By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!
Get StartedIndians fired acta today, don't know if that will affect anything. sox still have 3 at clev.
in the 3rd inning...yes...in the bottom of the 9th to move the winning run to 3b with only one out....the right call
I hate them. Giving the opposition outs is bad baseball.
It's not 1979 and Gene Mauch is dead. So is the blind strategy of the sac bunt.
In that situation, here are the Run Expectancy numbers over the last 50 years:
1b and 2b no outs: 1.5 (number of runs scored in an inning)
2b and 3b 1 out: 1.4
Argument ended, since the Tigers needed only one run.
But look at this:
Here's the probability that a run will score at all:
1b and 2b no outs: .643
2b and 3b 1 out: .698
To me, the added 5-hundredths of a percent is not worth the risk. What the botched bunt created instead:
1b and 2b 1 out: .429 probability
The odds were against Santiago, or any bunter moving the runners in a sac bunt in the first place.
An out for a run is a great trade, no matter how you look at it (in this specific situation). Think situationally. Then think about what the Tigers usually do when we have that situation and don't bunt.......
Of course, it all depends on having players that can bunt reliably, which I don't have much confidence on with this team.
And yet, basically every single team in baseball still uses the sacrifice bunt in this situation. The statistics are mixed on this, as you pointed out. You also haven't factored in who the runner that would be advanced to third would be. Fielder is not going to run home safely on a single with the KC outfield, generally. Incidentally, you are reading the percentages wrong. That is a 5% difference, no 5/100s of a percent.
Founded in 2011, Detroit Sports Forum is a community of fanatics dedicated to teams like the Lions, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Wolverines, and more. We live and breathe Detroit sports!