2019 Series #18 Cleveland Indians @ Boston Red Sox May 27, 28, 29

[CBBI]

Guys, the bunt was the right play in that situation.

Sucks it didn't work out but doesn't make it wrong.

You're playing for one run in that situation.

The case could be made that sacrifice bunting is not the right play in any situation from a run expectancy perspective.

 

[EdMonix11]

The case could be made that sacrifice bunting is not the right play in any situation from a run expectancy perspective.

A sac bunt in the 6th inning is MUCH different than two on, no out in the 9th in a tied game.

Whether you love or loathe analytics, it was the right move. You're playing for one run and a sac bunt should get a man on 3rd. You then don't need a hit to take the lead.

No, it wasn't the right play. Their relievers haven't felt found the strike zone all inning, and we gifted them an out with the bunt. Not to mention that Mercado has been swinging a hot bat since he arrived in the big leagues and is batting in the two hole.

Dude, every team in the league is gonna bunt in that situation.

And to be honest, if Freeman slides into the bag, it's bases loaded with no out.

 

[Kevalier]

Most remarkable win of the season. Not sure if it will spark any type of turnaround, but that was still impressive.

 

[CBBI]

A sac bunt in the 6th inning is MUCH different than two on, no out in the 9th in a tied game.

Whether you love or loathe analytics, it was the right move. You're playing for one run and a sac bunt should get a man on 3rd. You then don't need a hit to take the lead.

Expected runs with runners on first and second with no one out: 1.45887

Expected runs with runners on second and third with one out: 1.35970

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[CBBI]

And before anyone cites the possibility of a Mercado GIDP to “ruin” the inning, if his sac bunt gets down and the Sox go to first for the out, the next order of business is that they’re gonna IBB Santana to load the bases and set up said double play all over again. Only this time it would end the inning.

So with two on and none out, we want to intentionally create a scenario where the No. 2 and No. 3 hitters don’t even get a chance to swing the bat and give away an out in the process?

Doesn’t make sense.

 

[Stark]

Jose reaches base four of his five plate appearances, stole two bases, and we won.

Astounding thing that him playing good gets us a W. Need him to stay productive.

 

[sportscoach]

Of course I talk vad about Allen and he has the biggest hit of his career. I'll take it.

I was about to say, maybe this was just the type of day Allen needed to get things right in the pros. He has shown sparks of talent, he just needs to put everything together.

Luplow also got the hit against the right hander, so that was a big hit as well.

These hits you would never expect, Allen with the HR and Luplow hitting the double off a RHP.

We badly needed this win especially the come back style. Now it almost makes tomorrows game the most important of the season. I know strange to say 50ish games in, but if they can come back and dominant in tomorrows game, I think this team can start to get on a roll and then we get Naquin and Clev back, that could add more energy to this team.

 

[Wulfgar1224]

No real analysis. I just enjoyed the win tonight. I thought when Boston scored twice in the bottom of the eighth that it was over. I was pleasantly surprised at the ninth.

 

[sportscoach]

I liked how Plesac pitched, he wasn't flashy, he just attacked hitters and threw strikes. He did miss over the plate with some pitches but for the most part he threw a lot of quality pitches. I think he will get a couple more starts and then that will be about the time Clev comes back from the DL and we will see if him or Jefry stays up to be the 5th starter. I feel bad he didn't get the win tonight since he did a pretty good job out there for us.

 

[EdMonix11]

Expected runs with runners on first and second with no one out: 1.45887

Expected runs with runners on second and third with one out: 1.35970

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You're looking at the wrong stat my man.

9th inning, tie game, playing for one run..... the stat you'd be looking for is "Run Expectations-- At least One Run"

1st and 2nd, 0 Out: .6201
2nd and 3rd, 1 Out: .6646
*Bases Loaded, 1 Out: .6565
*If they intentionally walk Santana, as you proposed
(via BP)

That sac bunt, if it worked out, would've improved the Indians odds of scoring one run by ~4.5%. Last season, that sac bunt would've improved the Indians odd of scoring one run by ~8%.

I loathe bunting under most circumstances but even the analytics support Tito's decision. 9th inning and playing for one run changes things completely.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Urban]

Pretty solid first start for Plesac at Fenway vs. the defending champs with an hour rain delay mixed in. Probably benefited from a favorable babip and little tape on him, but I'll take it

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

Expected runs with runners on first and second with no one out: 1.45887

Expected runs with runners on second and third with one out: 1.35970

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

That's not speaking to his argument at all.

You want the probability of scoring at least one run.

Edit: nvm, @EdMonix11 already got it.

 

[CBBI]

You're looking at the wrong stat my man.

9th inning, tie game, playing for one run..... the stat you'd be looking for is "Run Expectations-- At least One Run"

1st and 2nd, 0 Out: .6201
2nd and 3rd, 1 Out: .6646
*Bases Loaded, 1 Out: .6565
*If they intentionally walk Santana, as you proposed
(via BP)

That sac bunt, if it worked out, would've improved the Indians odds of scoring one run by ~4.5%. Last season, that sac bunt would've improved the Indians odd of scoring one run by ~8%.

I loathe bunting under most circumstances but even the analytics support Tito's decision. 9th inning and playing for one run changes things completely.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I don’t subscribe to BP, so our numbers might be slightly off. If what you’re looking at is free data, I’m happy to look at and use the same numbers if you have a link.

Ultimately this has turned into a whole different argument, a "should they? v. why did they?" thing but fundamentally speaking I am just in disagreement on the whole “playing for one run” thing.

I understand that was likely Francona’s mindset last night, but it’s a flawed mindset to me.

1 run lead going into the B9 = 81.8% chance of winning
2 run lead going into the B9 = 92.1% chance of winning
3 run lead going into the B9 = 96.67% chance of winning
(via GregStoll.com)

My personal opinion is that teams should put themselves in position to score as many runs as possible in an inning, regardless of what inning is it and what the score is. Giving away outs without scoring runs is something I just can't get behind in any scenario.

 

[CBBI]

That's not speaking to his argument at all.

You want the probability of scoring at least one run.

Edit: nvm, @EdMonix11 already got it.

Yeah I get it. It's a different argument.

I think the "playing for one run" concept is flawed in and of itself, but I understand that's what Ed was referring to.

 

[Joe Charboneau]

I do not care if you are 25 games out of 1st place, any night you beat the Red Sox in that fashion, or any fashion really and send those fans home all pissed off is a great, great night.