Master Index of Archived Threads


Delgado, the Shift, and Bunting

Centerfield May 02 2007 10:59 AM

In each of the last two games, Delgado has come up in the late innings with the Mets needing baserunners (he did not represent the tying run). How is it excusable that he is not bunting his way on in those situations? They are GIVING him first base. It's just a step removed from swinging when a team is trying to give you an intentional pass. I think it's time to call out both Carlos and Willie for this. Is it machismo? Lack of awareness of the situation? It's maddening to see a team play then infield that way and watch Delgado line one right into the shift.

Edgy DC May 02 2007 11:02 AM

Well, I've been pushing for this hardest, but two things 1) The ninth inning situation of two nights ago was more bunt-single-worthy than the eighth inning one of last night. 2) Nothing is automatic. Still, I wanted him bunting both times.

Johnny Dickshot May 02 2007 11:04 AM

It may depend on stuff such as "how good is the opposing 3Bman" or what side of the mound does the pitcher fall off to and junk like that. You'd hate to see him thrown out at first on a bunt.

metirish May 02 2007 11:07 AM

That's the thing though,if Delgado tried that and got thrown out at first then we might be asking WTF is he doing,how good a bunter is he anyway?

Centerfield May 02 2007 11:08 AM

If nothing else, even a few attempted bunts makes a team think twice about the shift, and maybe a few successful ones will cause them to abandon it altogether. Willie has talked about how Carlos has hit the ball well, but he's hit it right to a fielder. Well, part of that could be because there are 17 guys standing on that side of the infield. Drop a few down. Take the base when they give it to you. Get off the interstate.

Johnny Dickshot May 02 2007 11:10 AM

I know one place he could put it where fielders aren't there to get it.

Centerfield May 02 2007 11:10 AM

metirish wrote: That's the thing though,if Delgado tried that and got thrown out at first then we might be asking WTF is he doing,how good a bunter is he anyway? With the shift Florida was playing last night, if there is a bunt up the third base line, there is no way he gets thrown out. The third baseman was shaded up the middle. At worst, an unsuccessful bunt is just a foul ball.

Edgy DC May 02 2007 11:12 AM

Agreed. It'll keep them more honest if nothing else. He's 1-1 in attempted bunt singles this year as far as I can recall. The thirdbaseman is a non-issue, as he's behind secondbase these days. If he bunts it hard enough, the pticher become a non-issue also. On astroturf, he'd get a double.

MFS62 May 02 2007 11:24 AM

Johnny Dickshot wrote: I know one place he could put it where fielders aren't there to get it. Agreed. Having him bunt not only means that he isn't doing what he does best - hitting dingers, but if he gets on he clogs the bases. If you pinch run, it burns a player (or two) for later in the game. Over his career, Carlos has been a streak hitter. He's been hitting the ball hard. Let him keep his stroke, don't mess with what he's doing. They'll start falling in, and then he'll go on a tear/ be able to carry the team on his back for a while. Later

Centerfield May 02 2007 11:28 AM

Johnny Dickshot wrote: I know one place he could put it where fielders aren't there to get it. Of course. But in situations like the ninth inning on Monday, a Home Run is no different than a walk, or a bunt single, except that the HR is much much less likely to happen. The idea is to reach base so you can bring the tying run to the plate. Declining to pursue an option that would double or triple your chances of accomplishing this is inexcusable. And what about the manager. Why do we have a bunt sign in the first place? It's astonishing that he will call for so many sacrifice bunts, where the result, even if successful, results in an out, but decline to call for a bunt in a situation where a successful one leads to a batter reaching base.

Edgy DC May 02 2007 11:29 AM

What sort of batting average is worth giving up homers for? At the rate he's hitting them or the rate you expect him to be hitting them? .400? .500? .600? How about in the ninth inning when the tying run is behind him and a single is as good as a homer. Isn't a 40% good enough?

Centerfield May 02 2007 11:38 AM

MFS62 wrote: Agreed. Having him bunt not only means that he isn't doing what he does best - hitting dingers, but if he gets on he clogs the bases. If you pinch run, it burns a player (or two) for later in the game. Over his career, Carlos has been a streak hitter. He's been hitting the ball hard. Let him keep his stroke, don't mess with what he's doing. They'll start falling in, and then he'll go on a tear/ be able to carry the team on his back for a while. Later Forgive my tone here, but that is simply idiotic. In the ninth inning of that game, you want him to reach base. A home run or a bunt single is no different. Are you suggesting that you didn't want him to reach base because it would clog the bases? Even if it meant that the tying run would bat? How would a two run HR help you in a situation where you are down three? As far as messing up his stroke, I don't see how laying down a bunt will "mess with" his swing. The two are not even remotely similar. It's like arguing that Carlos should avoid closing car doors, or refrain from itching his back because it will screw up his stroke. I just don't see it. And as far as "what he does best", I don't want to see ballplayers try to pigeonhole themselves as "home run hitters" or "table setters". I expect them to recognize the best way to maximize their odds of success in a situation and capitalize on it. I expect a manager to be able to do this as well instead of just basing his strategy on where the player hits in the lineup. Be adaptable. Only Sith deal in absolutes.

metirish May 02 2007 11:47 AM

The idea that your clean up hitter should not bunt is so ingrained in baseball speak,I hate it,the point that CF is making is valid,if you need a base runner in the late innings then Delgado bunting is really a good option,probably a hot Wright hitting fifth would help in that decision.

Nymr83 May 02 2007 12:58 PM

i certainly wouldnt force him to bunt if he isn't comfortable, but he did it before and its a good idea in situations where the Mets trail by more than 1 at least

Rockin' Doc May 02 2007 01:03 PM

Does anyone know how capable of a bunter Delgado actually is? Bunting is not all that difficult, but it never ceases to amaze me the number of major league hitters that seem incapable of doing so. I often get the impression that most hitters consider bunting to be beneath them, particularly sluggers. Whatever the reason, it appears that many major league hitters seem to have little idea how to bunt and don't appear to spend much time practicing it. Part of being a smart player is to be willing take advantage of any opportunity that the opposition gives you. Whether that be taking a base when the defense shows indifference to doing so or bunting for a hit when the defense is practically daring you to do so. The best long term answer to the exaggerated shift would be for Delgado to hit the ball to all fields and quit trying to pull everything. He had great success in the 2006 postseason doing that. Hit enough singles and doubles with an occasional home run to left field and left center and the defense will have to start playing him more honestly.

metirish May 02 2007 01:36 PM

Delgado looks like he has been trying to hit the ball to all fields,he's beaten the shift a few times this season doing it

Edgy DC May 02 2007 01:44 PM

I don't know how good a bunter he is. I do know he's bunting 1.000 and has a whole lot of margin for error, and something to gain even in failure. Delgado has beaten the shift, but, with the exception of his bunt, not in the infield. http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/stats/individual_player_hitting_chart.jsp?playerID=113232&statType=1

Vic Sage May 02 2007 04:55 PM

]Does anyone know how capable of a bunter Delgado actually is? Bunting is not all that difficult, but it never ceases to amaze me the number of major league hitters that seem incapable of doing so. Well, that observation seems to argue that bunting is alot more difficult than you think... especially against ML pitchers throwing sinkers, curves, sliders, splits and 97-MPH fastballs up and in. I think bunting is not only more difficult than is being assumed here, it is a specific skill that, unless practiced routinely, is unlikely to be highly developed by guys who hit 30+HRs/yr. And a bad bunter can get his fingers broken. (I saw someone get hurt that way just the other day. who was that?). And we're expecting a non-bunting HR hitter to not just lay one down for a sacrifice, but to push it hard down the 3b line for a hit. He has to hit it hard enough and pull it down the line enough to get past the pitcher on a grass field. Why is that a "gimme"? I don't necessarily buy the "we need a baserunner" argument, either. We don't need a baserunner. we need 2 runs. we can get them any number of ways. While the odds of getting ONE run increase with a man on first/no out, the odds of getting TWO or more runs are significantly better with a man on 2nd or 3rd (or after a homerun). So, i don't think its quite so self-evident, CF, that taking the bat out of the hands of one of our main power guys is a no-brainer. That being said, if Delgado has some moderate level of skill at bunting (which he seems to have), it would be useful for him to try it a few times to try and break the shift and keep the defense honest, thus making him a more effective offensive player overall.

Nymr83 May 02 2007 05:01 PM

]I don't necessarily buy the "we need a baserunner" argument, either. We don't need a baserunner. we need 2 runs. we can get them any number of ways. While the odds of getting ONE run increase with a man on first/no out, the odds of getting TWO or more runs are significantly better with a man on 2nd or 3rd (or after a homerun). So, i don't think its quite so self-evident, CF, that taking the bat out of the hands of one of our main power guys is a no-brainer. in the 9th inning, down by 2+ runs, any baserunner is as good as the potential homerun. go plug it into edgy's win predictor thing, i did it the other night and down by 3 in the bottom of the 9th there was a better chance to win the game with a runner on first (no outs) than there was with nobody on an down by only 2 (the situation after the homer) thats probably sample size (or maybe there really is a "rally-killing" effect from thbases being empty) but at the very least it shows that single = homer in that situation.

attgig May 03 2007 02:25 AM

he bunted earlier this year against the phils http://www.nypost.com/seven/04102007/sports/mets/delgado_solves_phillies_shift_with_a_bunt_single_mets_mark_hale.htm ]"I guess I've done it once, so you can do it," he said. "If the situation, if you're not feeling good at the plate or [there's] a tough lefty or a big run out there and you think you can push it, yeah, I will consider it.'' you can't expect him to do it every single time the shift is on. it's not in his mindset to approach hitting like reyes might with the bunts. Delgado can crush balls, and the pitcher might make a mistake where he may have a run on the board instead of a guy on first from a little bunt. Also, if the pitcher is a decent fielder, he could still get thrown out depending on the placement of the bunt. if he lays a bunt that's a little too close to the pitcher, everyone's going to be yelling at him because he screwed up a bunt. I'd rather see him swing away, but he needs to hit the other way every now and then....

iramets May 03 2007 08:08 AM

Let's suppose the shift were even more extreme than it ever is for Delgado: all four infielders crowded between 1st and 2nd, and the LFer in right-center, the CFer a normal RF, and the RFer playing eight feet from the line. My question, for you "Pul! Pull!! Pull!" diehards, is of course: would this tempt you to change your minds? Seems to me, there's got to be a point at which shifting makes you change your offensive strategy for two separate but very good reasons in themselves: 1) they're giving you a hit, or at least they're adding hundreds of points to your BA and 2) you're motivating them to ease up on the shift, giving you a better field to pull the ball into eventually. An extreme shift is just another form of an IBB: they're giving you first base, with the understanding that you won't hit a long ball to your power. More simply, OBP+, SLG-. Bottom line, what happens to OPS?, and the answer (with anything resembling a 1.000 OBP) is: it goes up, and the offense wins. James once ran a study of what would happen to Babe Ruth's offensive value if the defense simply walked him every time he got up to the plate. Babe Ruth with 0 HR? But with a 1.000 OBP his value went UP and his team looked to score even more runs than with Ruth's regular production. Sounds crazy, but it's just incredibly valuable to have baserunners, and you need to grab them anytime the other side is giving them away, even if it radically changes your game plan..

Edgy DC May 03 2007 09:02 AM

It's particularly valuable to have baserunners down three in the ninth with nobody on or one on. James' experiment wasn't just with a lineup in which Ruth is always walked. It was something like Ruth 1921 in a lineup of hand-picked unproductive players.

iramets May 03 2007 09:10 AM

Edgy DC wrote: It's particularly valuable to have baserunners down three in the ninth with nobody on or one on. True dat. Bottom line being, if it makes sense even including ALL game situations, it's gotta make even more sense in the particular situation we're discussing. If they give to you, don't be greedy. Say "Thank you" and take the damned base.

Nymr83 May 03 2007 11:22 AM

I wasn't even necessarily going to ask him to do it other than down by multiple runs very late in the game, but some people can't even grasp that its a smart idea then so you may need to start small.