The Case Against Small Ball

[VObserver]

First, to give fair warning, I absolutely detest deliberately giving up outs for any reason other than to score a winning or tying run in the last inning, and even then, I don't like it.

So far this year, we have 18 sacrifice bunts. Mia Liscano, Haley Hart, Dayzja Williams and Cecilia Vasquez have accounted for 13 of the 18. Combined, those 4 girls are 81 for 208 [.389] with 20 extra base hits.

Assuming 20 sac attempts and that every attempt was successful, and further assuming that in 5% of sac attempts, the bunter successfully reached base, and that in 5% of attempts the defense committed an error allowing the bunter to reach base, the best scenario yields 18 instances of a runner on 2nd and 1 out, and 2 instances of runners on first and second with no outs, and results in 0 immediate runs.

Now, assume that we do not bunt in any of those 20 instances, and further assume that the four girls mentioned above are allowed to hit away. With rounding, they will produce 8 hits, 2 of which will be for extra bases. Of their 6 singles, assume 3 are hit behind the runner, and that 2 of those allow the runner on first to reach 3rd base. Further assume that both extra base hits are doubles, one scoring the runner from first.

Those same 20 plate appearances that [if bunted] yield 18 runners at second with 1 out, and 2 instances of runners on first and second with no outs and 0 runs scored, would yield [at worst] 1 immediate run with a runner on second and no outs, 1 instance of runners on second and third and no outs, 6 instances of runners on first and second with no outs and likely at least 6 instances with a runner on first or second with one out and at most 2 instances of no runners on base and 2 outs.

I would appreciate input from some small ball guru to explain to me how my reasoning is wrong.

I am sure I am missing some nuances somewhere, but I cannot for the life of me figure out why any conventional hitter hitting .300 or better would ever be asked to sacrifice bunt other than in the instances I set out in my first sentence.

[Turbine]

Not a fan of small ball.

Rare instances only.

[SlickRick]

First, to give fair warning, I absolutely detest deliberately giving up outs for any reason other than to score a winning or tying run in the last inning, and even then, I don't like it.

So far this year, we have 18 sacrifice bunts. Mia Liscano, Haley Hart, Dayzja Williams and Cecilia Vasquez have accounted for 13 of the 18. Combined, those 4 girls are 81 for 208 [.389] with 20 extra base hits.

Assuming 20 sac attempts and that every attempt was successful, and further assuming that in 5% of sac attempts, the bunter successfully reached base, and that in 5% of attempts the defense committed an error allowing the bunter to reach base, the best scenario yields 18 instances of a runner on 2nd and 1 out, and 2 instances of runners on first and second with no outs, and results in 0 immediate runs.

Now, assume that we do not bunt in any of those 20 instances, and further assume that the four girls mentioned above are allowed to hit away. With rounding, they will produce 8 hits, 2 of which will be for extra bases. Of their 6 singles, assume 3 are hit behind the runner, and that 2 of those allow the runner on first to reach 3rd base. Further assume that both extra base hits are doubles, one scoring the runner from first.

Those same 20 plate appearances that [if bunted] yield 18 runners at second with 1 out, and 2 instances of runners on first and second with no outs and 0 runs scored, would yield [at worst] 1 immediate run with a runner on second and no outs, 1 instance of runners on second and third and no outs, 6 instances of runners on first and second with no outs and likely at least 6 instances with a runner on first or second with one out and at most 2 instances of no runners on base and 2 outs.

I would appreciate input from some small ball guru to explain to me how my reasoning is wrong.

I am sure I am missing some nuances somewhere, but I cannot for the life of me figure out why any conventional hitter hitting .300 or better would ever be asked to sacrifice bunt other than in the instances I set out in my first sentence.

It makes no sense, especially with the improved batting averages this season and more specifically with the batting averages of Liscano, Williams, and Hart. Yes, these girls have excellent speed, but with their averages, they should only be bunting near the end of a close game to move a runner into scoring position. Full stop.

[MarlinMan3]

I guess one could argue if you dont try it early in season you wont know if you are capable of doing it later, when more pressing need and possibly against tougher competition.

[Cajunsmike]

It makes no sense, especially with the improved batting averages this season and more specifically with the batting averages of Liscano, Williams, and Hart. Yes, these girls have excellent speed, but with their averages, they should only be bunting near the end of a close game to move a runner into scoring position. Full stop.

I am OK with bunting with a runner on second and zero outs or runners on first and second and no outs. This allows you a greater chance to score without benefit of a hit. Obviously the next batters in the lineup should help determine the decision. I don't like bunting with a runner on first and no outs or one out.

[VObserver]

I guess one could argue if you dont try it early in season you wont know if you are capable of doing it later, when more pressing need and possibly against tougher competition.

That is what practice is for.

[SlickRick]

I am OK with bunting with a runner on second and zero outs or runners on first and second and no outs. This allows you a greater chance to score without benefit of a hit. Obviously the next batters in the lineup should help determine the decision. I don't like bunting with a runner on first and no outs or one out.

[cajunref]

Totally agree with VO, only time you should sacrifice is to get tying or winning running run into scoring position in the seventh or in extra innings. Makes no sense to me to sacrifice some of our best hitters in any other situation, period.

[Turbine]

Just getting on base does not fit the definition of "sacrifice."

Situations where a single by the next batter will score a run for someone on third base is acceptable to me.

At the same time a single by the next batter could be "this batter" and it accomplishes the same thing without losing an out.

[JMV JustMyView]

Bunting is a choice that depends on game state, matchups, and skill. Use a sacrifice bunt when one run is precious, like late in a tie game, behind by one in the late innings, ahead by one in the late innings, or when moving a runner increases your chance to score that single run. Use a bunt for a hit when the defense gives you space—deep corners, slow pitcher, or surprise—and when you have the speed and touch to take it. Avoid bunting just because it feels “safe.” Outs are valuable. Read the inning, score, outs, defense, and your own strengths. Then choose with purpose. One last thing, if you are playing a low scoring game with pitchers pitching well, manufacturing a run might be necessary.

When in doubt, ask yourself one simple question: Does this bunt raise my team’s chance to score the run we need right now? If the answer is yes and you have the lane and the skill, go ahead and lay it down. If not, keep the bat on your shoulder until you get a good pitch to hit. Smart bunting is not about being fancy; it is about being right at the right time. That is how you turn a tiny tap into a big moment.