Bunting
As we all know, Edwin Encarnaction hit a walk-off HR last night, after being asked to lay down a sacrifice bunt - and failing miserably. After the game, Dusty Baker said some nonsense about hoping EE would fail to get the bunt down:
“He hadn’t been swinging well. You can’t let him swing in that situation,” Baker said. “I told [bench coach] Chris [Spier], ‘Chris I kinda hope he doesn’t get it down so he can hit a three-run homer.’ And he hit a three-run homer.”
I’m going to ignore Dusty’s comments entirely, because I think he was just fooling around. (That’s the only explanation that will let me sleep at night.)
What I’m interested in is whether bunting was the right call, given the situation:
- Ninth inning, Reds down 2.
- 0 outs, Phillips on first; Dunn on second.
- EE up.
- Votto on deck, followed by Bako and the pitcher’s spot.
- Hatteberg, Castro, and Valentin on bench.
I’m actually going to ignore all but the first two, because otherwise, there are just too many variables - I will say that items 3-5, at the very least, don’t make bunting any more beneficial (a bad bunter, and weaker hitters coming up).
Using play-by-play-based data from last year’s games, Prospectus provides us (at least subscribers) with the expected runs scored from any given situation.
In the 9th inning, with nobody out, and runners on 1st and 2nd, teams scored an average of 1.51044 runs. That’s the situation Dusty faced. Note that it’s not good enough to win. Now, let’s look at what we’d have if Dusty’s strategy would’ve worked:
9th inning, 1 out, runners on 2nd and 3rd: 1.44328 runs. So even in a vacuum, the strategy doesn’t improve your chances of winning (on average).
A different way to look at it is based on Win Expectations, also based on game data. According to this Win Expectency tool, the Reds had a 33.3% chance of winning the game when EE came to the plate. If he’d sacrificed successfully, the Reds would’ve had (on average) an 28.1 % chance of winning. Again, even in this extreme game situation, where “the book” says a bunt is almost automatic, it doesn’t seem to help you win, on the average.
Check out the great FanGraphs gamelog for more on EE’s contributions. It was the single most valuable hit in baseball so far this season.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:06 am
I think with Votto, Valentin, and Hatteberg still to come, I would have done exactly what Dusty did. Except I probably would have had Castro PH to do it.
This is why I’m not the manager.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:07 am
In my defense it would have been worthwhile just to see Redszone blow up over it.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:12 am
Mike P, you would’ve bunted even despite the numbers I posted above, that show it would’ve decreased the (average) chance of winning by 5%? What’s your thought process on that?
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:15 am
The numbers aren’t in a vacuum though, and to that point you weren’t getting lesser hitters.
Admit it, before the at bat, who would you have more confidence in to hit a single(and tie the game) Edwin or Votto or Valentin. (I’m assuming Valentin would have batted for Bako because what’s the point in keeping the fat tub of goo on the roster if he can’t PH for the weak hitting catcher in a tough spot.)
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:31 am
I’m 99% certain you would have posted that quote and commented on how funny it was if Adam Dunn said it, Chris.
I have to question the validity of those numbers. 1st and 2nd, no out in the 9th. First of all, how many could there have possibly of been? How many of them were 2 run games? Dusty was clearly playing for 2 runs. He knew what he needed, it was doable, and everything played out right before EE was up. There were also plenty of bats that have won games waiting on the bench.
Besides, I think, if anything, that quote means it was a tough call for Dusty.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:44 am
The problem is that if he bunts, Bako (or a PH) then gets walked to load ‘em up. Then they bring a LOOGY in to face Votto/Hatty.
I’m a fan of never bunting, especially in this case. Play for the big inning, except in one and only one case. Need 1 run, man on 2nd, no outs.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:52 am
If Adam Dunn had given that quote, we would have been sure he was joking. With Baker, he’s supposed to be the serious one in charge, so it’s less certain that it’s in jest, or serious, or in a rooting interest, or what. As with any new management, there’s a period of adjustment in learning about how the person communicates and what the personality tendencies are that influence that communication.
Blah blah blah: we’re overexamining. My immediate reaction was that Dusty was looking on more as a fan of the player, sort of, and the quote was about how he wanted Edwin to hit a homer so that he could be the hero and forget about the costly error, etc…I’ve definitely been getting a vibe that Baker just likes Edwin. Maybe the same way he likes Corey Patterson, I dunno. It’s early yet.
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:55 am
#4: I would choose Edwin over Votto or Hatteberg. Of course, it was impossible for Edwin to come up with runners on 2nd and 3rd and 1 out last night, so that’s not really the choice. Remember, if Edwin strikes out or pops up, Votto still gets to hit, just with 1 out and guys on 1st and 2nd.
#5: I’d have been confident that Dunn was joking, Jared. And look again - I did give Dusty credit for doing the same thing. My post isn’t about his comment at all.
Assuming you are legitimately trying to understand that numbers, the data comes from 20 years of play by play (’77-06). There were 360 games where the home team was batting in the 9th, down 2 runs, with runners on 1st and 2nd, and 0 outs. They won 101 of those.
There were 203 games with the same inning and run situation, but 1 out and runners on 2nd and 3rd. The home team won 62 of those.
If you want to argue that Joey Votto is so far superior to all the other major leaguers who make up that sample, such that it would skew the numbers into making the bunt a good call, I guess you can. Of course, you’d have to first figure out how Edwin Encarnacion gets that bunt down. IF you want to justify bunting, I think you have to start by pulling EE for Castro.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Chris, I actually agree with you. If they were going to bunt, I would have put in Castro to do it. My main fear with EE batting was the chances of something bad outweighed the good. 2nd and 3rd, also has the advantage of no double play balls.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:11 pm
That’s true. With 1 out, men on 1st and 2nd, Win Expectency drops to 17%.
What all of this tells me is how important outs are - much more important than what base guys happen to be on. Which brings me back to being against sac bunting, except for when the pitcher or a Castro-ish hitter is (already) up.
I maybe could’ve even lived with bunting a struggling guy like EE in that situation, to get his mind off swinging, but only if he could, you know, actually get the bunt down.
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:19 pm
One caution about those run expectancy or win expectancy tables–they are averages across all situations. One of the overlooked sections in The Book is the bit on sacrifice bunting and game theory. I don’t know why it doesn’t get more play.
Anyway, one of their main points is that you can’t just do whatever run or win expectancy table say you should in a given situation. In fact, the best approach is to play it based on what the defense is doing. If defense is back, bunting can be effective because there’s a fair chance for an infield single (which is why, on average, sacrifice bunts actually have break-even value to swinging away…another astonishing finding from The Book that gets no attention). But if defense is in…like it most certainly was after Edwin gave it up on Lyon’s bluff back to second base…it’s probably better to swing away.
So…I guess I’m saying that I don’t disagree with you about what Dusty should have done in this situation–especially after the bluff–I just wanted to throw out some caution about the use of those tables. -j
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Thanks, JinAZ. I actually checked your site before I wrote this, in hopes you’d already looked at the issue and I could just link to your work.
You also remind me that I had originally planned to include a caveat that I don’t have my Tango book with me right now, so my “analysis” is far from thorough.
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:10 pm
At the end of the day, I’m not sure that either decision is that much better, I would just like to see the manager have a thought process about it. That is a thought process that isn’t well this is the way the game is supposed to be played. Not saying that he necessarily didn’t, but very few things Dusty has said leads me to believe he employs a rational objective thought process.
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:25 pm
IMO, Encarnacion’s chance of getting a hit was greater than getting down a successful bunt. Which means chances of an RBI single, runners still on 1st and 2nd with no outs is greater than 2nd and 3rd with 1 out. I like that situation (1 run game with two on and no outs) better.
April 3rd, 2008 at 4:22 pm
The point about the bunt taking a GIDP out of the equation is kinda bad, since you’d have to give up an out for it.
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Since we won its really hard for me to get too worked up about this… BUT the main problem with what happened yesterday is that everyone in the ballpark knew that EE is a terrible bunter. Anyone that has followed his career knows this fact, that he was never asked to bunt in the minors and the one or two times Narron had him lay one down, he couldn’t do it. The more we hear from Baker it just seems like he doesn’t know the team all that well. He thinks Adam Dunn can hit .300? Is he being serious? He thinks EE can get a crucial bunt down in that situation? He likes AGON over Kepp because of defense? It seems like he is learning on the job which brings us back to the grand Corey Patterson debate. I don’t think Dusty watched any tape of Hopper last season. Not a whole lot of it anyhow. I think he looks at Hopper and sees a career minor leaguer finally cracking into the majors but who could more than likely flop. I think he looks at Freel as a washed up speedster coming off serious injury. He seems to remember all Patterson’s positive achievements and forgotten his struggles and honestly believes he is the best man for the job. I am glad he gave Freel a spot start today, and I expect him to do that type of thing, but it looks very much like Dusty is still learning this team which is disappointing in my mind.
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:36 pm
This is exactly why stats don’t matter as much as some of you want them to matter. Statistically we should have lost. We won. The only stats that matter are wins and losses. How you get there is gravy.
April 3rd, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Statistically we should have lost? FTH does that mean?
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:35 pm
i think y’all are missing a major point. #6 is right on the money. with first open after a successful bunt, az would walk the next hitter to set up the dp again. i’ve seen this about 50 times with ozzie in chicago. including in the world series. bunting in that specific game situation last night is just dumb.
April 4th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Loved the outcome, hated the decision making. Asking EE to bunt in that situation is crazy. Of course, a double play would also have been a dagger to the heart. I probably would have bunted in that situation, but would have had Castro do it, and if we had tied it I would have had my best defensive team on the field for the 10th. If I use EE, he’s swinging away from jump street. I know it’s not the popular option here, but I play to eliminate the double play and have two shots to tie the game on a base hit, especially with Hatteburg still on the bench. Might not have history on my side, but I’d do it anyway. Of course, I have seen the sacrifice play go really, really wrong; but I play to advance runners out of a DP situation.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Late in the game the “Book” says play for a tie at home and the win on the road.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
IMO, Encarnacion’s chance of getting a hit was greater than getting down a successful bunt. Which means chances of an RBI single, runners still on 1st and 2nd with no outs is greater than 2nd and 3rd with 1 out. I like that situation (1 run game with two on and no outs) better.
Remember, there’s another possibility with a bunt–bases loaded on an infield single. It doesn’t happen as often as the sacrifice, but that’s really what should be considered the desired outcome of a bunt. If the sacrifice happens, it’s a way of minimizing your losses more than gaining anything. -j
April 4th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
sorry, the above first paragraph should have been italicized. I was quoting GregD. -j
April 4th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Going with that, put Hopper in to slap something down a line, perhaps for a single, or the D throws it away. Early in the season with a wet field that is a decent possibility.
Of course you could let EE swing away and end it with a HR…..