JPN06 said:

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

JPN06 said:

---

tjack16 said:

---

Yeah the "MVP" is really just the best overall player now. Has nothing to do with team performance

---

It always has been. Not just now.

---

There are some years where it clearly was the best guy who made his team better.

Namely Kirk Gibson with the 88 Dodgers and Terry Pendleton with the 91 Braves come to mind.

1988
Gibson had 106 R, 25 HR, 76 RBI, 31 SB and slashed .290/.377/.483 and won the MVP
Darryl Strawberry had 101 R, 39 HR, 101 RBi, 29 SB and slashed .299/.366.545 and finished second. Strawberry led the league in HR, SLG and OPS.

A few other players had as good or better seasons than Gibson, including Will Calark and Andy Van Slyke.

1991 NL MVP
Pendelton led the league with hits (187) and batting average (.319) and hit 22 HR with 86 RBI
Bonds hit 25 HR, drove in 116, had 43 stolen bases and slashed .292/.410/.514 - led the league in OBP and OPS.
Pendelton won 274-259

---

Gibson was a WS hero and Pendleton's Braves lost, but he hit great in the WS. I suspect they both got some credit for postseason heroics. The main problem is that they have been so inconsistent with what the actual criteria for winning the award is. And also baseball writers in general are self-important dorks that never played baseball.

Not that anyone knew what WAR was in 1988, but Gibson had a higher WAR than Strawberry, btw. Bonds was robbed. Probably for being a dick.

---

The voting takes place before the playoffs begin.

From my understanding it's 100% a "this guy is good, let's sign him and figure it out from there" kind of thing

texasaggie2015 said:

---

From my understanding it's 100% a "this guy is good, let's sign him and figure it out from there" kind of thing

---

And that is good and all, but starters and relievers make significantly different money.

Some basic payroll info for the AL West.

Astros
2023 Tax Payroll: 222 M
2024 Tax Payroll: 232 M (Surpassed 2023, 5 M to reach first tax threshold)
FA: 5 - Brantley, Maldonado, Maton, Neris, Stanek

Rangers
2023 Tax Payroll: 237 M
2024 Tax Payroll: 219 M (18 M to match 2023 & the first tax threshold)
FA: 12 - Chapman, Garver, Grossman, Hedges, Jankowski, Kennedy, Miller, Montgomery, Odorizzi, Perez, Smith, & Stratton. Tied for 2nd most in MLB.

Mariners
2023 Tax Payroll: 190 M
2024 Tax Payroll: 152 M (38 M to match 2023, 85 M to reach first tax threshold)
FA: 3 - Hernandez, Leone, Murphy

Angels
2023 Tax Payroll: 228 M
2024 Tax Payroll: 164 M (64 M to match 2023, 73 M to reach first tax threshold)
FA: 7 - Cron, Escobar, Grichuk, Loup, Moustakas, Ohtani, Urshela

As
2023 Tax Payroll: 79 M
2024 Tax Payroll: 60 M (19 M to match 2023, 177 M to reach first tax threshold)
FA: 3 - Kemp, May, Rucinski

speaking of the Mariners...

Seattle has a strong starting rotation...and the Astros struggled mightily to hit them...but other teams did not.

final season ERAs:

Castillo ---> 3.34
Kirby ------> 3.35
Gilbert ----> 3.73
Miller ------> 4.32

good to very good numbers...but nothing sub 3.00

Framber had a 3.45 ERA last year. JV had a 3.11 ERA with the Astros. Big Luis posted a 3.74 ERA in 2022

Mathguy64 said:

---

He's played 200 games total over 4 years for LAA. His max is 58 in 2021.

His best was 52 in the covid season. Take that out and in 3 full season he's played in 148 of 496 possible games. All while managing OPS+ of 94, 100 and 88.

So he's making $38MM a year, playing less than 1/3 of the actual games and when he plays he's below league average.

You can argue he is the reason why they can't resign Ohtani.

---

I'd argue that it's more about the fact that the Angels suck and haven't shown that they can compete for championships. At the end of the day, Ohtani is probably the most marketable baseball player in the world right now. He can go just about anywhere and make his money. If the guy wants to win, he'll leave that organization and go somewhere else.

W said:

---

speaking of the Mariners...

Seattle has a strong starting rotation...and the Astros struggled mightily to hit them...but other teams did not.

final season ERAs:

Castillo ---> 3.34
Kirby ------> 3.35
Gilbert ----> 3.73
Miller ------> 4.32

good to very good numbers...but nothing sub 3.00

Framber had a 3.45 ERA last year. JV had a 3.11 ERA with the Astros. Big Luis posted a 3.74 ERA in 2022

---

Keep in mind, only 5 starters were sub 3. The rules changes (ball changes?) have impacted starting pitching in a big way.

Castillo & Kirby were top 15ish and Gilbert is top 30ish. Miller and Woo aren't too shabby either. They add Ray back and will have Marco to eat innings if needed. They are absolutely set in the starting pitching department. They should go out and buy some bats now.

I hate people trying to look at data in a vacuum.

Bunting or not bunting is just one part of an offensive strategy. Yes statistically it's giving up outs. It can also be moving a runner up to push the percentages of scoring in your favor if the player at the plate is more likely to make an out anyway. It also depends on the skill and speed of the players in question. It also puts pressure on the other team to field and not make an error while runners are moving on the bases.

If your offensive scheme is gorilla ball with a bunch of big, slow guys. Bunting probably isn't going to be part of your offensive strategy. If your offensive scheme is to utilize speed, have contact hitters with, and want to stress the defense by putting runners in motion, bunting is probably going to be a part of the scheme. Both strategies are going to more rely on how that's executed instead of just counting how many times you bunt.

This bunting does or doesn't work on it's own is a waste of time. Hell, 3 of the 4 top teams were in the top half of bunts. Still doesn't mean much.

bearkatag15 said:

---

When you bunt pic.twitter.com/mVO85mGW31

— Mike Petriello (@mike_petriello) November 7, 2023

Much higher than years prior I imagine

---

The Astros bunted 38 times in the regular season. They had 14 successful sacrifices out of 19 attempts (Maldy had the most, by far). They had 10 bunt hits out of 19 attempts.

I need to look at the run expectancy before and after the sacrifice bunts to see if they were worth it. https://t.co/J8PINbiXcm pic.twitter.com/R2IzR95TRz

— Tony Adams (@adams_at) November 7, 2023

I would have just assumed bunting for a hit would drop. Not that it was commonplace, but seems common sense that more lefties would have been bunting for a hit with shifts and nobody covering the left side of the field....

AgLA06 said:

---

I hate people trying to look at data in a vacuum.

Bunting or not bunting is just one part of an offensive strategy. Yes statistically it's giving up outs. It can also be moving a runner up to push the percentages of scoring in your favor if the player at the plate is more likely to make an out anyway. It also depends on the skill and speed of the players in question. It also puts pressure on the other team to field and not make an error while runners are moving on the bases.

If your offensive scheme is gorilla ball with a bunch of big, slow guys. Bunting probably isn't going to be part of your offensive strategy. If your offensive scheme is to utilize speed, have contact hitters with, and want to stress the defense by putting runners in motion, bunting is probably going to be a part of the scheme. Both strategies are going to more rely on how that's executed instead of just counting how many times you bunt.

This bunting does or doesn't work on it's own is a waste of time. Hell, 3 of the 4 top teams were in the top half of bunts. Still doesn't mean much.

---

Except run expectancy doesn't support moving the runner up in favor of the out increasing your percentages of scoring. Runner on 3rd with 1 out is less favorable than runner on 2nd with 0 outs and runner on 2nd with 1 out is less favorable than runner on 1st with 0 outs based on run expectancy.

A lot of the bunt or not discussion assumes the bunt is successful. Bunt success rate is like 80% or somewhere around there. 20% of the time the bunt makes your situation even worse because an unsuccessful bunt means out have a man on 2nd or 1st with 1 out which is much worse than man on 2nd or 1st with 0 outs.

In short, a successful bunt not only lowers the run expectancy (it may increase the odds of scoring one run only, but there is no data on that situation), and an unsuccessful bunt significantly lowers run expectancy.

GM Meetings update: Red Sox officials have spoken with the agent for LHP Jordan Montgomery, who posted a 2.79 ERA in 11 regular-season starts for the World Series champs. @MLBNetwork @MLB

— Jon Morosi (@jonmorosi) November 7, 2023

There is data on increasing the odds of scoring one and only one. I'll have to look it up. AgLA06 is correct. No way for us to know what it actually does to run expectancy. And bunting run expectancy stats already account for failures to sacrifice.

But really the complicating factor here is Maldonado. The odds for all of this change when you look at his stat line and contact rates. Same with whoever is hitting behind him at the time. Or has to do with how well he is seeing the ball, facing a lefty or righty, or how well he does against that pitcher. Or if the in-game situation only calls for needing one run.

I'm not saying one way or the other, because Dusty wasn't using those stats anyway. But your bunt run expectancy stats are all very general. The reason a team like the Astros have such highly regarded analytics departments are because they have the data and get very SPECIFIC with their stats. Not just with spin rates and data like that, but with very specific scenarios.

Buck Compton said:

---

There is data on increasing the odds of scoring one and only one. I'll have to look it up. AgLA06 is correct. No way for us to know what it actually does to run expectancy. And bunting run expectancy stats already account for failures to sacrifice.

But really the complicating factor here is Maldonado. The odds for all of this change when you look at his stat line and contact rates. Same with whoever is hitting behind him at the time. Or has to do with how well he is seeing the ball, facing a lefty or righty, or how well he does against that pitcher. Or if the in-game situation only calls for needing one run.

I'm not saying one way or the other, because Dusty wasn't using those stats anyway. But your bunt run expectancy stats are all very general. The reason a team like the Astros have such highly regarded analytics departments are because they have the data and get very SPECIFIC with their stats. Not just with spin rates and data like that, but with very specific scenarios.

---

Yep. A stat is just a stat. It's normalizes / averages things out (not math correct, but you know what I mean). Specific situations matter, but stats should also play a part. Big difference in who is up and who they are facing. Big difference in needing 1 run to tie a game late versus early in the game. Playoffs versus the dog days of summer.

Assuming 0 or 1 out, low scoring game;

A 3 -5 hole hitter up with a runner on first that has good contact numbers that doesn't hit into a bunch of double plays facing an average pitcher, then sure those bunting stats matter and swing away.

A 2 hole hitter up with a high strikeout rate or high double play percentage facing an above average pitcher and it probably makes more sense to bunt with better hitters behind.

And as much as Dusty killed us this year on these kind of "feel" things. Good managers knows the data / stats and the specific situation and use their gut to try and skew them to the team's favor. Dusty was just really bad at it this year. Bunt stats don't account for slumps, or a guy being under the weather, or not being able to see a pitcher everyone else kills worth a crap. Or more importantly the mood in the dugout. Managers should.

Buck Compton said:

---

There is data on increasing the odds of scoring one and only one. I'll have to look it up. AgLA06 is correct. No way for us to know what it actually does to run expectancy. And bunting run expectancy stats already account for failures to sacrifice.

But really the complicating factor here is Maldonado. The odds for all of this change when you look at his stat line and contact rates. Same with whoever is hitting behind him at the time. Or has to do with how well he is seeing the ball, facing a lefty or righty, or how well he does against that pitcher. Or if the in-game situation only calls for needing one run.

I'm not saying one way or the other, because Dusty wasn't using those stats anyway. But your bunt run expectancy stats are all very general. The reason a team like the Astros have such highly regarded analytics departments are because they have the data and get very SPECIFIC with their stats. Not just with spin rates and data like that, but with very specific scenarios.

---

Genuinely, I hope you can show me that data set. I have searched and have not found it for scoring one and only one run. I'm glad to be wrong if it's the case that bunting a guy from 2nd to 3rd in favor of an out for the purpose of scoring one run only has a higher run expectancy than playing normal with a guy on 2nd with 0 outs. I've looked all over and haven't every seen that to be the case.

I'd be amazed if it couldn't. Most contact, a passed ball, and fly ball now score him from third. They don't from second.

The other thing is data is only as good as what goes into it and and how it is used. I image it's more general as stated above and can't account for various situations. And that's assuming the data is correct or applicable to the decision anyway.

What I assume data doesnt take into effect is the proficiency of the batter to hit into a DP, ground out anyways and not move the runner over, pop up that doesnt move the runner over or even more so...an incidence where you only need one and only one run

Beat40 said:

---

Buck Compton said:

---

There is data on increasing the odds of scoring one and only one. I'll have to look it up. AgLA06 is correct. No way for us to know what it actually does to run expectancy. And bunting run expectancy stats already account for failures to sacrifice.

But really the complicating factor here is Maldonado. The odds for all of this change when you look at his stat line and contact rates. Same with whoever is hitting behind him at the time. Or has to do with how well he is seeing the ball, facing a lefty or righty, or how well he does against that pitcher. Or if the in-game situation only calls for needing one run.

I'm not saying one way or the other, because Dusty wasn't using those stats anyway. But your bunt run expectancy stats are all very general. The reason a team like the Astros have such highly regarded analytics departments are because they have the data and get very SPECIFIC with their stats. Not just with spin rates and data like that, but with very specific scenarios.

---

Genuinely, I hope you can show me that data set. I have searched and have not found it for scoring one and only one run. I'm glad to be wrong if it's the case that bunting a guy from 2nd to 3rd in favor of an out for the purpose of scoring one run only has a higher run expectancy than playing normal with a guy on 2nd with 0 outs. I've looked all over and haven't every seen that to be the case.

---

Ok. Math time.

I kept it simple. The situation is 1st and 2nd, 0 outs. That RE for at least 1 run is .636. So your chances of scoring at least 1 run is 0.636. The same 1st and 2nd with 1 out is .428. So getting an out that does nothing is to be avoided, The successful sac bunt does something.

I used our success sac bunt % of 14/19.

5/19 of the time you are unsuccessful as a bunter. I will take that as your bunt was an out and it was so bad they got the lead runner, leaving 1st and 2nd but now 1 out. Yes it could be a double play, lets ignore that. The RE for 1 out, 1st and 2nd is .428

14/19 of the time you are successful and thats moving runners to 2nd and 3rd with now 1 out. You could be super successful and have bases loaded and 0 outs, but its Machete wee are using so ignore that. The RE of 2/3 and 1 out is .68.

So the combined RE of scoring at least 1 run is: (.428)(5/19) + .(.68)(14/19) = .613

You gave up an out and increased your chances of scoring at least 1 run from .428 to .613. It looks good. But before you batted it was .636 and that takes every outcome including a sac bunt into account. One you know you are giving up an out its better. If you dont know what you are going to do it is worse. Bayesian statistics says give up the out.

That does take into account the possibility of a DP, which makes things really worse.

ETA: if we were slightly more successful bunting (like one more "success" on 19 sac attempts, it would make this strategy an auto decision. Our 14/19 success % is right at the decision point of making this a no brainer.

Farmer1906 said:

---

Mathguy64 said:

---

Beat40 said:

---

Buck Compton said:

---

There is data on increasing the odds of scoring one and only one. I'll have to look it up. AgLA06 is correct. No way for us to know what it actually does to run expectancy. And bunting run expectancy stats already account for failures to sacrifice.

But really the complicating factor here is Maldonado. The odds for all of this change when you look at his stat line and contact rates. Same with whoever is hitting behind him at the time. Or has to do with how well he is seeing the ball, facing a lefty or righty, or how well he does against that pitcher. Or if the in-game situation only calls for needing one run.

I'm not saying one way or the other, because Dusty wasn't using those stats anyway. But your bunt run expectancy stats are all very general. The reason a team like the Astros have such highly regarded analytics departments are because they have the data and get very SPECIFIC with their stats. Not just with spin rates and data like that, but with very specific scenarios.

---

Genuinely, I hope you can show me that data set. I have searched and have not found it for scoring one and only one run. I'm glad to be wrong if it's the case that bunting a guy from 2nd to 3rd in favor of an out for the purpose of scoring one run only has a higher run expectancy than playing normal with a guy on 2nd with 0 outs. I've looked all over and haven't every seen that to be the case.

---

Ok. Math time.

I kept it simple. The situation is 1st and 2nd, 0 outs. That RE for at least 1 run is .636. So your chances of scoring at least 1 run is 0.636. The same 1st and 2nd with 1 out is .428. So getting an out that does nothing is to be avoided, The successful sac bunt does something.

I used our success sac bunt % of 14/19.

5/19 of the time you are unsuccessful as a bunter. I will take that as your bunt was an out and it was so bad they got the lead runner, leaving 1st and 2nd but now 1 out. Yes it could be a double play, lets ignore that. The RE for 1 out, 1st and 2nd is .428

14/19 of the time you are successful and thats moving runners to 2nd and 3rd with now 1 out. You could be super successful and have bases loaded and 0 outs, but its Machete wee are using so ignore that. The RE of 2/3 and 1 out is .68.

So the combined RE of scoring at least 1 run is: (.428)(5/19) + .(.68)(14/19) = .613

You gave up an out and increased your chances of scoring at least 1 run from .428 to .613. It looks good. But before you batted it was .636 and that takes every outcome including a sac bunt into account. One you know you are giving up an out its better. If you dont know what you are going to do it is worse. Bayesian statistics says give up the out.

That does take into account the possibility of a DP, which makes things

---

Good stuff.

Can you do it again for extra innings rules?

---

No because the RE data is for all outcomes and in extra innings you potentially only need 1 and its over. The data doesnt exist. Even the RE guys admit that.

Brewers interested in Espada.

Mathguy64 said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

Mathguy64 said:

---

Beat40 said:

---

Buck Compton said:

---

There is data on increasing the odds of scoring one and only one. I'll have to look it up. AgLA06 is correct. No way for us to know what it actually does to run expectancy. And bunting run expectancy stats already account for failures to sacrifice.

But really the complicating factor here is Maldonado. The odds for all of this change when you look at his stat line and contact rates. Same with whoever is hitting behind him at the time. Or has to do with how well he is seeing the ball, facing a lefty or righty, or how well he does against that pitcher. Or if the in-game situation only calls for needing one run.

I'm not saying one way or the other, because Dusty wasn't using those stats anyway. But your bunt run expectancy stats are all very general. The reason a team like the Astros have such highly regarded analytics departments are because they have the data and get very SPECIFIC with their stats. Not just with spin rates and data like that, but with very specific scenarios.

---

Genuinely, I hope you can show me that data set. I have searched and have not found it for scoring one and only one run. I'm glad to be wrong if it's the case that bunting a guy from 2nd to 3rd in favor of an out for the purpose of scoring one run only has a higher run expectancy than playing normal with a guy on 2nd with 0 outs. I've looked all over and haven't every seen that to be the case.

---

Ok. Math time.

I kept it simple. The situation is 1st and 2nd, 0 outs. That RE for at least 1 run is .636. So your chances of scoring at least 1 run is 0.636. The same 1st and 2nd with 1 out is .428. So getting an out that does nothing is to be avoided, The successful sac bunt does something.

I used our success sac bunt % of 14/19.

5/19 of the time you are unsuccessful as a bunter. I will take that as your bunt was an out and it was so bad they got the lead runner, leaving 1st and 2nd but now 1 out. Yes it could be a double play, lets ignore that. The RE for 1 out, 1st and 2nd is .428

14/19 of the time you are successful and thats moving runners to 2nd and 3rd with now 1 out. You could be super successful and have bases loaded and 0 outs, but its Machete wee are using so ignore that. The RE of 2/3 and 1 out is .68.

So the combined RE of scoring at least 1 run is: (.428)(5/19) + .(.68)(14/19) = .613

You gave up an out and increased your chances of scoring at least 1 run from .428 to .613. It looks good. But before you batted it was .636 and that takes every outcome including a sac bunt into account. One you know you are giving up an out its better. If you dont know what you are going to do it is worse. Bayesian statistics says give up the out.

That does take into account the possibility of a DP, which makes things

---

Good stuff.

Can you do it again for extra innings rules?

---

No because the RE data is for all outcomes and in extra innings you potentially only need 1 and its over. The data doesnt exist. Even the RE guys admit that.

---

I read too quickly. You were doing run expectancy (like you clearly said) and not odds on scoring.

Farmer1906 said:

---

Mathguy64 said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

Mathguy64 said:

---

Beat40 said:

---

Buck Compton said:

---

There is data on increasing the odds of scoring one and only one. I'll have to look it up. AgLA06 is correct. No way for us to know what it actually does to run expectancy. And bunting run expectancy stats already account for failures to sacrifice.

But really the complicating factor here is Maldonado. The odds for all of this change when you look at his stat line and contact rates. Same with whoever is hitting behind him at the time. Or has to do with how well he is seeing the ball, facing a lefty or righty, or how well he does against that pitcher. Or if the in-game situation only calls for needing one run.

I'm not saying one way or the other, because Dusty wasn't using those stats anyway. But your bunt run expectancy stats are all very general. The reason a team like the Astros have such highly regarded analytics departments are because they have the data and get very SPECIFIC with their stats. Not just with spin rates and data like that, but with very specific scenarios.

---

Genuinely, I hope you can show me that data set. I have searched and have not found it for scoring one and only one run. I'm glad to be wrong if it's the case that bunting a guy from 2nd to 3rd in favor of an out for the purpose of scoring one run only has a higher run expectancy than playing normal with a guy on 2nd with 0 outs. I've looked all over and haven't every seen that to be the case.

---

Ok. Math time.

I kept it simple. The situation is 1st and 2nd, 0 outs. That RE for at least 1 run is .636. So your chances of scoring at least 1 run is 0.636. The same 1st and 2nd with 1 out is .428. So getting an out that does nothing is to be avoided, The successful sac bunt does something.

I used our success sac bunt % of 14/19.

5/19 of the time you are unsuccessful as a bunter. I will take that as your bunt was an out and it was so bad they got the lead runner, leaving 1st and 2nd but now 1 out. Yes it could be a double play, lets ignore that. The RE for 1 out, 1st and 2nd is .428

14/19 of the time you are successful and thats moving runners to 2nd and 3rd with now 1 out. You could be super successful and have bases loaded and 0 outs, but its Machete wee are using so ignore that. The RE of 2/3 and 1 out is .68.

So the combined RE of scoring at least 1 run is: (.428)(5/19) + .(.68)(14/19) = .613

You gave up an out and increased your chances of scoring at least 1 run from .428 to .613. It looks good. But before you batted it was .636 and that takes every outcome including a sac bunt into account. One you know you are giving up an out its better. If you dont know what you are going to do it is worse. Bayesian statistics says give up the out.

That does take into account the possibility of a DP, which makes things

---

Good stuff.

Can you do it again for extra innings rules?

---

No because the RE data is for all outcomes and in extra innings you potentially only need 1 and its over. The data doesnt exist. Even the RE guys admit that.

---

I read too quickly. You were doing run expectancy (like you clearly said) and not odds on scoring.

---

No. I used % of scoring at least 1 run based on situations. Effectively odds of scoring.

From https://gregstoll.com/~gregstoll/baseball/runsperinning.html