Open Thread: 2006 NLCS, Game 7

If it makes you feel better to continue to demonstrate this, be my guest.  I obviously can't stop you (although I tried).

I was merely trying to initiate what I thought could be a potentially interesting discussion of the strategy employed in the bottom of the 9th inning of tonight's 7th game of the NLCS.

Let me first point out to you that I am not only aware of the arguments against bunting, I have studied the expected runs table and can hold a fairly intelligent conversation as to the value and/or weaknesses of those studies and the reasons why they do not definitively settle the issue.  I am not ignorant of them at all, and they most assuredly are not without controversy.  I just wasn't in the mood to get into a discussion of them tonight.  I just wanted to talk about the game, which, after all is what this diary was about.

In short, the utility of the sacrifice bunt is affected by a myriad of factors that are not and cannot be accounted for in the ERTs.

It is generally realized, even by Bill James and the folks at Baseball Prospectus, that the ERTs only serve to analyze baseball strategies in general and not specific situations.

Two of the most important factors are the fact that the tables lump both successful and non-successful sacrifices into one category and the fact that it does not take into account the variable quality of the hitters who come to bat following the sacrifice attempt.  They use league averages that do not break down individual components that will effect whether a run gets scored or not.

All of these things were factors in the 9th inning situation last night.  1) The Mets had sitting on the bench someone who may be the best bunter in the NL.  The probability that he would successfully execute the sacrifice is extremely high.  2)  If the sacrifice had been called, then the lead off hitter, followed by the 2, 3 & 4 hitters were coming up, all of which increases the chances scoring over league averages.

Another issue with the ERTs are that they only account for the probability that a run will be scored.  In the game last night, the Mets needed to score two runs in the 9th or the game would be over.  An ERT that showed the probability of scoring two runs with men on first and second with no outs versus second and third with one out would have to be used, but it would still lack the data from this specific scenario.

So, while I would be delighted to discuss the strategy of the sacrifice bunt in general with you sometime, it was this specific circumstance that I was interested in this night.

But, I would caution you that unlike some, I do not accept sabremetric conclusions without question.  Unfortunately, I have a statistical background in addition to my interest in sports and I can see the holes in some of these conclusions pretty quickly.

In the meantime, if you are interested in learning more about the deficiences of the ERTs that formed the basis of the anti-sacrifice bunt articles on Baseball Prospectus, try this:
 http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2006/07/empirical_analy_1.php