Honestly I think it is you who is missing the point.
1. Run expectancy is not a team stat, ie. good teams and s***** teams. It is a stat based on individual ab's of all players in the league to determine outcomes measured in runs. Bad teams can have good hitters and vice versa (Goins was on the 2015,16 Jays). Run expectancies have the same veracity for bad teams as they do for good teams.
2. The fact that run expectancy when a player is allowed to bat is higher than when he bunts is true irrespective of how good/bad the team is. On a s***** team team, yes the chances of a producing a run via a hit is lower than a good team, but it is still better than bunting for that same s***** team. A poor hitting team just moves down on the run expectancy scale, but their run expectancy via a bunt also moves down. It is all relative and not based on how good or bad a team is.
3. No one puts weight on metrics based on two games in Cleveland much less a season with 10 games played. Why would you even bring up such a weak point? (
)
4. Another glaring omission is that you fail to consider babip. With a runner in scoring position just putting the ball in play could yield a run. BABIP in mlb is somewhere around .300 year over year. That is why you swing the bat, EVERYTIME, because as Tercet will tell you, even Gurriel can get a hit if he puts the ball in play. Why give up those odds for even lower odds with a bunt? With a runner on second and no outs, it is unfathomable why anyone would chose to bunt.
“outs are a commodity. They are the currency by which the game is governed, and willfully giving up an out is never worth the extra base that a bunt can provide. It's trading a piece of gold for a piece of silver."
Greg Jayne