A Bunting Manuel
By: Sean Pidgeon
Willie Harris’ game ending web gem was deflating to watch. That catch was literally the difference between victory and defeat. If Rod Barajas’ smoking line drive hits turf, Reyes and Wright score and the Mets win. But thanks to Karma, Harris snared that ball in a full extension dive, preserving the Nats 4-3 lead and ending the game.
Yes, Karma beat the Mets. It was Jerry Manuel’s fault. The baseball gods could not let the Mets win and excuse Manuel’s boneheaded managing. Manuel lost the game twice, in the 8th and 9th, on wasteful sacrifice bunts.
The headline in the Post claims, “Clutch Hits Elude Mets.” If a manager wants his players to get clutch hits, he should maximize the number of at-bats with runners on base. The Mets had two less outs to work with in the 8th and 9th because Jerry gave them away to Washington with useless bunts (and the first on a 3-1 count, no less).
If this game is remembered (which it won’t be), Mets fans will remember it for two things on the field (Jose Reyes’ return is the big story, but that is outside the box score). Fans will remember Harris’ heartbreaking catch and Jeff Francoeur’s double play groundout in the 3rd with the bases loaded and no outs. And Frenchy’s at-bat was awful! Tommy Bennett of Baseball Prospectus tweeted, “Mets win expectancy went from 73.3% to 56.6% after Francouer’s plate appearance.”
But I can forgive Frenchy. Frenchy’s been hitting the crap out of the ball so far, and even taking some walks, which he did in the 9th right before Barajas’ at-bat. Yeah, Frenchy swung at a couple bad pitches in the 3rd. Sure, I want him to have a better batting eye, but that takes practice and skill. I played baseball (albeit only up to the collegiate level), and it’s hard to lay off pitches floating out of the strike zone. But Manuel’s decision making takes no athletic skill. By making his team bunt, behind by one run, with a man on first and no outs in both the 8th and 9th innings, Manuel blew the game through sheer stupidity.
In Chapter 4-2 of the Jonah Keri-edited Baseball Between the Numbers, James Click charts the changes in Win Expectancy after sacrificing with a man on first and no outs.* When a team bunts the runner over in the 8th with a one run deficit, their win expectancy goes down about 3.8%!** And in the 9th inning, that bunt drops the win expectancy by about 4.8%! A manager who makes his team bunt in these situations is making it harder for his team to win.
And just think; if Willie Harris doesn’t replace Adam Dunn in left, Barajas’ hit falls in, Alex Cora gets verbally felated for doing the Little Things and being a Team Player who pushes the runner over, and Manuel gets praised for his brilliant managerial strategy.
*This chart is on page 131, if you have the book or wish to buy it (or maybe borrow it from a library).
**Unfortunately, I did not find any charts further extrapolating Win Expectancy based on counts. When Fernando Tatis bunted in the 8th, the count was 3-1. I don’t have the statistics, but I’m sure they’d show sacrificing ahead in the count is even worse than sacrificing behind in the count.
I couldn’t agree more. These bunts were infuriating! Especially bunting with a 3-1 count and the bottom of the order coming up with the first baseman.
I was seething with anger at the first bunt attempt and was in a full blown rage for the second. He must be stopped. Good stuff Pidge.
I know! He definitely must be stopped. I want to say Jerry (and to all the high school baseball and softball coaches who don’t know any better), “Listen; bunting the runner over doesn’t make you look smart; it doesn’t make you look like a small ball genius; it makes you look like a dinosaur. You’re as obsolete as those grizzled old baseball man who still think BA is more important than OBP. You’re the Flat Earth Society of Baseball.” Also: “Jerry, stop giving playing time to Gary Matthews and Mike Jacobs!”
I’m glad to see everybody is mad at Jerry for those bunts.
I re-read that chapter from Baseball Between the Numbers, and one interesting conclusion it comes to is that bunting the runner over from first with no outs is never the right play. Any inning, any score, that bunt will lower your teams Win Expectancy.
I’d like to look at other bunting situations; say, 1st and 2nd, no outs, or runner on just 2nd and no outs, and see what a bunt does to Win Expectancy there. I don’t like those bunts either, but at least it moves a man to third, where he can score on a grounder or fly ball with only one out.
And, the most brutal bunt: The sac bunt with runners on 1st and 3rd, trading an out to have runners on 2nd and 3rd.
Bunts I hate the most: Bunts when there’s already one out. For the love of all that is holy, why!? Why do you do it, baseball managers!?
Two bunt situations I would like to see studies on:
(1) The suicide squeeze. I’m not a fan. (a) too risky; batter misses the bunt, the runner gets tagged out at home. Total waste. (b) At least you’re trading an out directly for a run, unlike the ubiquitous bunt to move the man from 1st to 2nd. But you’re still giving away an out; if the batter swings away, there’s always the .280 (or whatever his batting avg. is) chance of a hit, and another I’d guess 40% chance of driving the runner in with an out. (c) a suicide squeeze is life-threateningly dangerous. If the hitter misses the sign and swings away and hits a line drive at the runner from 3rd sprinting home…I don’t even want to think about it.
(2) Pitcher’s bunting in the N.L. I don’t really get upset by this. Most pitchers are close to sure outs anyway, so why not have them use their out to bunt someone over? However, some pitchers are okay hitters (.190 to .220 range). I wonder if there is a cut-off batting avg. or OBP where it is more advantageous to have a weak hitter bunt the runner over than swing away? Just some questions…