Impressions of Roenicke so far (part 3)

[homer]

Excessive bunting results in fewer runs scoring. This has been proven by several people. A quick Google search will lead to you the results. If you want to refute, please do so.

 

Sorry it took so long but I did take up your challenge. I found plenty of studies that showed the relationship between runs and bunts. I found none that related to winning more games. I realize more runs are very strongly related to wins. Yet it is not a one to one relationship. There are times when perhaps going for less runs to make sure you get some runs can lead to more wins than sitting back and waiting for more runs at the risk of getting none. That was why we got Carlos Lee for Scotty Po. They wanted to get away form an all or nothing offense. Apparently it worked for the White Sox. I know it was the pitching that they won with. But good pitching is when fewer runs spread out more evenly may win more games than more runs in sporadic fashion.

I am not saying it is so. I am saying it is possible. From what I can find there is nothing more to contradict it than validate it.

So you can't say it worked for the White Sox if the best you can say is that it's possible.

 

I don't dislike ALL bunting. Late in games it's fine to go for one run. But Morgan bunting every time Hart gets a lead off single is just dumb. Especially when you have two of the best power hitters in the league on deck. It's not like Morgan is a big double play threat either.

[Thurston Fluff]

That would go back to this idea of assuming there is a perfect answer or what it may be if there is one. Was it right not to? Maybe but to suggest studies show that specific situation was wrong is not supported by the actual studies nor even the broader concept of sac bunts in general. It is wrong to use broad based studies to decide if a specific situation was correct IMHO.

 

I can understand why you may think that specific move was not the right one. There is room to debate that. Thing is when I did I was told to look it up and I'd find it was clearly the wrong choice.

I did and found out it was not nearly as black and white as suggested. It is not inherently wrong to bunt to score one run. One study even seems to support doing so may have been the right call in that situation. It should be expected of a major league player to be able to successfully bunt. Even with runners crashing in. Hell pitchers routinely do that very thing.

[Thurston Fluff]

So you can't say it worked for the White Sox if the best you can say is that it's possible.

 

I am not the one making claims of universal baseball truths. I am saying there is possibilities to both sides having valid points. To not see that possibility yet decide the competency of the manager anyway is what is wrong. I also see the possibility that there is no single best way to do things. Thus the whole argument of merit based off it is off base. It more preference than substance. I can see why someone who likes the sabre approach would not like him. Liking someone and believing they are incompetent are two separate issues.

 

I can't point you to the original study, but I can point you to a short Brewerfan thread on the article and some discussion at Baseball Think Factory.

 

Thank you Casey. I will definitely look into it. When I find out I'm wrong I'll post my apologies to everyone on this board post haste.http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/ohwell.gif

[pebadger]

If this weren't Green, and just some non-descript journeyman, would we be railing against RR for just "riding the hot hand"?

How is that at all, in any possible way, relevant to this situation?

It has to do with the fact that no matter what RR does, unless it is EXACTLY the move the certain folks think must be made, he is criticized. If he were just "riding the hot hand" he would be criticized for ignoring the big picture in favor of a small sample size. If he were to keep Green on the bench he would be critisized for not playing the best player.

 

I'm happy Green is playing. I wanted him to play a long time ago. But it just seems like in what is looking like the best regular season in the history of the franchise, that folks have to complain about something every single day.

 

 

[Baldkin]

If this weren't Green, and just some non-descript journeyman, would we be railing against RR for just "riding the hot hand"?

How is that at all, in any possible way, relevant to this situation?

It has to do with the fact that no matter what RR does, unless it is EXACTLY the move the certain folks think must be made, he is criticized. If he were just "riding the hot hand" he would be criticized for ignoring the big picture in favor of a small sample size. If he were to keep Green on the bench he would be critisized for not playing the best player.

 

I'm happy Green is playing. I wanted him to play a long time ago. But it just seems like in what is looking like the best regular season in the history of the franchise, that folks have to complain about something every single day.

 

These folks have an eye to the playoffs, where every AB and every choice is magnified. These folks want the team to have the best possible shot at the World Series. These folks can't help but wonder where the team would be if RR would've played matchups, put his players in better positions earlier in the season. These folks can't help but worry that McGehee and Betancourt will be hitting 5-6 in a playoff game.

[Raw Biz]

It should be expected of a major league player to be able to successfully bunt. Even with runners crashing in. Hell pitchers routinely do that very thing.

As it's been explained many times, "should" and "can" are two different things. Yuni can't bunt. He may have done so in the past but just watching his technique, you can tell he is a terrible bunter. And no, you do not bunt when the corners are crashing like St. Louis was. Both players were practically on top of the plate. With a force at 3rd, the bunt would have to be near-perfect, instead of just in play. Even if you think bunting on the 1st pitch and with Yuni is the right call, I don't know how any knowledgeable baseball fan can say you still bunt with Yuni with the corners crashing there.

[Thurston Fluff]

He may have done so in the past but just watching his technique, you can tell he is a terrible bunter.

 

He's bunted once this season and you can tell what his technique is from that? You should be a scout. You could watch a guy swing the bat once and tell if he is capable of ever hitting.

 

And no, you do not bunt when the corners are crashing like St. Louis was. Both players were practically on top of the plate.

 

why were the corners crashing in? Because the bunt was the best way to score and they sold out to stop it. I also wonder how Ron was supposed to know the Cards were going to crash in when he called for the bunt. Usually the corners don't start to do so until well after the the signs from the dugout are relayed. Do you think Tony told Ron before he bunted that he was going to crash in like that? Or do you think Ron should send signs when the pitcher starts to throw?

 

Even if you think bunting on the 1st pitch and with Yuni is the right call, I don't know how any knowledgeable baseball fan can say you still bunt with Yuni with the corners crashing there.

 

Thus if I disagree I'm not a knowledgeable baseball fan. I suppose nobody ever changed strategies ever between one pitch and another in your world knowledgeable of baseball fans. Just because they did so the first pitch doesn't mean they do so on the second. No more than batters bunt every time on the second pitch when they did on the first. The simple fact is he made a call that went with the numbers, something that even the most knowledgeable fans here didn't realize, and it didn't work because the other team made the right call in that situation. That's the randomness of baseball not bad managing.

 

These folks have an eye to the playoffs, where every AB and every choice is magnified. These folks want the team to have the best possible shot at the World Series. These folks can't help but wonder where the team would be if RR would've played matchups, put his players in better positions earlier in the season. These folks can't help but worry that McGehee and Betancourt will be hitting 5-6 in a playoff game.

 

As the whole -non-pitcher sac bunts are always bad- thing shows those same folks have been wrong on occasions as well. I think I'll just sit back and trust him to know his job better than we do. I'm sure it won't be Ron that cost us a world series.

[Baldkin]

By the time the pitch was thrown Pujols was 30 feet from home plate.

After the first pitch, if you need to, call time, and tell Yuni "Hey, if they are crashing before the pitch, you can swing away" Not that hard to do.

 

Yes, and I'm sure you'll blame Kameron Loe for not getting out Chase Utley & Ryan Howard in a game, instead of blaming RR for putting Loe in that position.

[DougJones43]

why were the corners crashing in? Because the bunt was the best way to score and they sold out to stop it. I also wonder how Ron was supposed to know the Cards were going to crash in when he called for the bunt. Usually the corners don't start to do so until well after the the signs from the dugout are relayed. Do you think Tony told Ron before he bunted that he was going to crash in like that? Or do you think Ron should send signs when the pitcher starts to throw?

Were you even watching the game? The corner infielders were crashing in on a previous pitch in the at-bat. So, the Cardinals had tipped their hand. Roenicke had an opportunity to see exactly what the Cards were doing and adjust. But Roenicke is so predictable that TLR knew he could just do it again and that no adjustment would be made on the Brewers part.

 

Even if you think bunting is a good move there, you have to adjust based on what your opponent is doing as well as what your player is good at. One thing Yuni is actually decent at is making contact with the ball, so just tell him to swing away on a slash play if the infield crashes in (again), and it's going to be a lot easier for any ball in play to find a hole.

[Raw Biz]

why were the corners crashing in? Because the bunt was the best way to score and they sold out to stop it. I also wonder how Ron was supposed to know the Cards were going to crash in when he called for the bunt. Usually the corners don't start to do so until well after the the signs from the dugout are relayed. Do you think Tony told Ron before he bunted that he was going to crash in like that? Or do you think Ron should send signs when the pitcher starts to throw?

Even if you think bunting is a good move there, you have to adjust based on what your opponent is doing as well as what your player is good at. One thing Yuni is actually decent at is making contact with the ball, so just tell him to swing away on a slash play if the infield crashes in (again), and it's going to be a lot easier for any ball in play to find a hole.

This is what I was trying to say. Even if you think bunting is the right call at the beginning of the AB, once you see them crashing in like that, you call the bunt off.

As for the Yuni technique thing, I personally haven't seen him bunt before but Roenicke probably has in batting practice (assuming most players square around a couple of times before swinging away). So I was assuming that Roenicke has seen him before and that Yuni used the same technique during BP that he showed during that game. So yes, if Roenicke saw that technique out of Yuni in BP, he should know that he is going to be a terrible bunter, at least in that situation where the bunt needed to be perfect.

 

[Thurston Fluff]

Were you even watching the game? The corner infielders were crashing in on a previous pitch in the at-bat.

 

Just because they did so the first pitch doesn't mean they do so on the second. No more than batters bunt every time on the second pitch when they did on the first.

 

One thing Yuni is actually decent at is making contact with the ball, so just tell him to swing away on a slash play if the infield crashes in (again), and it's going to be a lot easier for any ball in play to find a hole.

 

Do you really think telling any batter to look at something other than the pitcher and the ball is a good way to increase the odds of success? So far the criticism of that play started with it's not a good idea to do it at all. Then when it appeared to not be such a bad call it was still bad because of the way the defense was playing on the first pitch. When I point out what happens on the first pitch has no relationship to what they may do on the second it changes once again to Ron should go out tell the batter to sac bunt if they stay but but keep an eye out in case they don't then change your swing while the pitcher is throwing to swing away. Yet make sure while you're looking at the first and/or third baseman to get a good enough look at the pitch to make enough contract to get it over their heads. You guys are the ones saying it's too much to ask him to put down a bunt but keeping an eye out for defenders while the pitch is coming and deciding in that split second whether to bun tor swing away is the smart move? All this for a guy who gets on base at a sub .300 clip.

 

So I was assuming that Roenicke has seen him before and that Yuni used

the same technique during BP that he showed during that game.

 

That is a rather large assumption isn't it? Why one Earth would you assume Ron did so? The only thing I can think of is you started with the premise that Ron is stupid and spun your tale from there.

[DougJones43]

Do you really think telling any batter to look at something other than the pitcher and the ball is a good way to increase the odds of success?...Ron should go out tell the batter to sac bunt if they stay but but keep an eye out in case they don't then change your swing while the pitcher is throwing to swing away. Yet make sure while you're looking at the first and/or third baseman to get a good enough look at the pitch to make enough contract to get it over their heads.

It's called the slash play. Players (even pitchers) do it successfully all the time. It's a way to adjust to what the defense is doing, and keep them honest.

 

Predictability is a huge disadvantage in any sport, and unfortunately Roenicke is stubborn and extremely predictable.

[Raw Biz]

Were you even watching the game? The corner infielders were crashing in on a previous pitch in the at-bat.

 

Just because they did so the first pitch doesn't mean they do so on the second. No more than batters bunt every time on the second pitch when they did on the first.

 

One thing Yuni is actually decent at is making contact with the ball, so just tell him to swing away on a slash play if the infield crashes in (again), and it's going to be a lot easier for any ball in play to find a hole.

 

Do you really think telling any batter to look at something other than the pitcher and the ball is a good way to increase the odds of success? So far the criticism of that play started with it's not a good idea to do it at all. Then when it appeared to not be such a bad call it was still bad because of the way the defense was playing on the first pitch. When I point out what happens on the first pitch has no relationship to what they may do on the second it changes once again to Ron should go out tell the batter to sac bunt if they stay but but keep an eye out in case they don't then change your swing while the pitcher is throwing to swing away. Yet make sure while you're looking at the first and/or third baseman to get a good enough look at the pitch to make enough contract to get it over their heads. You guys are the ones saying it's too much to ask him to put down a bunt but keeping an eye out for defenders while the pitch is coming and deciding in that split second whether to bun tor swing away is the smart move? All this for a guy who gets on base at a sub .300 clip.

 

So I was assuming that Roenicke has seen him before and that Yuni used

the same technique during BP that he showed during that game.

 

That is a rather large assumption isn't it? Why one Earth would you assume Ron did so? The only thing I can think of is you started with the premise that Ron is stupid and spun your tale from there.

You are really overcomplicating things here. First, people still think it was bad to bunt in the first place, especially with Yuni. But, if you are going to bunt there, you have to call it off once you see the corners crashing in. Even if they don't crash in and Yuni swings away, they would be doing exactly what most here thought was the right call anyway.

Second, pitchers do the slash play all the time. I'm sure the corners were crashing once they saw Yuni square. So have him square around and then pull back and swing away (if you want to go that route). Personally, I would've just had him swing away from the beginning. If they crash, it opens more holes, if they don't, no big deal.

Finally, why is it a large assumption to think that the manager has watched one of his players take BP at least this season? Why would a player bunt one way (the correct way) in BP and then just decide to use some awful technique in an actual game? No I didn't start with presumption that Ron is stupid. I was thinking that Roenicke has seen Yuni bunt before and figured he could at least put the ball in play (which he did). Unfortunately, Yuni needed to do more than put it in play. He needed to put it in the perfect spot. So my presumption is that Roenicke doesn't switch strategies once he decides on what he wants to do (and regardless of the situation).

 

[Thurston Fluff]

It's called the slash play. Players (even pitchers) do it successfully all the time. It's a way to adjust to what the defense is doing, and keep them honest.

 

Some players do the slash play sometimes. I think you have it backwards though. I think they do so to make the defense adjust not to adjust to the defense. They usually start with the intention that they are going to slash and get the corners to come in for a bunt by showing bunt. It is hard enough for competent hitters to hit a major league pitcher let alone decide which swing to use as it's being pitched. Doing so while looking at something other than the pitcher even harder. Much harder than laying down a sac bunt even with the corners crashing in.

 

First, people still think it was bad to bunt in the first place, especially with Yuni.

 

People are free to think what they want. I wanted to know if there was a basis for that. I was told why it was a bad idea and to look it up so I did. What I found seemed to indicate Ron had it correct. If you can't move off the first supposition when evidence shows you might be wrong then I don't know what to say. If you want to debate the veracity of study or my understanding of it then please do.

 

Finally, why is it a large assumption to think that the manager has watched one of his players take BP at least this season?

 

Nice try. The assumption is that Yuni does the same thing is practice and Ron knew that yet did what he did. You have no clue as to what he does or what Ron saw. Yet you made the assumption that Yuni always shows bad technique in bunting from seeing him do it once and Ron knew such. If you can't accept you made way to many assumptions to have merit then there is little point in continuing this discussion. All you will do is make up something else using increasingly wild assumptions based on little more than your dislike of the manager.

[thebruce44]

Were you even watching the game? The corner infielders were crashing in on a previous pitch in the at-bat.

 

Just because they did so the first pitch doesn't mean they do so on the second. No more than batters bunt every time on the second pitch when they did on the first.

So I take this as an admiration that you weren't actually watching the game since you didn't answer the question and because of how it was so painfully obvious they were going to crash in.

[NievesNoNO]

It has to do with the fact that no matter what RR does, unless it is EXACTLY the move the certain folks think must be made, he is criticized. If he were just "riding the hot hand" he would be criticized for ignoring the big picture in favor of a small sample size. If he were to keep Green on the bench he would be critisized for not playing the best player.

I agree. I'm not sure what people want, the Brewers do have the 4th best record in baseball, so I guess I'll take an incompetent manager all the time. Roenicke didn't become a big league manager by some stroke of luck and by being an idiot as some would believe. People can say all they want about not putting the team in the best position to win but there isn't really any proof that he isn't putting them in the best position to win, is there? At this point in the season if you're going to make some changes on the field you better make sure that those changes result in an improvement of the bottom line..Wins. Even if statistically and talent wise they should improve the team, if the team doesn't play better as a whole because of those changes I think Roenicke would face some criticism from the team. I'm O.K. with taking some time integrating Green into the lineup. I'm also just fine with the way Roenicke uses bunting, base running, etc. Perhaps they've built something of an identity with Roenicke's style of play.

[Raw Biz]

Finally, why is it a large assumption to think that the manager has watched one of his players take BP at least this season?

 

Nice try. The assumption is that Yuni does the same thing is practice and Ron knew that yet did what he did. You have no clue as to what he does or what Ron saw. Yet you made the assumption that Yuni always shows bad technique in bunting from seeing him do it once and Ron knew such. If you can't accept you made way to many assumptions to have merit then there is little point in continuing this discussion. All you will do is make up something else using increasingly wild assumptions based on little more than your dislike of the manager.

Obviously everything that happens in BP is an assumption because none of us are there. So you can quit with the "assumption" in every sentence. Explain to me though what reason Yuni would have to show good technique in bunts in BP (i.e. not wrapping your entire hand around the bat, keeping the barrel above the handle, etc.) and then use bad technique in a game (wrapping hand around the bat, bunting pitches above the starting level of the barrel, not keeping the bat at consistent incline, etc). I don't think there is a reason that he would do so, therefore I don't think it is a big assumption (there's that magic word) that Yuni would show the same technique in BP that he used in games.

Like I said, I obviously don't know what Roenicke has seen. But I do know that most major league managers have seen their players take BP at some point during the season. And if (notice I said "if", just like I did in my post earlier) Roenicke has seen him bunt, chances are Yuni's in-game technique is no different than his BP technique, so Roenicke SHOULD know that in a situation where you need a perfect bunt (i.e. runners on 1st and 2nd, no outs, corner's crashing), Yuni is not the guy and should just swing away (since he usually makes contact, the chances increase that he would find a hole).

 

[Raw Biz]

It has to do with the fact that no matter what RR does, unless it is EXACTLY the move the certain folks think must be made, he is criticized. If he were just "riding the hot hand" he would be criticized for ignoring the big picture in favor of a small sample size. If he were to keep Green on the bench he would be critisized for not playing the best player.

I agree. I'm not sure what people want, the Brewers do have the 4th best record in baseball, so I guess I'll take an incompetent manager all the time. Roenicke didn't become a big league manager by some stroke of luck and by being an idiot as some would believe. People can say all they want about not putting the team in the best position to win but there isn't really any proof that he isn't putting them in the best position to win, is there? At this point in the season if you're going to make some changes on the field you better make sure that those changes result in an improvement of the bottom line..Wins. Even if statistically and talent wise they should improve the team, if the team doesn't play better as a whole because of those changes I think Roenicke would face some criticism from the team. I'm O.K. with taking some time integrating Green into the lineup. I'm also just fine with the way Roenicke uses bunting, base running, etc. Perhaps they've built something of an identity with Roenicke's style of play.

As has been pointed out, the Brewers record is a little misleading. I don't have the exact numbers but I believe since the all-star break or whenever they started that run, they are only 5-7 or so against teams above .500. They are something like 27-5 against teams under .500. Obviously you have to beat the bad teams but you also have to beat some of the good teams. Managing mistakes probably don't matter as much against the lesser teams but against the good ones, you can't afford them. So I think you need to put your best team on the field against the good teams and make the best in-game decisions, regardless of whether it's something that has worked in the past (i.e. squeeze). I will admit that Roenicke has started to put a better team out there (starting Green) but there are still some improvements that could be made (Yuni and McGehee should be dropped in the order).

[NievesNoNO]

As has been pointed out, the Brewers record is a little misleading. I don't have the exact numbers but I believe since the all-star break or whenever they started that run, they are only 5-7 or so against teams above .500. They are something like 27-5 against teams under .500. Obviously you have to beat the bad teams but you also have to beat some of the good teams. Managing mistakes probably don't matter as much against the lesser teams but against the good ones, you can't afford them. So I think you need to put your best team on the field against the good teams and make the best in-game decisions, regardless of whether it's something that has worked in the past (i.e. squeeze). I will admit that Roenicke has started to put a better team out there (starting Green) but there are still some improvements that could be made (Yuni and McGehee should be dropped in the order).

I'll agree there's always room to improve and I've seen Roenicke make some gradual changes as the season has progressed which I think separates him from some of the more recent Brewer managers. Yes, Yuni and McGehee should be dropped in the order. I'm looking forward to the Phillies series as it should be a fair indication of where we stand against the best. I'm actually slightly less concerned about the final results given our large division lead and more interested how each game plays out. Too many times in recent memory in a big series against a big opponent the team has appeared to fold under the pressure (or maybe they were just that much inferior). Anyway, different topic I guess.

[Thurston Fluff]

Obviously everything that happens in BP is an assumption because none of us are there. So you can quit with the "assumption" in every sentence.

 

You made the assumption that Yuni was a bad bunter by watching him once. You then went ahead and assumed he must do that all the time and Ron knew that. If you make the assumptions based off of nothing more than your preconceived notions and one AB don't expect me to stop telling you it is wrong to do. Why not just admit you over stated what you knew instead of telling me to stop pointing out that you did?

 

Explain to me though what reason Yuni would have to show good technique in bunts in BP (i.e. not wrapping your entire hand around the bat, keeping the barrel above the handle, etc.) and then use bad technique in a game (wrapping hand around the bat, bunting pitches above the starting level of the barrel, not keeping the bat at consistent incline, etc). I don't think there is a reason that he would do so, therefore I don't think it is a big assumption (there's that magic word) that Yuni would show the same technique in BP that he used in games.

 

What you believe is he saw a player bunt in BP and realized he sucks then thought to himself I think I'll have him try it in a game. That is pure conjecture on your part. Quite frankly it's also a little unbelievable. If you want to convince anyone who hasn't made up their minds then you need to come with something a little more believable.

 

So I take this as an admiration that you weren't actually watching the game since you didn't answer the question and because of how it was so painfully obvious they were going to crash in.

 

Wow. That is an impressive reach. Too bad it's nothing close to the truth. That in a nutshell is what you seem to miss. I didn't address one of your questions and you draw a false conclusion. It's possible that I just missed it or forgot about it or even didn't think it was worthy of a response. You're doing the same thing with regard to judging RRR on that play. You are seeing what you want to see but totally ignoring any factors that do not fit your preconceived notion of what is correct to do there.

 

To answer your question yes I did watch the game. Was it painfully obvious? After the fact sure. To say so before it played out impossible to know. All you can do is make an educated guess. The situation dictated one of several options that could be employed by the defense. None of them obvious until they actually happen. What I saw was the possibility that they could crash in. I also saw the possibility that they would fake crashing in then pull back. I also saw the possibility that they were not going to crash in at all after the first attempt. There was also the possibility they would crash in at third and not first or vice versa. To have known for sure which option is going to happen would require better mind reading skills than I have. They didn't show anything to what their intentions were until well after the manager called the sac bunt already. The fact they did it on the first pitch has nothing, nada, zip, zilcho to do with what they may do one the second pitch. If you say odds are they would do what they did fine. I say the odds are also better that they would score a run by doing what they did than if they had him swing away. That was what the study found anyway. So it appears you are simply wrong on what gave us the best chance to score there. Unless you assume the study simply forgot to calculate that obvious strategy defenses play into it's study I guess.

[Raw Biz]

http://disciplesofuecker.com/the-wheel-play-sinks-milwaukee/

This article sums up my feelings on that play. It also seems like everyone but backupcatchers can tell Yuni is a terrible bunter. If you see a guy square around more than once in 1 AB with his entire hand wrapped around the bat, that's probably all you need to tell that his bunting mechanics are terrible. Plus, Roenicke even said Counsell was a better bunter but didn't want to use him because he didn't want Green to have to bat in a big situation (even though he used Counsell as a pinch runner anyway). And we haven't even mentioned in this whole thing that a slow runner was on 2nd (Prince), meaning the bunt had to be even more perfect.

[Raw Biz]

http://i1127.photobucket.com/albums/l638/rawbecht/yunibunt.jpg

 

 

This picture is from May 1st. Notice how Yuni's right hand is wrapped completely around the bat, rather than just using the fingertips. Notice too how far the barrel is below the handle of the bat. Proper bunting technique says to keep the barrel above the handle so as to not pop up the bunt. Even Schroeder points that out in broadcasts. Finally, notice how bad of a position his legs are in. I'm not sure if this was supposed to be a sac or for a hit but either way, you want to bend your knees when you bunt, especially if the pitch is low. And if this was supposed to be a sac (I doubt Yuni would try to bunt for a hit), he should have squared up a little more.

http://i1127.photobucket.com/albums/l638/rawbecht/yunibunt2.jpg?t=1315520398

This is from a couple of days before the Cardinal's game. Notice again how the right hand is wrapped completely around the bat. The barrel is only slightly below the handle here but the technique is still all wrong.

http://i1127.photobucket.com/albums/l638/rawbecht/yunibunt3.jpg

From his days in Seattle. At least his knees are slightly bent here.

[Thurston Fluff]

This article sums up my feelings on that play. It also seems like everyone but backupcatchers can tell Yuni is a terrible bunter.

 

You assumed supporting the decision to have him bunt and disagreeing the one time you saw him bunt qualified you to make that assessment means I think he was good. That is once again reading something in there that isn't. That means I thought a bad hitter's best chance to help score a run is to sac bunt. Major difference. The very place you use a sac bunt is when you have a bad hitter. Maybe that is where we are missing each other. Since he can't bunt well you assume hitting is better there. That is the exact opposite of what the statistical analysis says of the situation. The really bad hitters should bunt more often when playing for one run. It's still more likely to succeed in sac bunting than getting a hit for someone who can't get on base above a 30 % clip regardless of how bad of a bunter he is.

 

The complaint was it was obvious he should have hit in that situation. Argue all you want but objective measured research said it wasn't obvious, In fact it may have been wrong to hit there. You say he can't bunt well and Ron should have known that. Well he can't hit either and Ron knows that. He had reasons for not replacing the hitter. If you disagree with his reasoning for leaving Yuni in there then focus on that not the choice to bunt.

 

As far as replacing Yuni there I would have if I needed to win that game. If it was one of many there are things that may effect my decision. Things like how to get a rookie good spots to play in might then play into it more. What it does for the future of Green or if it helps win more games later this season I have no idea. Handling players seem to be Ron's strong suit. I'll leave it at that.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Well he can't hit either and Ron knows that.

That's actually debatable, given some of Roenicke's comments on Yuni B. And no, I don't expect RRR to throw Yuni "under the bus" but at the same time, there's comments (and the fact he continually has batted him 6th) that would at least make it arguable that Roenicke knows that Yuni is a terrible hitter.

[logan82]

Handling players seem to be Ron's strong suit.

Correction, handling players' egos seem to be Ron's strong suit. He seems to know very little about judging and evaluating player talent outside of obvious stars.