Bunting with 2 strikes/emotional dad killing his daughters chances

[default]

I used to totally agree with this and would never bunt in showcases. But as I have been told on numerous occasions the coaches want to see the players produce in actual game situations. The biggest showcase we go to every year has teams from all over the country playing and over 260 coaches attenting. And you see bunting in every situation that warrants it. Definately has changed over the years.....

If college coaches were indeed present at this event, the last thing a college coach wants to see (normally) is bunting. They are there to see the kids hit, the pitchers pitch, the catchers catch, and to a lesser extent the fielders fielding. So if college coaches are present travel coaches, SWING THE BAT!!! I would only bunt a kid if for some strange reason a college coach came up to me and asked me to bunt a certain kid, or if winning the tournament had national ramifications.

Len

 

[default]

If the situation calls for it I will have the players bunt. If the players has two strikes on her from failed bunt attempts , what has changed in the situation to call off the bunt, nothing.

While at tournaments recruiting I want to see players hit and bunt. It all part of the same game.

 

[default]

I have talked with college coaches who want to see sac bunting at showcases and those who don't. I am on the side of those who don't. If I can see a girl have several at-bats, then I don't care, but if I'm only going to see her play one game, I'm not giving her a scholarship because she can sac bunt. The attitude part that people have discussed here is a good point, though, and watching how a girl reacts to being given a two-strike bunt is helpful. Or, how they react to being given any order with which they disagree.

It's easy to have a great attitude and to be coachable when you agree with the coach. What we want to know is what a player will be like when she disagrees, because it's going to happen at least once (and probably several times) during her four years in college.

 

[default]

Ccdteacher .... what has changed is that there are now 2 strikes, the batter has already failed in 2 previous attempts, and if she fails and/or fouls off the next pitch, it hurts the team.

I continue to be amazed by all of the coaches who say they do it and imply it's on a regular basis, when in fact I almost never see it.

 

[default]

I agree that it is not something often seen, but the player has already hurt the team by not getting the job done.
I think you could make a case that getting a bunt down in fair play should be easier or at least as easy as getting a hit with 2 strikes.

Ccdteacher .... what has changed is that there are now 2 strikes, the batter has already failed in 2 previous attempts, and if she fails and/or fouls off the next pitch, it hurts the team.

I continue to be amazed by all of the coaches who say they do it and imply it's on a regular basis, when in fact I almost never see it.

 

[default]

I agree that it is not something often seen, but the player has already hurt the team by not getting the job done.
I think you could make a case that getting a bunt down in fair play should be easier or at least as easy as getting a hit with 2 strikes.

But that equates the result of a sac bunt with the result of a hit, when of course a hit is a far better result than a sac bunt. The question should be what result is most likely to occur with a two-strike bunt attempt vs. hitting away with two strikes.

 

[default]

Coachjwb I've been around as long as you and I see it quite a bit more then you have. I myself do it atleast 10 times a year... I honestly can't believe your resistance to this, in fact it's one of the main reasons my teams have had as much success bunting with 2 strikes the "ok she has 2 strikes back up" coaches We will run suicides with 2 strikes quite a bit lol. I teach bunting, my girls are good bunters and they know they better get it down. Your taking a view in which the player asked to do the bunting tried twice and failed miserably. That's not often the case, it could be a directional bunt, bad strike call and now if she's an accomplished bunter she will straight sac bunt. We've actually had walk off 2 strike bunts through the years, small is a big part of our teams make up. To each his own, but if you think it's not going on frequently you would be incorrect. Again, we practice it and its part of our team. Hell we bunted with 2 strikes this past weekend in Tiffin, we started with a 1-1 count. We were successful 2 out 3 times, normally we are better then that, but whatever lol, it's December and its an indoor tournament.

 

[default]

Uber ... I'm not saying there's never a time to try it, especially if you have an excellent bunter up and the defense is not respecting it. I teach bunting constantly as well, and we use it frequently, believe me ... my co-coaching daughter told me this past weekend after our 4 game tourney that she was going to get me a "I heart bunting" t-shirt for Christmas in fact! But I will back up the corners some when there's 2 strikes ... I prefer to think of it as daring the other team to bunt! Now if I think she still might bunt, then I will tell them to still watch the hands. Additionally, if there's an 0-2 or 1-2 count, you can be sure that the next pitch call is not going to be in an easy to bunt location. And, with all due respect, I know for a fact that it's not going on a lot in the games I am seeing ... maybe we need to play each other!

To add on to what Joe said, aside from the fact that a base hit is better than a bunt, sometimes swinging away can achieve the same result as a bunt, and you don't strike out if you foul it off.

 

[default]

For some reason...this whole situation seems a little familiar to me. ;&

 

[default]

I agree that it is not something often seen, but the player has already hurt the team by not getting the job done.
I think you could make a case that getting a bunt down in fair play should be easier or at least as easy as getting a hit with 2 strikes.

But that equates the result of a sac bunt with the result of a hit, when of course a hit is a far better result than a sac bunt. The question should be what result is most likely to occur with a two-strike bunt attempt vs. hitting away with two strikes.

Game Theory uses Expected Value to determine the best strategy by evaluating all the pros and cons of each strategy. It is the total of each possible result (i.e. probability times value).

There are lots of possible outcomes regardless of whether they bunt or swing away. The probability of each one varies by strategy (bunt/swing) and the particular matchup of batter vs. pitcher. The value of each outcome varies by coach's philosophy and game situation.

EV = probability of scoring runner * Value-Run (e.g. 5)
+ probability of reaching base and advancing runner (H, ROE or unsuccessful FC) * Value-RBAR (e.g. 3)
+ probability of reaching base w/o advancing runner * Value-RB (e.g. 2 or 1)
+ probability of productive out (advanced runner) * Value-PO (e.g. 1 or 2)
+ probability of unproductive out (w/o advancing runner) * Value-UO (e.g. -1)
+ probability of FC on lead runner * Value-FC (e.g. -2)
+ probability of double play * Value-DP (e.g. -3)

Coaches do this to some degree, usually subconciously. Many use it to determine a standard strategy for their team, some do it by player and exceptional ones can do it on the fly during a game.

 

[default]

Huh?

Game Theory uses Expected Value to determine the best strategy by evaluating all the pros and cons of each strategy. It is the total of each possible result (i.e. probability times value).

There are lots of possible outcomes regardless of whether they bunt or swing away. The probability of each one varies by strategy (bunt/swing) and the particular matchup of batter vs. pitcher. The value of each outcome varies by coach's philosophy and game situation.

EV = probability of scoring runner * Value-Run (e.g. 5)
+ probability of reaching base and advancing runner (H, ROE or unsuccessful FC) * Value-RBAR (e.g. 3)
+ probability of reaching base w/o advancing runner * Value-RB (e.g. 2 or 1)
+ probability of productive out (advanced runner) * Value-PO (e.g. 1 or 2)
+ probability of unproductive out (w/o advancing runner) * Value-UO (e.g. -1)
+ probability of FC on lead runner * Value-FC (e.g. -2)
+ probability of double play * Value-DP (e.g. -3)

Coaches do this to some degree, usually subconciously. Many use it to determine a standard strategy for their team, some do it by player and exceptional ones can do it on the fly during a game.

 

[default]

Game Theory uses Expected Value to determine the best strategy by evaluating all the pros and cons of each strategy. It is the total of each possible result (i.e. probability times value).

There are lots of possible outcomes regardless of whether they bunt or swing away. The probability of each one varies by strategy (bunt/swing) and the particular matchup of batter vs. pitcher. The value of each outcome varies by coach's philosophy and game situation.

EV = probability of scoring runner * Value-Run (e.g. 5)
+ probability of reaching base and advancing runner (H, ROE or unsuccessful FC) * Value-RBAR (e.g. 3)
+ probability of reaching base w/o advancing runner * Value-RB (e.g. 2 or 1)
+ probability of productive out (advanced runner) * Value-PO (e.g. 1 or 2)
+ probability of unproductive out (w/o advancing runner) * Value-UO (e.g. -1)
+ probability of FC on lead runner * Value-FC (e.g. -2)
+ probability of double play * Value-DP (e.g. -3)

Coaches do this to some degree, usually subconciously. Many use it to determine a standard strategy for their team, some do it by player and exceptional ones can do it on the fly during a game.

This is why I don't coach. LOL...

 

[default]

I sometimes lose track of how many outs there are, I sure as he** couldn't do algebra formulas on the fly in the middle of a game...but on the other hand, maybe I will print a few of these off and hand it to parents when they say "what were you thinking..." I will be in my car driving to the hotel and they will still be standing at the field figuring out the formula that I say I was following and how it applies to my decision to bunt with 2 strikes

 

[default]

"What I am saying is: +probability FC on lead runner *Value-DP (e.g.-2) x Susans batting average- Sarahs OBP ** makes it really my only choice in that moment".

 

[default]

Game Theory uses Expected Value to determine the best strategy by evaluating all the pros and cons of each strategy. It is the total of each possible result (i.e. probability times value).

There are lots of possible outcomes regardless of whether they bunt or swing away. The probability of each one varies by strategy (bunt/swing) and the particular matchup of batter vs. pitcher. The value of each outcome varies by coach's philosophy and game situation.

EV = probability of scoring runner * Value-Run (e.g. 5)
+ probability of reaching base and advancing runner (H, ROE or unsuccessful FC) * Value-RBAR (e.g. 3)
+ probability of reaching base w/o advancing runner * Value-RB (e.g. 2 or 1)
+ probability of productive out (advanced runner) * Value-PO (e.g. 1 or 2)
+ probability of unproductive out (w/o advancing runner) * Value-UO (e.g. -1)
+ probability of FC on lead runner * Value-FC (e.g. -2)
+ probability of double play * Value-DP (e.g. -3)

Coaches do this to some degree, usually subconciously. Many use it to determine a standard strategy for their team, some do it by player and exceptional ones can do it on the fly during a game.

Awesome, great information for parents and let them know all base coach decisions are based on this! Lol

 

[default]

Game Theory uses Expected Value to determine the best strategy by evaluating all the pros and cons of each strategy. It is the total of each possible result (i.e. probability times value).

There are lots of possible outcomes regardless of whether they bunt or swing away. The probability of each one varies by strategy (bunt/swing) and the particular matchup of batter vs. pitcher. The value of each outcome varies by coach's philosophy and game situation.

EV = probability of scoring runner * Value-Run (e.g. 5)
+ probability of reaching base and advancing runner (H, ROE or unsuccessful FC) * Value-RBAR (e.g. 3)
+ probability of reaching base w/o advancing runner * Value-RB (e.g. 2 or 1)
+ probability of productive out (advanced runner) * Value-PO (e.g. 1 or 2)
+ probability of unproductive out (w/o advancing runner) * Value-UO (e.g. -1)
+ probability of FC on lead runner * Value-FC (e.g. -2)
+ probability of double play * Value-DP (e.g. -3)

Coaches do this to some degree, usually subconciously. Many use it to determine a standard strategy for their team, some do it by player and exceptional ones can do it on the fly during a game.

This is exactly right. All coaches and players do this subconciously during games. All this means is what is the best strategy, given the most likely outcome. The problem in our sport is that we don't have enough data, so we have to use common sense, as well as borrow from MLB data and decide when it should apply to our sport. I try to teach this is a very basic mode to our players by talking about probabilities and outcomes. The ones who don't want any part of it, I don't recruit.

 

[default]

My post was mainly a reply to msutt and JoeA just looking at either probability or value. The most accurate answer is a combination of both that also takes into account all the possible outcomes and their relative values.

Coaches obviously don't calculate complex Expected Values during a game, but they often do basic ones (e.g. risk-reward of attempting a stolen base) and can evaluate the impact of different factors on more complex ones for comparison purposes.

 

[default]

I am admittedly a numbers geek, though not saying I could do anything like the above! But there are a few basic ones I think about from time to time, sort of unconsciously. To follow-up on what SoCal Dad said, let's say there's a fairly fast runner on first and 2 outs, and we need a run badly. There's a good batter hitting, and a weaker batter to follow. If I figure there's say a 60% chance that the runner can steal 2nd, and then be in scoring position to be brought in with a base hit by the strong hitter, vs. the alternative of the good hitter and the weaker hitter both getting hits ... if the chances of that weaker hitter getting a base hit are only 20%, then I am going to reason that we're about 3 times more likely to get the run in by stealing vs. hoping that the next 2 hitters both get on.

 

[default]

I would never question a coach for asking DD to execute PERIOD (before,during or after). But when someone asks for DD never ever question he/she just because they are the COACH it's BS. Anyone who read your post knew its was sarcastic, but even in sarcasm there is some truth to your expectation of your requests being absolute. Even as their Dad I have thought them to question me if they think I'm wrong.
Past season our coach called for a bunt (not suicide) and ball hit dirt and DD pulled back to which they weren't happy with. DD asked what the expectation was when bunt was called (not in suicide situation), they explained they want an attempt. Although she didn't understand why this would be the case, next time this happened she attempted and failed. So as a coach are you confusing the situation? Are you teaching your player right softball knowledge? I would be willing to bet this situation or expectation would never happen in college.

I think a player can ask if they heard right, which was my point on that post. If a player got a signal that they thought said "Stick your face in front of the ball" I would expect them say ask "What?" and I would say "I really like the colors in the fall, now go hit".

 

[default]

Why? Were you asked to bunt with two strikes?

For some reason...this whole situation seems a little familiar to me. ;&