would have done 100 years ago without all the benefits they have today.

This need to put down guys from previous eras is getting lame.

Yes guys in the modern game can do things athletically thanks to many advances in many fronts that guys in the past couldn’t. But comparing the dominance of players to their peers as a way to even the playing field is absolutely valid and the insinuation that you can’t is rubbish IMO because we have no idea how players of each era would actually perform with/without the benefits and negatives of another era.

 

[Capella]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

Tim, Babe Ruth was playing against auto mechanics. If he ever saw a pitch like that slider Ohtani threw to Trout they would have called the cops.

Ruth also didn’t have the benefit of modern nutrition, supplements, training, equipment, analytics, rest days, recovery, etc. We have no idea what Ruth could or couldn’t have done if he had all those benefits and played in today’s game. And we have no idea what any guy playing today would have done 100 years ago without all the benefits they have today.

This need to put down guys from previous eras is getting lame.

Yes guys in the modern game can do things athletically thanks to many advances in many fronts that guys in the past couldn’t. But comparing the dominance of players to their peers as a way to even the playing field is absolutely valid and the insinuation that you can’t is rubbish IMO because we have no idea how players of each era would actually perform with/without the benefits and negatives of another era.

Be real. Every era of athlete gets better. Especially 100 years later. If they didn’t keep swim times you’d say Mark Spitz was better than Michael Phelps too.

 

[jobarules]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

Tim, Babe Ruth was playing against auto mechanics. If he ever saw a pitch like that slider Ohtani threw to Trout they would have called the cops.

Ruth also didn’t have the benefit of modern nutrition, supplements, training, equipment, analytics, rest days, recovery, etc. We have no idea what Ruth could or couldn’t have done if he had all those benefits and played in today’s game. And we have no idea what any guy playing today would have done 100 years ago without all the benefits they have today.

This need to put down guys from previous eras is getting lame.

Yes guys in the modern game can do things athletically thanks to many advances in many fronts that guys in the past couldn’t. But comparing the dominance of players to their peers as a way to even the playing field is absolutely valid and the insinuation that you can’t is rubbish IMO because we have no idea how players of each era would actually perform with/without the benefits and negatives of another era.

In life, everything improves over time. Why wouldnt athletes?

 

[GroveDiesel]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

Tim, Babe Ruth was playing against auto mechanics. If he ever saw a pitch like that slider Ohtani threw to Trout they would have called the cops.

Ruth also didn’t have the benefit of modern nutrition, supplements, training, equipment, analytics, rest days, recovery, etc. We have no idea what Ruth could or couldn’t have done if he had all those benefits and played in today’s game. And we have no idea what any guy playing today would have done 100 years ago without all the benefits they have today.

This need to put down guys from previous eras is getting lame.

Yes guys in the modern game can do things athletically thanks to many advances in many fronts that guys in the past couldn’t. But comparing the dominance of players to their peers as a way to even the playing field is absolutely valid and the insinuation that you can’t is rubbish IMO because we have no idea how players of each era would actually perform with/without the benefits and negatives of another era.

In life, everything improves over time. Why wouldnt athletes?

I don’t think I said they don’t. I firmly acknowledge that today’s nutrition/training/medicine help create better athletes.

Is it your contention that, absent all other advances, humans today would be better athletes than 100 years ago?

 

[jobarules]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

Tim, Babe Ruth was playing against auto mechanics. If he ever saw a pitch like that slider Ohtani threw to Trout they would have called the cops.

Ruth also didn’t have the benefit of modern nutrition, supplements, training, equipment, analytics, rest days, recovery, etc. We have no idea what Ruth could or couldn’t have done if he had all those benefits and played in today’s game. And we have no idea what any guy playing today would have done 100 years ago without all the benefits they have today.

This need to put down guys from previous eras is getting lame.

Yes guys in the modern game can do things athletically thanks to many advances in many fronts that guys in the past couldn’t. But comparing the dominance of players to their peers as a way to even the playing field is absolutely valid and the insinuation that you can’t is rubbish IMO because we have no idea how players of each era would actually perform with/without the benefits and negatives of another era.

In life, everything improves over time. Why wouldnt athletes?

I don’t think I said they don’t. I firmly acknowledge that today’s nutrition/training/medicine help create better athletes.

Is it your contention that, absent all other advances, humans today would be better athletes than 100 years ago?

By evolution alone probably a little, sure. But it is mostly the advances in training and technology that make them better. I don't think anyone is saying any different.

 

[Gally]

Mookie Betts is one of the best players in baseball. He should not ever be bunting.

And this is why American baseball has turned into the boring pile of crap it is.

You get a man on second with two chances to scratch across a run to tie a CHAMPIONSHIP game.

But no....we don't want to hurt Betts' feelings because we are asking to give himself up for the sake of the team. Come on.

He wouldn't be giving himself up for the sake of the team. He'd be hurting the team for the sake of the old-school baseball crowd that wants to romanticize self-defeating strategy.

And there's nothing exciting about bunting. He taps the ball harmlessly in front of the plate, Witt moves up a base, and now we didn't get to watch Mookie Betts face Shohei Ohtani. Forget the math of it, that's just no fun.

I just think there is a time and place for new school analytics and a time and place for old timey baseball. This was one of those times for old timey baseball.

The double play there just kills you, as we saw it play out. I know we will never agree on this, and that's fine.

I would have liked to see us put pressure on the defense there. As the 2014 and 2015 Royals proved - action baseball can make teams do weird things sometimes.

Analytics in baseball are built for the long haul like blackjack rules on when to take a hit or not. Over the course of thousands of at bats (or hands) the analytics say to do X in this situation. For baseball that generally means never bunting and always going for the homerun over situational (old timey) hitting approaches.

That doesn't mean that in this particular game instance in this one-off game play that bunting would be a bad thing. Sometimes for a particular situation going against the grain could be a benefit.

 

[Gally]

Obviously a double play there hurts, but so does a failed sacrifice attempt. A quick search shows that Betts has 4 sacrifice bunts in his career (zero in the post season) and his last one was in 2015. He's only grounded into a double play in just over 1% of his plate appearances in his career. Ohtani isn't exactly easy to bunt on either (zero sac bunts given up last year).

How many were tried against him? Since analytics has swung so far over and pitchers aren't hitting anymore (Ohtani excepted) I would guess that sac bunt attempts are down to the point that he may not even have faced one last year.

 

[Gally]

Just curious, but why do you think "this" was a time to go against analytics (which presumably gives you the "best" odds) and instead "go with your gut"? If anything I'd think it would be the opposite, you want to remove some of the emotion during bigger/more important moments.

Analytics are based on thousands of AB's over thousands of games. So in the long run the analytics say to never bunt. However, for a given one off situation that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be tried or won't be successful. In playoff situations where the "long view" isn't necessary or maybe even right for the situation using our "gut" and going against the grain can be a good tool for success.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Ohtani is pretty Ruthian, only a century later and left coast.

He’s really not though. Ruth was a very good pitcher who switched to being the greatest power hitter of all time. Ohtani is a very good pitcher and above average batter. What makes Ohtani unique is his ability to do both. But he’s certainly not the best at anything he does. Love him though; he may be my favorite baseball player ever.

Tim, Babe Ruth was playing against auto mechanics. If he ever saw a pitch like that slider Ohtani threw to Trout they would have called the cops.

Ruth also didn’t have the benefit of modern nutrition, supplements, training, equipment, analytics, rest days, recovery, etc. We have no idea what Ruth could or couldn’t have done if he had all those benefits and played in today’s game. And we have no idea what any guy playing today would have done 100 years ago without all the benefits they have today.

This need to put down guys from previous eras is getting lame.

Yes guys in the modern game can do things athletically thanks to many advances in many fronts that guys in the past couldn’t. But comparing the dominance of players to their peers as a way to even the playing field is absolutely valid and the insinuation that you can’t is rubbish IMO because we have no idea how players of each era would actually perform with/without the benefits and negatives of another era.

Be real. Every era of athlete gets better. Especially 100 years later. If they didn’t keep swim times you’d say Mark Spitz was better than Michael Phelps too.

Better and dominant are not the same thing.

And are you 100% sure that Phelps was so much better than Spitz simply because he was born decades later, rather than Phelps benefiting from way better nutrition, training programs, medicine, technology, etc? So just human evolution is the driving factor?

 

[Spartans Rule]

Analytics are based on thousands of AB's over thousands of games. So in the long run the analytics say to never bunt.

I don't think they say NEVER bunt. I'm a numbers nerd but there are situations where it makes sense.

You don't want to bunt early in a game because you could kill a big inning, but if you're tied in the bottom of the 9th or extras and one run walks it off, a bunt might maximize your chances of scoring that run. And if you've got a bad hitter up, you're not losing as much by sacrificing the out (especially a pitcher pre-universal DH). And if there's runners on 1st and 2nd with no out, you get two bases for your out instead of one.

Last night's situation checks none of those boxes for me though. Great hitter up, down 1 in the top of the inning, only one man on. Not even close to a bunt situation IMO.

 

[Gally]

I don't think they say NEVER bunt. I'm a numbers nerd but there are situations where it makes sense.

I believe for all intents and purposes they do say never bunt for the situation from last night. My understanding is that the run expectancy with a runner on 2B with one out is less than a runner on 1B with no outs. So based on analytics you should never bunt in that configuration no matter what the situation is.

I disagree with this approach in game specific situations because a game is a short term view where the analytics is the long term view.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I don't think they say NEVER bunt. I'm a numbers nerd but there are situations where it makes sense.

I believe for all intents and purposes they do say never bunt for the situation from last night. My understanding is that the run expectancy with a runner on 2B with one out is less than a runner on 1B with no outs. So based on analytics you should never bunt in that configuration no matter what the situation is.

I disagree with this approach in game specific situations because a game is a short term view where the analytics is the long term view.

A lot of times people assume a bunt is always going to work and of course it's never 100%. Especially with so few players knowing how these days.

 

[tri-man 47]

I don't think they say NEVER bunt. I'm a numbers nerd but there are situations where it makes sense.

I believe for all intents and purposes they do say never bunt for the situation from last night. My understanding is that the run expectancy with a runner on 2B with one out is less than a runner on 1B with no outs. So based on analytics you should never bunt in that configuration no matter what the situation is.

I disagree with this approach in game specific situations because a game is a short term view where the analytics is the long term view.

Never bunt in that situation, you say? The data in these two articles support your understanding (so I need to reevaluate my own support for bunting).

"...downright medieval"

"...downright awful"

 

[Gally]

Never bunt in that situation, you say? The data in these two articles support your understanding (so I need to reevaluate my own support for bunting).

"...downright medieval"

"...downright awful"

I don't say never bunt. Analytics says so. I just think analytics is a tool but is not absolute and in game situations (especially a one game playoff/championship) should factor into what to do and bunting is a viable tool to force things to happen. Provided the players are prepared and have the ability to bunt. Unfortunately, that is such a rare thing having the confidence in a player to actually be able to do it adds to the information to craft your decisions. As a coach bunting was part of our game plan and we practiced it to be able to do it when needed (high school level).

As I stated before, analytics is based on long term results and in game situations sometimes need short term solutions.

 

[humpback]

How many were tried against him? Since analytics has swung so far over and pitchers aren't hitting anymore (Ohtani excepted) I would guess that sac bunt attempts are down to the point that he may not even have faced one last year.

Don't know, and I agree attempts are likely down, but it doesn't really change anything. No one did it against him successfully all season, so we certainly can't automatically assume that this attempt would be successful, especially considering Betts hasn't done so in 7 years.

Analytics are based on thousands of AB's over thousands of games. So in the long run the analytics say to never bunt. However, for a given one off situation that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be tried or won't be successful. In playoff situations where the "long view" isn't necessary or maybe even right for the situation using our "gut" and going against the grain can be a good tool for success.

People can tweak analytics to only use specific subsets of data, which is one of the reasons why I'm not a blind supporter. However, when taken to the extreme what you're saying here applies to every single play. They're all unique, so who's to say when you should play it by the book vs. go against the grain? Why was that particular situation a good time to use your gut?

There's no right or wrong answer. Ironically one of the reasons coaches don't go against the grain more is because going against brings more criticism after the fact. If Betts had tried to bunt and it wasn't successful I'm fairly certain more people would be saying what a bad decision it was (maybe even including some of those saying they should have bunted now).

 

[Gally]

Don't know, and I agree attempts are likely down, but it doesn't really change anything. No one did it against him successfully all season, so we certainly can't automatically assume that this attempt would be successful, especially considering Betts hasn't done so in 7 years.

In the little bit of poking around I did on the interwebz to see if I could get an answer to this I found out that bunting in 2022 was down tremendously (the Braves tried one sac bunt for the entire year and it was in game 161) with the use of the universal DH and reliance on analytics saying not to bunt. I think the most prolific team bunted 30 times on the year (0.19 times per game).

Based on this it is very likely that nobody even attempted a bunt on Ohtani last year. Even more likely considering the Angels were the 2nd most prolific bunting team and he didn't have to face them.

All that to say, I am not so sure the fact no one did it successfully against him in 2022 really tells you anything about his defensive prowess at stopping a sac bunt from being successful.

 

[humpback]

Don't know, and I agree attempts are likely down, but it doesn't really change anything. No one did it against him successfully all season, so we certainly can't automatically assume that this attempt would be successful, especially considering Betts hasn't done so in 7 years.

In the little bit of poking around I did on the interwebz to see if I could get an answer to this I found out that bunting in 2022 was down tremendously (the Braves tried one sac bunt for the entire year and it was in game 161) with the use of the universal DH and reliance on analytics saying not to bunt. I think the most prolific team bunted 30 times on the year (0.19 times per game).

Based on this it is very likely that nobody even attempted a bunt on Ohtani last year. Even more likely considering the Angels were the 2nd most prolific bunting team and he didn't have to face them.

All that to say, I am not so sure the fact no one did it successfully against him in 2022 really tells you anything about his defensive prowess at stopping a sac bunt from being successful.

That's all well and good but again, doesn't really change anything. Zero successful attempts vs. him and zero successful attempts in 7 years for Betts doesn't mean it couldn't be successful, but it certainly doesn't mean that it would've been either. When I said he isn't exactly easy to bunt on it was about his throwing ridiculously hard, nasty stuff, not the number of attempts.

You're advocating for going against the numbers here and instead going with your gut, but haven't really provided anything to back that up (other than what they did didn't work). Sure, bunting could have worked, but you kind of need a better reason than that if you're going to go against the odds IMO.

 

[ChiefD]

Analytics have ruined baseball.

 

[Gally]

You're advocating for going against the numbers here and instead going with your gut, but haven't really provided anything to back that up (other than what they did didn't work). Sure, bunting could have worked, but you kind of need a better reason than that if you're going to go against the odds IMO.

At this point there is nothing I can say that will prove anything. This isn't a proof thing because it can't be proven one way or the other.

Personally in the last inning with the tying run on first I would do something to force the defense to do something. With Betts up I likely hit in run or straight steal depending on my runners confidence on reading the pitcher.

You are already in a bad spot with Ohtani chucking 100+. Let's try and make the defense make a play.

 

[Capella]

Analytics have ruined baseball.

Because it’s improved on Stone Age thinking? Bunting literally leads to less runs. Why would you prefer that? It just makes no sense at all.

 

[Encyclopedia Brown]

Analytics have ruined baseball.

In general, analytics has smartened and made baseball more efficient. But the extremes have sucked the life out of the game.

It wasn't that long ago when the leadoff hitter was determined by who won the relay races in spring training. That's how you ended up with some guy with an OBP of .300 and an OPS in the 500's getting six-hundred plate appearances.

Or having someone like Dave Kingman get fifteen years in the majors while being dreadful at every aspect of the game except for one skill.

 

[Capella]

It wasn't that long ago when the leadoff hitter was determined by who won the relay races in spring training. That's how you ended up with some guy with an OBP of .300 and an OPS in

This didn’t even make sense to me even when I was a kid. You lead off once a game, and then any other after that is pure chance. Who cares how fast you are?

 

[humpback]

You're advocating for going against the numbers here and instead going with your gut, but haven't really provided anything to back that up (other than what they did didn't work). Sure, bunting could have worked, but you kind of need a better reason than that if you're going to go against the odds IMO.

At this point there is nothing I can say that will prove anything. This isn't a proof thing because it can't be proven one way or the other.

Personally in the last inning with the tying run on first I would do something to force the defense to do something. With Betts up I likely hit in run or straight steal depending on my runners confidence on reading the pitcher.

You are already in a bad spot with Ohtani chucking 100+. Let's try and make the defense make a play.

I'm not asking you to prove anything, I'm just asking you to support it. Like I said, I'm open to going against the overall numbers at times, but it needs to be based on something other than just gut feel IMO. Otherwise, like I said earlier, you can argue making any call at any time "just because". Rhetorical, obviously you don't have to, just saying what makes sense to me.

And for the record, I was talking about bunting specifically in that situation- straight steal or hit and run are very different IMO.