Article: Report From The Fort: Measure What Matters

[caninatl04]

I seem to remember that some on this site were against one year contracts. Exhibit A: Addison Reed.

[bunt_vs_the_shift]

 

There are numerous reasons to not bunt against the shift. On your first point about a walk vs a bunt, I'll talk the walk every time. A walk is a free base 100% of the time. You still have to execute a bunt. You could bunt the ball right in front of the plate or right back to the pitcher. You could pop up the bunt. You still have to put the ball in play and beat it out. A lot of things can go wrong.

 

Who on the Twins would you rather see bunt than swing away ever? You're giving up the opportunity for extra base hits if you bunt, meaning you score less runs.

 

Lastly, teams aren't going to change their defensive philosophy just because someone laid down a few bunts against a shift. Their defensive philosophy is based off of hundreds or even thousands of plate appearances. They aren't changing that because Miguel Sano laid down a few bunts. They would actually probably prefer that over him swinging away.

 

Is there skill required to drop a bunt down? Yes. Is there skill required to take a walk? Usually.

 

Is the same skill level required to drop a bunt down vs. a normal alignment as with a shift when you have the entire left side of the infield open? Of course not. It is considerably less difficult to push a ball to the left side when no one is playing 3rd or even short sometimes. If you put it in play and don't pop it up near the pitcher or catcher it's a hit. 

 

But let's take your premise. Yes, you give up the opportunity for that extra base. You are trading that for extending the inning for your team and giving the next batter an opportunity, just as with a walk. I believe that even a player who bunts infrequently should be able to get down 1 of 2 successfully (and yes, I believe against a pronounced shift, that means it's a hit), but for argument's sake, let's say it's 1 of 3. 

 

You asked, who would I like to see do this for the Twins? The answer depends on the context of the game (the inning, score, etc.) but if I'm using a 1 of 3 success rate as the number, I believe only Mauer and Escobar had a higher OBP than .333 of the starters. I'm not saying I want Sano to start laying down bunts, but rally killers like Castro when they're shifting? Guys who are scuffling, especially if they have a little speed? Yes. 

 

It's the same concept as a slump-busting bloop or a seeing eye single and I would argue that any sort of hit has a psychological impact on the confidence of the hitter, so you have an intangible value there, not to mention how it frustrates the opponent. 

 

Finally, if this were done more consistently within those parameters do I think teams will adjust their alignment? Yes. 

 

 

 

[h2oface]

 

bingo! if Miguel Sano bunts against the shift, the shift worked

 

With a 40% K rate..... and a .211 average..... I would often take a bunt. 

Way more exciting than a walk, and fielders have just as much chance throwing it away for more bases as the poor power hitter has of hitting into the shift or striking out or grounding out or walking or......

 

Maybe Sano will actually be on the field at some point this year..... what a fiasco.

Edited March 5, 2019 by h2oface

[USAFChief]

 

There are numerous reasons to not bunt against the shift. On your first point about a walk vs a bunt, I'll talk the walk every time. A walk is a free base 100% of the time. You still have to execute a bunt. You could bunt the ball right in front of the plate or right back to the pitcher. You could pop up the bunt. You still have to put the ball in play and beat it out. A lot of things can go wrong.

 

Who on the Twins would you rather see bunt than swing away ever? You're giving up the opportunity for extra base hits if you bunt, meaning you score less runs.

 

Lastly, teams aren't going to change their defensive philosophy just because someone laid down a few bunts against a shift. Their defensive philosophy is based off of hundreds or even thousands of plate appearances. They aren't changing that because Miguel Sano laid down a few bunts. They would actually probably prefer that over him swinging away.

While I'm also not a fan of bunting, even for hits, there are times when I do think it would be a good idea for LH hitters, facing extreme shifts with 3rd base abandoned by the defense, to bunt for a hit. Kepler and Rosario, for example, should be able to bunt for a hit with nobody on base quite easily. You don't need much skill, just bunt it hard towards the left side. There's nobody there to field it.

 

RH hitters (such as Sano) don't have the same opportunities to bunt against shifts.

[MN_ExPat]

 

because you can’t argue with the cop. You have to make your case with the judge. Heck of a lot of work for a $150 speeding ticket, but .... https://www.pennlive.com/news/2018/02/were_you_wrongly_ticketed_for.html

Now you’ll notice it’s not exactly apples to apples as it’s not the same device.

Point is, technology is fallible.

Yes, technology is fallible.  There are however a number of factors that can influence the reading that the device gives you.

 

Just for discussion purposes.   One of the more common devices that teams/scouts/etc. use, is made by Stalker (and Stalker is also one of the more common brands used by law enforcement agencies as well ).   Stalker is also pretty good quality for the most part.

 

That being said, some of the biggest factors that influence the reading that the radar gives you are wind interference, other objects in the way or traveling along with the object, and probably one of the greatest culprits is how far off the center of path of travel the device is from the object being tracked (the greater the degree of separation from path of travel and the device, the larger the deviation from the actual speed).

 

Also, we tend to not often take into account maintenance.  If the device is not maintained or stored properly, heat, humidity, bumping or jarring can take their toll and cause the device to read improperly.   Given the cost of most of these, you can guess that they are used as long as possible.  The most common hand held Stalker for example runs between $400 and $600 per unit, while I believe Rapsodo and Trackman (?) run about $3500+ per unit.

[Jham]

There are numerous reasons to not bunt against the shift. On your first point about a walk vs a bunt, I'll talk the walk every time. A walk is a free base 100% of the time. You still have to execute a bunt. You could bunt the ball right in front of the plate or right back to the pitcher. You could pop up the bunt. You still have to put the ball in play and beat it out. A lot of things can go wrong.

 

Who on the Twins would you rather see bunt than swing away ever? You're giving up the opportunity for extra base hits if you bunt, meaning you score less runs.

 

Lastly, teams aren't going to change their defensive philosophy just because someone laid down a few bunts against a shift. Their defensive philosophy is based off of hundreds or even thousands of plate appearances. They aren't changing that because Miguel Sano laid down a few bunts. They would actually probably prefer that over him swinging away.

The nice thing about stats is that it can simply very complex analysis. It's drawback is that it can simplify very complex analysis. The stats regarding shifting and bunting are all based on historical data that may or may not apply to the evolving game. "never bunt" (based on run production) evolved into sometimes bunt, even sacrifice,

when it's late and close (based on win %)... Further analysis showed that very successful bunters or perhaps poor sluggers may make the bunt a good play.

 

But the historical data doesn't take shifts into account. and counts bunting for hits the same way as sacrificing. And a lot of the data is pitchers I'd imagine. Anyway, there's a tipping point for every player where bunting becomes a good play which also happens to be situation dependent. Bottom line, nothing is absolute. People can argue all they want because they're both right.

[Jham]

bingo! if Miguel Sano bunts against the shift, the shift worked

What if it's extra innings at Target Field with a runners on the corners 1 out?

 

"Those idiots gave up a chance at more runs!"

[ashbury]

What if it's extra innings at Target Field with a runners on the corners 1 out?

 

"Those idiots gave up a chance at more runs!"

Are shifts leaving third base uncovered common in that scenario?

[Jham]

Are shifts leaving third base uncovered common in that scenario?

No, but the right side may still shift with the entire infield playing back at double play depth. You can use Ken Griffey Jr or Bryce Harper if it helps. And since it's all hypothetical, we can also assume some of the infielders are giant penguins. It makes me smile to think about and it still drives home the idea that at some time, you reach a tipping point where the smart play is to bunt. To me, for most players in most situations, the tipping point is 2 or more penguins in the infield.* (not supported by data, very sss) Edited March 6, 2019 by Jham

[ashbury]

Ron Cey retired some time ago.

[yarnivek1972]

For all their talent and skill I have always thought that major league'rs were not that great at fielding bunts even when they did spend a lot of time practicing it in spring training. How about bucking the trend and using the time saved but not practicing the defense of bunts and use it to actually get good at bunting themselves.

A skill they will use even less? Twins pitchers had 22 plate appearances last year. How many of those were even bunting situations? Half?

[Dantes929]

 

A skill they will use even less? Twins pitchers had 22 plate appearances last year. How many of those were even bunting situations? Half?

I guess I assumed that the time spent on the bunt coverage was for the entire infield and not just the pitchers.    My comment about practicing bunting for hits.was not directed at pitchers but the batters.