Marlins vs. Blue Jays (game 1 out of 2)

[Slade]

 

I'm optimistic he can figure it out. I just can't see this guy keep scorching balls on the ground.

[Krylian]

 

I'm optimistic he can figure it out. I just can't see this guy keep scorching balls on the ground.

 

 

At some point he'll stop scorching them I guess.

[Stangstag]

This is true, but you also need to factor in the chance that the bunt does not succeed. I assume that chance would drag the 66% down to the 61% range, if not worse. There is a non-zero chance that Jansen pops it up, right. So it's not just 61% vs 66%. There is say a ~5% chance (pop up, etc.) that the 61% chance to score a run becomes a 40% chance (runner on 2nd, one out).

 

I'm sure the complete math has been done somewhere online.

 

If Jansen has only a 5% chance to fail their "one run expectancy" is 64.685%

10% chance to fail it is 63.37%

20% chance to fail it is 60.74%

 

I think.

 

And, per this: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-truth-about-bunting/

MLB hitters only succeed at getting a committed bunt down fair 50% of the time. That means given two chances a typical player would get it down in play 75% of the time and fail 25% of the time. That's not good enough to bunt by the numbers!!!

Also, fair does not necessarily mean it's even good enough. Fair could mean a missile straight at the pitcher that doesn't allow the runner to advance.

Also, Danny Jansen is not even a practiced bunter.

 

I think we have the answer. Don't bunt in that situation unless the hitter is a good bunter.

 

Nice writeup, thanks

[Jonn]

I wonder after all the changes that the Bisons will just change their team name to Blue Jays. The city seems to like it a lot better than Bisons.

[Spanky99]

I wonder after all the changes that the Bisons will just change their team name to Blue Jays. The city seems to like it a lot better than Bisons.

 

I doubt it, the Bisons history goes back to the 1860's.

[Boxcar]

This is true, but you also need to factor in the chance that the bunt does not succeed. I assume that chance would drag the 66% down to the 61% range, if not worse. There is a non-zero chance that Jansen pops it up, right. So it's not just 61% vs 66%. There is say a ~5% chance (pop up, etc.) that the 61% chance to score a run becomes a 40% chance (runner on 2nd, one out).

 

I'm sure the complete math has been done somewhere online.

 

If Jansen has only a 5% chance to fail their "one run expectancy" is 64.685%

10% chance to fail it is 63.37%

20% chance to fail it is 60.74%

 

I think.

 

And, per this: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-truth-about-bunting/

MLB hitters only succeed at getting a committed bunt down fair 50% of the time. That means given two chances a typical player would get it down in play 75% of the time and fail 25% of the time. That's not good enough to bunt by the numbers!!!

Also, fair does not necessarily mean it's even good enough. Fair could mean a missile straight at the pitcher that doesn't allow the runner to advance.

Also, Danny Jansen is not even a practiced bunter.

 

I think we have the answer. Don't bunt in that situation unless the hitter is a good bunter.

 

Also the possibility that Jansen just accrues two strikes and then bunts for the third strike because that's a good idea according to Charles.

 

In this instance the bunt was of no benefit, anyway, so no one can really argue it "worked out". If anything, made things more dicey given our propensity to hit into inning ending double plays. Came down to Shaw vs. a lefty. Good thing he came through but that wasn't some master class on how to manage in extra innings.

[Spanky99]

I would keep Alford on the team for his speed alone

 

Lets go bud, almost game time...

 

[Ex Player]

Lets go bud, almost game time...

 

You please do it. I'm eating

[Spanky99]

You please do it. I'm eating

 

That's not how it works bro...