Farmer1906 said:MosesHallRAB04 said:redline248 said:This is the maybe the best argument I've seen. Again, I think it probably varies batter to batter...there aren't many Barry Bonds types on each team. Are the majority of big league hitters more likely to hit a double or homer than a single?Farmer1906 said:redline248 said:Less often than the ~33% of the time guys get on base in other ways?Farmer1906 said:redline248 said:Do teams not emphasize getting on base, anymore? I am not all that up to date on the modern game.Farmer1906 said:MosesHallRAB04 said:Farmer1906 said:
Because if it was easy, they would. I would wager any of our hitters 1-9 would be more likely to strike out than get a bunt single the other way.
Instead of attempting it he just hits the ball in the exact same spot 95% of the time. That's obviously working
There is a reason why pretty much everyone in baseball doesn't do what your saying.
They do. Clearly they don't think that will get them on base often enough.
For the record, I'm only annoyed by it some of the time
But that only factors in on base. What about those extra bases? You'd have to be successful more like 40-43% of the time for it to make sense.
I enjoy this conversation, btw
You don't have to bunt to hit it to the 3rd. Inside out swing. Tucker never does it. And I agree that the entire mlb doesn't do it either. And I think it's odd for them as well
I've never understood that term very well. What is an inside out swing?
Wouldn't the chances of a bunt single go way up against the shift, though? At least to the point that teams may stop shifting against a batter as much?Farmer1906 said:
Yeah I'm It trying to pick a fight.
If you can bunt for a single 33% of the time, then your ops is 660 assuming your not walking or getting hit by pitches. Opposing teams would take that 100% of the time.
See Derek Jeter. (Bregxit beat me)Farmer1906 said:MosesHallRAB04 said:redline248 said:This is the maybe the best argument I've seen. Again, I think it probably varies batter to batter...there aren't many Barry Bonds types on each team. Are the majority of big league hitters more likely to hit a double or homer than a single?Farmer1906 said:redline248 said:Less often than the ~33% of the time guys get on base in other ways?Farmer1906 said:redline248 said:Do teams not emphasize getting on base, anymore? I am not all that up to date on the modern game.Farmer1906 said:MosesHallRAB04 said:Farmer1906 said:
Because if it was easy, they would. I would wager any of our hitters 1-9 would be more likely to strike out than get a bunt single the other way.
Instead of attempting it he just hits the ball in the exact same spot 95% of the time. That's obviously working
There is a reason why pretty much everyone in baseball doesn't do what your saying.
They do. Clearly they don't think that will get them on base often enough.
For the record, I'm only annoyed by it some of the time
But that only factors in on base. What about those extra bases? You'd have to be successful more like 40-43% of the time for it to make sense.
I enjoy this conversation, btw
You don't have to bunt to hit it to the 3rd. Inside out swing. Tucker never does it. And I agree that the entire mlb doesn't do it either. And I think it's odd for them as well
I've never understood that term very well. What is an inside out swing?
redline248 said:Wouldn't the chances of a bunt single go way up against the shift, though? At least to the point that teams may stop shifting against a batter as much?Farmer1906 said:
Yeah I'm It trying to pick a fight.
If you can bunt for a single 33% of the time, then your ops is 660 assuming your not walking or getting hit by pitches. Opposing teams would take that 100% of the time.
Let's take Straw, for example. Hell , even Tucker. If either of those guys get to first, the defense and pitching change a lot bc of their threat to steal 2nd.
Someone like Gallo maybe isn't as big a threat. I do remember AJ talking about him, specifically, and how they'd gladly give him 1st.
looks like Dusty pulled Springer even thought he's up to bat next. That can't be a good thing.MosesHallRAB04 said:
Why is straw in CF?
That's is what I was thinking.bearkatag15 said:looks like Dusty pulled Springer even thought he's up to bat next. That can't be a good thing.MosesHallRAB04 said:
Why is straw in CF?
He barreled a fastball and it was short of 400. Last might those were going 415+.cap-n-jack said:
Last night that would've been out in the county somewhere
There is probably a lot of **** this year that Dusty thinks he didn't sign up forAg_07 said:
Y'all ever think that as he's taking the ball from yet another rookie BP arm Dusty thinks to himself 'Man I did not sign up for this shlt'
