BUNT
Baseball’s “BAD” four letter Word
Part I of II - Over analyzed and over thought
This article will address the squeeze/ sacrifice bunt
With the technology we have today, the information we can get is staggering. The
problem is, there is too much information (over analyzation). There was a study
done by MIT where half the people were given as much information about the stock
market as they wanted. The other half practically no information. The people that
had unlimited information made about half as much as the people that had limited to
virtually no information. They knew more but obviously understood less.
The introduction of Sabermetrics (the empirical analysis of baseball - baseball statistics that
measure in-game activity) has done about the same for bunting. It has assisted in the
brainwashing of baseball into believing the bunt is a bad four letter word. Many
publications like The Book – Playing the Percentages in Baseball and other
“Sabermetric” books, articles and research have scrutinized bunting to the point that
it has denigrated bunting as being an ineffective strategy.
Sports are filled with stats. They are necessary to help come to some conclusions on
players, situations, etc. Unfortunately, the “geniuses” of statistics get a little too
involved with their formulas and variables which over complicate the whole process.
Plain and simple - over analyzation. Evidence for this can be seen in two popular
baseball scoring apps for mobile devices which track over 200 stats. We prefer the
K.I.S.S. theory – “Keep It Simple Stupid”. Here is our simple and easy to understand
“sabermetrics” on bunting and why simply it is a viable scoring tool that has to be
used.
First, from Suicide Squeeze: Thievery, Genius and Insanity by Tim Muma 4/29/2013
states: The squeeze play and safety squeeze has been a very successful tool, even at the Major
League level.
From 2000-2011, there were 356 bunts with a runner on 3rd or runners on 2nd and 3rd with only 1
out.
84 times the runner on 3rd scored with no outs recorded
193 times the runner on 3rd scored and 1 out was recorded
25 times a double play was recorded (once a runner also scored)
49 times no run scored and 1 out was recorded
5 times no run scored and no out was recorded
53 times a runner was "caught stealing" on a missed bunt
5 times a runner was safe at home on a missed bunt (wild pitch/passed ball)
Thus, if we consider a "success" being where at least 1 run scored and 1 out or no outs were
recorded, the success rate for the squeeze play during this time period was about 68%.