quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I didn't love the decision to bunt in the first place but if the hitter gets to two strikes while bunting, the percentages are better to leave it on.

He still had the ability to walk and move the runner without risk of double play if he had executed. Odds aren't great of a successful outcome letting him swing once he had two strikes. The double play is on the table as is every other potential out that doesn't move the runner.

---

Can you point me to the study where it is a higher probability to leave the bunt on than swing away with 2 strikes?

---

Have to take into account how comfortable the batter is with bunting before making him. All of these kids should be prepared and capable to do it, but he obviously didn't look comfortable which I think is a weakness in our offense. He's probably not the only one who would struggle.

---

He failed at getting a fair bunt down twice already, probably should've K'ed on the next bunt attempt, yeah, he obviously didn't look comfortable doing it, and he has one sac bunt all year.

I'm fine with the sac bunt with 0 strikes. Maybe with one. Not with 2.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

A hitter who is hitting well that showed several poor bunt attempts and yet you still have him bunting with a 2-2 count??? Really horrible coaching decision on that one.

---

Do you know how many times in the last 2 weeks alone that he's bunted for a hit?

Of course you don't.

---

Have you ever coached baseball? Even peewee? Of course you haven't.

---

Ah. Now reduced to fallacious arguments. I accept your admission of defeat.

---

I could have made the same worthless statement after your first response.

It was a bad coaching decision to keep bunting with a 2-2 count. The sooner you realize that the smarter you will be.

---

As someone who HAS coached baseball, I'll say it was not a BAD coaching decision.

You can disagree with it, hell I probably would have taken the bunt off, but there are a TONS of big time coaches that would have left the bunt on in that situation including the winningest coach in college baseball history.

With a guy like Homan, it is a very good assumption that he is going to get a bunt down and keep you out of the double play but he didn't.

It is fine to disagree with the call, but don't pretend it is some crazy call that no other coach would make.

---

So the vast majority of coaches at every level would've taken off the bunt with two strikes, but a few self proclaimed experts here say it was the right call.

---

I don't know that the vast majority would. That is my point; statistically speaking, the bunt still had the highest chance of success.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I didn't love the decision to bunt in the first place but if the hitter gets to two strikes while bunting, the percentages are better to leave it on.

He still had the ability to walk and move the runner without risk of double play if he had executed. Odds aren't great of a successful outcome letting him swing once he had two strikes. The double play is on the table as is every other potential out that doesn't move the runner.

---

Can you point me to the study where it is a higher probability to leave the bunt on than swing away with 2 strikes?

---

I don't have stats for college, but statistically speaking sac bunts are successful approx 70% of the time.

Conversely, the MLB batting average with 2 strikes is less than .250. I would suspect college results are similar.

---

That 70% sacrifice success rate is not with 2 strikes on the batter. The % goes down significantly if you factor in 2 strikes.

---

Does it go down 50%?

Again, I'm not arguing for or against this particular bunt, just saying it isn't as far fetched as some are making it out to be.

ok

yes, exactly. I posted this in the middle of the game thread, but this is his last 16 games entering today:

In the last 16 games, Melton is batting with .196 13 hits, 11 RBI, 21 strikeouts, and 25 LOB. He has not had a multi-hit game in the last 12.

We have to address this emerging black hole in the 4 spot. Either he needs to get his **** fixed, or Bolt/RC need to make a lineup adjustment.

That's way too little production.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

A hitter who is hitting well that showed several poor bunt attempts and yet you still have him bunting with a 2-2 count??? Really horrible coaching decision on that one.

---

Do you know how many times in the last 2 weeks alone that he's bunted for a hit?

Of course you don't.

---

Have you ever coached baseball? Even peewee? Of course you haven't.

---

Ah. Now reduced to fallacious arguments. I accept your admission of defeat.

---

I could have made the same worthless statement after your first response.

It was a bad coaching decision to keep bunting with a 2-2 count. The sooner you realize that the smarter you will be.

---

As someone who HAS coached baseball, I'll say it was not a BAD coaching decision.

You can disagree with it, hell I probably would have taken the bunt off, but there are a TONS of big time coaches that would have left the bunt on in that situation including the winningest coach in college baseball history.

With a guy like Homan, it is a very good assumption that he is going to get a bunt down and keep you out of the double play but he didn't.

It is fine to disagree with the call, but don't pretend it is some crazy call that no other coach would make.

---

So the vast majority of coaches at every level would've taken off the bunt with two strikes, but a few self proclaimed experts here say it was the right call.

---

I don't know that the vast majority would. That is my point; statistically speaking, the bunt still had the highest chance of success.

---

What? You're completely FOS. The vast majority absolutely would take the bunt off with 2 strikes. If you don't know that, you don't know baseball like you proclaim to and that goes for every one else here too. You can watch an entire season of MLB and won't see a 2 strike bunt called for more than a handful of times.

---

equating the MLB and college baseball tendencies is pretty f'ing stupid.

---

You can pick any level of baseball you want. You can narrow it down to the SEC if you want. I'll still be right and you'll still be wrong.

You can agree with the call. You're wrong but you can be wrong. Just don't try to tell us a lot of coaches would've made the same call, because the vast majority at every level would not, especially with a hitter that has one sac bunt all year and couldn't get a bunt down on his first three attempts. And yes, he made three attempts. We caught a huge break he wasn't called out prior to the foul.

By the way, even a successful sac bunt doesn't guarantee anything...some baseball statisticians think it is never appropriate to sac bunt. (Although I can understand the original bunt attempt but strongly disagree once he failed and had 2 strikes.)

"According to Dan Levitt of baseballanalysts.com, using a study that gathered information over 15 years of professional baseball, the expected run table for an inning sets at .877 in situations where there is a runner at first with no outs. However, if you decide to bunt the runner over, your expected run table for the inning drops to .693 with a runner on second and one out.
In essence, you are voluntarily killing your own rally.

In addition to the expected run table, basic percentages say that the sac bunt is the wrong play. According to Baseball Prospectus, you have a 24.4 percent better chance of scoring a runner from first with no outs than you have of scoring a runner from second with one out. 24.4 percent! Swing away."



http://www.onestrikeaway.com/index/2015/5/18/stop-bunting

quote:

---

You can agree with the call. You're wrong but you can be wrong. Just don't try to tell us a lot of coaches would've made the same call, because the vast majority at every level would not, especially with a hitter that has one sac bunt all year and couldn't get a bunt down on his first three attempts. And yes, he made three attempts. We caught a huge break he wasn't called out prior to the foul.

---

I totally agree with you.

IMO having him bunt with 2 strikes was more of RC not worrying about winning the game. he gave the kid another chance with live pitcher to get the bunt down. who knows.

I think if this was in the regional he wouldn't have been bunting with 2 strikes. hell we probable wouldn't have been bunting at all, maybe try a hit and run.

my $.02

quote:

---

You can agree with the call. You're wrong but you can be wrong. Just don't try to tell us a lot of coaches would've made the same call, because the vast majority at every level would not, especially with a hitter that has one sac bunt all year and couldn't get a bunt down on his first three attempts. And yes, he made three attempts. We caught a huge break he wasn't called out prior to the foul.

---

Homan is 4/6 on the year.

quote:

---

IMO having him bunt with 2 strikes was more of RC not worrying about winning the game. he gave the kid another chance with live pitcher to get the bunt down. who knows.

I think if this was in the regional he wouldn't have been bunting with 2 strikes. hell we probable wouldn't have been bunting at all, maybe try a hit and run.

my $.02

---

except Bolt runs the offense and makes those calls...

maybe the thinking is still the same, but I simply disagree our coaches were not worried about winning the game. We wouldnt have brought Ecker in when we did if we weren't concerned with winning.

How many pitches did Ecker throw today?

I for one do not disagree with your "swing away" post. That's a different argument than leaving it on with two strikes. It's really hard to hit with two strikes under any circumstance, especially when you viewed the first four pitches from a squared bunting stance.

At that point, it's about putting your nose on the ball and grinding out the bunt (lay off bad pitches while you're at it).

quote:

---

quote:

---

You can agree with the call. You're wrong but you can be wrong. Just don't try to tell us a lot of coaches would've made the same call, because the vast majority at every level would not, especially with a hitter that has one sac bunt all year and couldn't get a bunt down on his first three attempts. And yes, he made three attempts. We caught a huge break he wasn't called out prior to the foul.

---

Homan is 4/6 on the year.

---

Nope. Looking at his stats right now. Sacrifice bunts are only 1. You must be looking at stolen bases and attempts.

quote:

---

quote:

---

IMO having him bunt with 2 strikes was more of RC not worrying about winning the game. he gave the kid another chance with live pitcher to get the bunt down. who knows.

I think if this was in the regional he wouldn't have been bunting with 2 strikes. hell we probable wouldn't have been bunting at all, maybe try a hit and run.

my $.02

---

except Bolt runs the offense and makes those calls...

---

I bet they discussed the situation before hand, if X gets on do we bunt or hit away..

Or even before the game.

Just seems to me they where trying something to see what happens.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

You can agree with the call. You're wrong but you can be wrong. Just don't try to tell us a lot of coaches would've made the same call, because the vast majority at every level would not, especially with a hitter that has one sac bunt all year and couldn't get a bunt down on his first three attempts. And yes, he made three attempts. We caught a huge break he wasn't called out prior to the foul.

---

Homan is 4/6 on the year.

---

Nope. Looking at his stats right now. Sacrifice bunts are only 1. You must be looking at stolen bases and attempts.

---

You are right, I mis-read.

quote:

---

I for one do not disagree with your "swing away" post. That's a different argument than leaving it on with two strikes. It's really hard to hit with two strikes under any circumstance, especially when you viewed the first four pitches from a squared bunting stance.

At that point, it's about putting your nose on the ball and grinding out the bunt (lay off bad pitches while you're at it).

---

except Homan got to 0-2 after 2 pitches. He should have swung away right there...not after squaring around and watching 2 more balls.

I agree hitting with 2 strikes is no easy task, but every single type of foul ball when swinging away gives you more opportunities to continue the at bat

keeping the bunt on reduces the possibilities of outcomes....AND it's much harder to bunt with 2 strikes when you feel like you have to protect the plate and the pitcher isn't going to pipe one down the middle for you. That lends to less successful bunts even when you do get the bat on the ball.

At 0-2, he should have turned around and protected the plate, swinging away.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

A hitter who is hitting well that showed several poor bunt attempts and yet you still have him bunting with a 2-2 count??? Really horrible coaching decision on that one.

---

Do you know how many times in the last 2 weeks alone that he's bunted for a hit?

Of course you don't.

---

Have you ever coached baseball? Even peewee? Of course you haven't.

---

Ah. Now reduced to fallacious arguments. I accept your admission of defeat.

---

I could have made the same worthless statement after your first response.

It was a bad coaching decision to keep bunting with a 2-2 count. The sooner you realize that the smarter you will be.

---

As someone who HAS coached baseball, I'll say it was not a BAD coaching decision.

You can disagree with it, hell I probably would have taken the bunt off, but there are a TONS of big time coaches that would have left the bunt on in that situation including the winningest coach in college baseball history.

With a guy like Homan, it is a very good assumption that he is going to get a bunt down and keep you out of the double play but he didn't.

It is fine to disagree with the call, but don't pretend it is some crazy call that no other coach would make.

---

So the vast majority of coaches at every level would've taken off the bunt with two strikes, but a few self proclaimed experts here say it was the right call.

---

I don't know that the vast majority would. That is my point; statistically speaking, the bunt still had the highest chance of success.

---

What? You're completely FOS. The vast majority absolutely would take the bunt off with 2 strikes. If you don't know that, you don't know baseball like you proclaim to and that goes for every one else here too. You can watch an entire season of MLB and won't see a 2 strike bunt called for more than a handful of times.

---

equating the MLB and college baseball tendencies is pretty f'ing stupid.

---

You can pick any level of baseball you want. You can narrow it down to the SEC if you want. I'll still be right and you'll still be wrong.

---

in an 0-2 count you can take the bunt off and K swinging or looking, with the runner on first you can fight off an iffy pitch out of the zone and GIDP. Odds are you are not walking and odds are you are not getting a hanging curve to smash. You can be right all you think, but in an 0-2 hole where you were going to sacrifice anyway you keep the sac on and hope you can control the ball put in play or at minimum you K and protect the base runner.

I do agree that shaking up the lineup may be a good idea. Hunter is struggling and seems to be pressing really bad. He is not up there trying to not get his job done. I think sliding him down to 6 or 7 might be a good idea for a few games. Lets see if he can get back on track. Who knows though? Maybe, hopefully, he gets out his funk in the next game, and just relaxes at the plate and does what he did until the last few weeks: take what the pitcher gives him, and not chasing pitches out of the zone with less frequency. Surely, we have some way of videoing at-bats and our offensive staff is going over these at-bats with him, trying to help.
But, in his case, it could be mostly a mental thing. I hope the big guy straightens out, I have confidence that he can.

quote:

---

IMO having him bunt with 2 strikes was more of RC not worrying about winning the game. he gave the kid another chance with live pitcher to get the bunt down. who knows.

I think if this was in the regional he wouldn't have been bunting with 2 strikes. hell we probable wouldn't have been bunting at all, maybe try a hit and run.

my $.02

---

agree

quote:

---

quote:

---

I for one do not disagree with your "swing away" post. That's a different argument than leaving it on with two strikes. It's really hard to hit with two strikes under any circumstance, especially when you viewed the first four pitches from a squared bunting stance.

At that point, it's about putting your nose on the ball and grinding out the bunt (lay off bad pitches while you're at it).

---

except Homan got to 0-2 after 2 pitches. He should have swung away right there...not after squaring around and watching 2 more balls.

I agree hitting with 2 strikes is no easy task, but every single type of foul ball when swinging away gives you more opportunities to continue the at bat

keeping the bunt on reduces the possibilities of outcomes....AND it's much harder to bunt with 2 strikes when you feel like you have to protect the plate and the pitcher isn't going to pipe one down the middle for you. That lends to less successful bunts even when you do get the bat on the ball.

At 0-2, he should have turned around and protected the plate, swinging away.

---

with the tying run on first the absolute worst scenario there is grounding into a DP. and swinging away in an 0-2 count has a infinitely higher probability of outcome than keeping the bunt on.

quote:

---

I for one do not disagree with your "swing away" post. That's a different argument than leaving it on with two strikes. It's really hard to hit with two strikes under any circumstance, especially when you viewed the first four pitches from a squared bunting stance.

At that point, it's about putting your nose on the ball and grinding out the bunt (lay off bad pitches while you're at it).

---

It's also really hard to bunt with 2 strikes when you have failed at 3 already (I'm counting the one he looked like he stabbed at but they said he pulled the bat back in time. I thought it was a strikeout).

At least swinging away a foul is not necessarily an out.

The probability of bunting a ball foul is infinitely higher than GIDP

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I for one do not disagree with your "swing away" post. That's a different argument than leaving it on with two strikes. It's really hard to hit with two strikes under any circumstance, especially when you viewed the first four pitches from a squared bunting stance.

At that point, it's about putting your nose on the ball and grinding out the bunt (lay off bad pitches while you're at it).

---

except Homan got to 0-2 after 2 pitches. He should have swung away right there...not after squaring around and watching 2 more balls.

I agree hitting with 2 strikes is no easy task, but every single type of foul ball when swinging away gives you more opportunities to continue the at bat

keeping the bunt on reduces the possibilities of outcomes....AND it's much harder to bunt with 2 strikes when you feel like you have to protect the plate and the pitcher isn't going to pipe one down the middle for you. That lends to less successful bunts even when you do get the bat on the ball.

At 0-2, he should have turned around and protected the plate, swinging away.

---

with the tying run on first the absolute worst scenario there is grounding into a DP. and swinging away in an 0-2 count has a infinitely higher probability of outcome than keeping the bunt on.

---

With that logic then why was the last batter swinging away with only 1 out and a guy on first?

Also, infinitely higher is not correct. I can't tell you how many times I have seen a bunter pop the ball up and the guy get doubled off first.

And why be so scared of the DP when there were no outs? The game would have turned out no worse than what happened.

The bigger issue is we've lost 3 of our last 5 games and if we lose tomorrow that will mean we enter the post season having lost 3 of our last 6. It doesn't affect anything as far as a national seed or not but it's just not the way you'd like to enter post season. Now, it will likely turn out to mean nothing as I expect us to roll through our Regional regardless.

Wrong time of the year for all the mental errors.

quote:

---

with the tying run on first the absolute worst scenario there is grounding into a DP. and swinging away in an 0-2 count has a infinitely higher probability of outcome than keeping the bunt on.

---

Homan is fast as can be. Unless he hits a rocket right at a guy, they aren't turning a DP.

deciding to keep the bunt on makes a successful bunt that much harder with 2 strikes, and reduces all other potential outcomes of swinging away. Keeping the bunt on for fear of the double play just doesn't add up imo.

It's not a major deal, and I'm not too upset that they decided to keep it on, but I think it was the wrong call.

I'm much more concerned about controlling what we can control. And part of that is the black hole in the cleanup spot for the past month +.

I love Melton, but he has been an inning and momentum killer for a long time. We can control that, and honestly when I looked back at just how rough his numbers have been the last 16 games, the decision should have been made before the tourney.

However, perfect opportunity to roll the dice tomorrow and move things around.

quote:

---

AND it's much harder to bunt with 2 strikes when you feel like you have to protect the plate and the pitcher isn't going to pipe one down the middle for you.

---

Had Homan followed a cardinal rule (don't offer at pitch above your squared bat), he would have worked a full count. That would have been a good time to take the bunt off because the pressure is now back on the pitcher. Even if you leave it on the pitcher has no choice but to "pipe one". Poor execution on a couple levels.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I for one do not disagree with your "swing away" post. That's a different argument than leaving it on with two strikes. It's really hard to hit with two strikes under any circumstance, especially when you viewed the first four pitches from a squared bunting stance.

At that point, it's about putting your nose on the ball and grinding out the bunt (lay off bad pitches while you're at it).

---

except Homan got to 0-2 after 2 pitches. He should have swung away right there...not after squaring around and watching 2 more balls.

I agree hitting with 2 strikes is no easy task, but every single type of foul ball when swinging away gives you more opportunities to continue the at bat

keeping the bunt on reduces the possibilities of outcomes....AND it's much harder to bunt with 2 strikes when you feel like you have to protect the plate and the pitcher isn't going to pipe one down the middle for you. That lends to less successful bunts even when you do get the bat on the ball.

At 0-2, he should have turned around and protected the plate, swinging away.

---

with the tying run on first the absolute worst scenario there is grounding into a DP. and swinging away in an 0-2 count has a infinitely higher probability of outcome than keeping the bunt on.

---

With that logic then why was the last batter swinging away with only 1 out and a guy on first?

Also, infinitely higher is not correct. I can't tell you how many times I have seen a bunter pop the ball up and the guy get doubled off first.

And why be so scared of the DP when there were no outs? The game would have turned out no worse than what happened.

---

the last batter has a greater than .300 batting average, yes? The infinitely higher was tongue in cheek, hopefully you are not that dense. I hope I don't really need to explain the importance of keeping the man on first in that situation.

quote:

---

quote:

---

with the tying run on first the absolute worst scenario there is grounding into a DP. and swinging away in an 0-2 count has a infinitely higher probability of outcome than keeping the bunt on.

---

Homan is fast as can be. Unless he hits a rocket right at a guy, they aren't turning a DP.

deciding to keep the bunt on makes a successful bunt that much harder with 2 strikes, and reduces all other potential outcomes of swinging away. Keeping the bunt on for fear of the double play just doesn't add up imo.

It's not a major deal, and I'm not too upset that they decided to keep it on, but I think it was the wrong call.

I'm much more concerned about controlling what we can control. And part of that is the black hole in the cleanup spot for the past month +.

I love Melton, but he has been an inning and momentum killer for a long time. We can control that, and honestly when I looked back at just how rough his numbers have been the last 16 games, the decision should have been made before the tourney.

However, perfect opportunity to roll the dice tomorrow and move things around.

---

Good points.

quote:

---

The bigger issue is we've lost 3 of our last 5 games and if we lose tomorrow that will mean we enter the post season having lost 3 of our last 6. It doesn't affect anything as far as a national seed or not but it's just not the way you'd like to enter post season. Now, it will likely turn out to mean nothing as I expect us to roll through our Regional regardless.

---

I'm really bad at math, but wouldn't it be 4 of the last 6? Maybe there's something I'm not seeing.

Anywho, of those 4 losses, potentially 3 could be to top 10 teams.