Bunting to break up a no hitter

[MrTPlush]

Alright this was technically the minors, but it has happened at the MLB level too. I will attach a link that has some MLB player opinions. Essentially the guy had a no-hitter in the 9th (one out) and a guy bunted with his team down 3-0.

 

Personally with the game that close I think it is a legit way to get someone on and start a rally. One of the MLB guys said, "The goal is to win, not break up a no-hitter." That is where I stand on it. If the game is still realistically within reach then go for it. However, to go up there and bunt down by 5+...well, I think that really speaks to the kind of person you are because it is pretty clear you mind is on breaking up the no-hitter and not winning. Along with the fact you are basically admitting you suck and the only way you are going to get a hit is by hoping you can get a bunt down...real impressive.

 

Scooter Gennett had the all-time quote on this situation and honestly maybe he is right :

 

I think that guy was batting .176 or something like that, so, I mean, maybe that’s all he could do was bunt. But it's definitely not a good look.

 

https://www.mlb.com/news/bunting-to-break-up-a-no-hitter-mlb-players-react

[And That]

You should be trying to win until the game is over. A great way to prolong the game is to get on base. If the infielders are playing back, a great way to get on base can be to bunt. No problem with it.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

It's definitely score related. Nobody can say it isn't lame as hell to do that down 8-0. But 3-0? That's reasonable.

[owbc]

IMO the whole bunt thing became irrelevant after defensive shifting took off...it's fair game if you can get it down.

 

The minor league thing was a non-story, afterwards the players on both sides said no offense was taken.

[young guns]

Pretty ridiculous to clear the benches and then say no offense was taken. SOMEBODY, at least, was offended enough to start jawing after the game which resulted in the benches clearing. Plus it was a combined no hitter with them on the third pitcher.

[trwi7]

A batter's job is to get on base. Who cares how he does it? If he's only batting .176 shouldn't you be expecting a bunt or something like that?

[KeithStone53151]

Yeah tend to agree, score matters. Probably 5 or 6 runs would be the threshold where it starts to become lame. 0-3 runs it is 100% reasonable to bunt your way one, that game isn't even close to over.

[645]

Throwing a No Hitter is about making the plays without allowing a Hit and what the hitter does don't mather because does the pitcher deserve a no hitter if the bunt would work.

[jerichoholicninja]

There are enough "unwritten rules" for guys to get their panties in a twist over. This is one that needs to go.

 

However, if you're down 8-0 but your team has a hit are you going to bunt? Almost 99.9% no. So if you do it down 8-0 when you're being no hit you're clearly doing it just to break up the no-hitter. I know that's not what happened here and I'm not even sure what I'm trying to say but you shouldn't be changing your offensive approach simply because your team doesn't have a hit.

[pacopete4]

There are enough "unwritten rules" for guys to get their panties in a twist over. This is one that needs to go.

 

However, if you're down 8-0 but your team has a hit are you going to bunt? Almost 99.9% no. So if you do it down 8-0 when you're being no hit you're clearly doing it just to break up the no-hitter. I know that's not what happened here and I'm not even sure what I'm trying to say but you shouldn't be changing your offensive approach simply because your team doesn't have a hit.

 

Perfectly said.

[nodakfan17]

The game in question was also a combined no-hitter.

 

As others have said, it was only 3-0. The game was still in reach. You do what you can to get on base. I have no problem with it.

[MVP2110]

I have an issue with it. I think it's ****** to do. Even in a one run game. It's like taking a charge in basketball, it can be good strategy but your only doing that because you can't beat the pitcher. If there isn't a no hitter on the line go for it. But I wouldn't want the Brewers to do it in the ninth to break up the no hitter

[82brewcrew82]

I'd do it in a heart beat. To my knowledge the responsibility of the team is to do everything you can to win the game, no?

[MrTPlush]

Two things to add:

 

I found out this no-hitter was a combined no-hitter from an article...which to me is not that incredibly impressive. I’m surprised the team got so upset over it.

 

Secondly, we assume this player was “trying to win”. However, I am willing to bet the only thing on his mind was breaking up the no-hitter. So does that change it? If the player says “I was just trying to break up the no-hitter” then are they just a douche?

[BillScottCanRake]

I am hoping someone can help me out. What is it about trying to break up a no hitter, or bunting to do so, that is wrong? I thought baseball was a competitive endeavor where the defensive team attempts to prevent the offense from reaching base, while the offensive attempts to reach base and score as often as they can. The game only ends when one team has scored more than the other and the losing team has recorded at least 27 outs.

 

If a pitcher (or team) has a no hitter after 24 outs, why should an offense a) not do anything they would normally do in the first 8 innings? and b) restrict themselves to only specific strategies? To be that seems to go against the whole competitive aspect of the game.

 

The thing I dont get is why a bunt single in the third is OK but why it isn't in the 9th? Does this also mean a pull hitter who 27-hoppers one the opposite way is "just" trying to break up a no hitter?

 

I understand realistically games are decided prior to the 9th inning, but given the lack of a clock in baseball and ts competitive nature, bunt away. Or lean into a pitch. It is up to the pitcher and the other 8 guys to earn a no hitter.

[OldHeidelberg]

I don't want the Brewers to get no hit, whatever it takes to break it up is fine with me. Imagine if it was against the Cardinals or Cubs and Braun lays down a bunt with 2 outs in the 9th to break it up. That would be so sweet!

[Outlander]

Two things to add:

 

I found out this no-hitter was a combined no-hitter from an article...which to me is not that incredibly impressive. I’m surprised the team got so upset over it.

 

Secondly, we assume this player was “trying to win”. However, I am willing to bet the only thing on his mind was breaking up the no-hitter. So does that change it? If the player says “I was just trying to break up the no-hitter” then are they just a douche?

It doesn't matter what he says, his job is to get on base. He is a bad hitter and it may have been his best shot at getting on base plus it brought the tying run on deck. Probably worse that anybody got upset about losing a combined no hitter.

[jerichoholicninja]

I am hoping someone can help me out. What is it about trying to break up a no hitter, or bunting to do so, that is wrong?

 

Because about a century ago someone decided it was wrong and therefore it was "un"-written in stone and so shall ever be.

[MVP2110]

I am hoping someone can help me out. What is it about trying to break up a no hitter, or bunting to do so, that is wrong? I thought baseball was a competitive endeavor where the defensive team attempts to prevent the offense from reaching base, while the offensive attempts to reach base and score as often as they can. The game only ends when one team has scored more than the other and the losing team has recorded at least 27 outs.

 

If a pitcher (or team) has a no hitter after 24 outs, why should an offense a) not do anything they would normally do in the first 8 innings? and b) restrict themselves to only specific strategies? To be that seems to go against the whole competitive aspect of the game.

 

The thing I dont get is why a bunt single in the third is OK but why it isn't in the 9th? Does this also mean a pull hitter who 27-hoppers one the opposite way is "just" trying to break up a no hitter?

 

I understand realistically games are decided prior to the 9th inning, but given the lack of a clock in baseball and ts competitive nature, bunt away. Or lean into a pitch. It is up to the pitcher and the other 8 guys to earn a no hitter.

 

Because to me it's cheap, again I equate it to taking a charge in basketball as a way to defend like you see teams do to giannis all the time or what the entire Wisconsin badger team does. Is it good strategy, sure, but it's still cheap imo. I wouldn't want the Brewers to break up a no hitter just like I wouldn't want to win on a missed call by a ref or ump

[FVBrewerFan]

Sorry, but I'm missing how there's any comparison between bunting to break up a no-hitter and taking a charge in basketball. Is blocking a shot or rebounding cheap too?

[wallus]

Unwritten rules are stupid and a combined no hitter is not that special.

[MVP2110]

Sorry, but I'm missing how there's any comparison between bunting to break up a no-hitter and taking a charge in basketball. Is blocking a shot or rebounding cheap too?

 

Taking a charge itself isn't cheap, but you see it all the time when players "guard" giannis. They aren't good enough to stop him so they resort to trying to draw the charge as a way to defend. In this instance, your saying, I'm not good enough to hit off this guy so instead I'm going to try and place a bunt. Both are good strategy but both are also cheap plays

[CheeseheadInQC]

Taking a charge itself isn't cheap, but you see it all the time when players "guard" giannis. They aren't good enough to stop him so they resort to trying to draw the charge as a way to defend. In this instance, your saying, I'm not good enough to hit off this guy so instead I'm going to try and place a bunt. Both are good strategy but both are also cheap plays

 

I'm curious to know what kind of charge you're talking about. It it is a help defender, that means someone is open. If it is the on ball defender, that means you haven't actually beaten your man if he is still between you and the hoop, and if you're talking about the plant and fall down on the push off, they have to be pretty certain that the guy is going to push off (otherwise planting looks really foolish), probably because he's been getting away with it because the officials aren't calling it unless the defender falls down (although admittedly there has seemed to be some degree of improvement in this in recent years).

 

As to bunting, as others have said if it's a reasonably close game, get on base however you can. If it isn't close, I guess my question is, was the team shifting? I have no problem with shifting, but doing so you accept the risk that a team is going to try to bunt against it. If you employ a strategy that tips the scales in your favor but expect the other team to abide by an unwritten rule that negates the potential counter to it, did the pitcher "earn" the no-hitter.

[MVP2110]

Taking a charge itself isn't cheap, but you see it all the time when players "guard" giannis. They aren't good enough to stop him so they resort to trying to draw the charge as a way to defend. In this instance, your saying, I'm not good enough to hit off this guy so instead I'm going to try and place a bunt. Both are good strategy but both are also cheap plays

 

I'm curious to know what kind of charge you're talking about. It it is a help defender, that means someone is open. If it is the on ball defender, that means you haven't actually beaten your man if he is still between you and the hoop, and if you're talking about the plant and fall down on the push off, they have to be pretty certain that the guy is going to push off (otherwise planting looks really foolish), probably because he's been getting away with it because the officials aren't calling it unless the defender falls down (although admittedly there has seemed to be some degree of improvement in this in recent years).

 

As to bunting, as others have said if it's a reasonably close game, get on base however you can. If it isn't close, I guess my question is, was the team shifting? I have no problem with shifting, but doing so you accept the risk that a team is going to try to bunt against it. If you employ a strategy that tips the scales in your favor but expect the other team to abide by an unwritten rule that negates the potential counter to it, did the pitcher "earn" the no-hitter.

 

I'm talking about a one on one defender where instead of being able to stay in front of you the second there is contract between the two of you, you fall down and draw the charge. You see it all the time when players attempt to guard giannis. Brad Davison of Wisconsin is also known for this and even though it's my team and it's good strategy I find it cheap and not satisfactory as a fan. If you feel different that's fine, we can each have our own opinion.

 

I will agree bunting for a hit in a close game is fine and good strategy. It goes back to what the intent of the player was, in his mind was he just trying to break up the no hitter or was he truly doing what he thought was best to win the game

[GreatNWwi]

Why can't it be both?

 

If you are bunting to break up a no-hitter, then you must think that bunting is your best chance to get on base. If you utilize your best chance to get on base then you are doing your best to help your team win.

 

I don't understand the mental gymnastics required to separate the two.