http://www.wisjournal.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/Boxscore.aspx?gid=27915867&pbp=0

Bottom of the 5th. Down 6-3. Leadoff single. My pitcher is pinch hit for.

The pinch hitter sac bunts.

My Sac bunt setting is at 3.

My thought is that the sim recognized this as the pitcher's slot when calling for the bunt. I can not think of any other reason to lay a bunt down in that situation.

Anyone else seeing a flaw with the logic?

(To top it off--the runner was thrown out trying to steal 3rd. I do have my base stealing set to aggressive--but to me that should be a situation where the runner would only go with a very aggressive setting--but I can live with that a little more than the sac bunt.)

Hmm. I would hate to think an average bunt setting bunts in that situation. Bad logic in my opinion.

Ouch....after he gets thrown out you hit a 2-run bomb.

I have noticed this flaw in the other extreme. Bottom of the ninth(tied game), runner on 2nd, no one out and my nine whole up and they let the guy swing away just to fround out to third and leave the guy standing on 2nd. It feels like this situation happens to me all the time.

My bunt setting is 4.

I dont know about your situation. Runner in scoring position, I dont know if I give up an out. He likely scores on any hit out of the infield. Dont think I give up the out. With a 5 setting, I could see a bunt in that situation.

If you bunt him over, you have a man on third with one out. Now, almost any ball that is put in play wins you the ball game.

Unless they walk the next hitter to setup the double play. There's a decent chance he moves over without a sacrifice as well. Anything hit to the right side, gets him over.

That is true, anything hit to the right side gets him over. I guess i need to make my bunt setting 5, because IRL im bunting there. I still think that 4 should be sufficient and I agree with you that there is a flaw in the sac bunt logic.

In your case it would have made sense, if they were going to bunt, to leave the P in and save a bench player.

What is your pitcher's pitch count? If your pitcher is due to be lifted anyhow, wouldnt you rather have the better bunt laying down the bunt?

Not sure what pitcher you have in but also seems unnecessary to pinch hit for the pitcher, only to lay down a bunt. Was your best bench bunter the one who came in at least?

If Simmy is running the logic on whether or not to pinch hit before the logic on whether or not to bunt, then this will happen consistently. Might be worthy of a ticket.

In general, I do not understand the sacrifice bunt unless it's the 9th, the lead runner gets on and the 9 spot is due up. Other than that specific situation, the expected runs in any given situation are ALWAYS driven down by a sacrifice bunt.

I've set mine to 1-RARE and it works for me. The bunt, in almost every situation, is a stupid baseball play.

Quote: Originally posted by soxfan121 on 5/06/2010In general, I do not understand the sacrifice bunt unless it's the 9th, the lead runner gets on and the 9 spot is due up. Other than that specific situation, the expected runs in any given situation are ALWAYS driven down by a sacrifice bunt.

I've set mine to 1-RARE and it works for me. The bunt, in almost every situation, is a stupid baseball play.

i'm gonna guess you're an AL fan. well, soxfan clears it up, but still...the paragraph you just wrote says you grew up watching the AL

not saying one is more right than the other. I just know that people who grew up watching the NL wouldn't say that (for the most part)

I sent a ticket before starting the thread. I was perfectly fine with the pitcher coming out for a pitch hitter. He had given up 6 runs in 5 innings. Under no circumstance was I ok with the sac in that situation. The bunter did have a bunt rating of 76. The pitcher 57. I am notching it down.

Quote: Originally posted by dmurphy104 on 5/06/2010I sent a ticket before starting the thread. I was perfectly fine with the pitcher coming out for a pitch hitter. He had given up 6 runs in 5 innings. Under no circumstance was I ok with the sac in that situation. The bunter did have a bunt rating of 76. The pitcher 57. I am notching it down.

i finally looked at the box. i'd be fine with him bunting considering he's a crappy hitter. My guess is that, if a better hitter was up, they'd have swung away. But given that there was a crappy hitter who was a better bunter than you pitcher available, they used him instead?

It was only the 5th. I say bunt him over, let the top of your lineup drive him in, and cut into the lead that's only 3 at that point with half the game to play

Quote: Originally Posted By moustachee on 5/06/2010

Quote: Originally posted by soxfan121 on 5/06/2010 In general, I do not understand the sacrifice bunt unless it's the 9th, the lead runner gets on and the 9 spot is due up. Other than that specific situation, the expected runs in any given situation are ALWAYS driven down by a sacrifice bunt.

I've set mine to 1-RARE and it works for me. The bunt, in almost every situation, is a stupid baseball play.

i'm gonna guess you're an AL fan. well, soxfan clears it up, but still...the paragraph you just wrote says you grew up watching the AL

not saying one is more right than the other. I just know that people who grew up watching the NL wouldn't say that (for the most part

I would guess more likely that soxfan never played competitive baseball at any level or he would realize that the bunt is a very important weapon to be able to employ in a game. The problem with today's game is that not enough hitters are able to bunt because they want to hit batting practice home runs instead of working on their weaknesses. We are seeing a trend back to the small ball game and I think in the future we will see more emphasis put on the fundamentals such as bunting and base running instead of waiting for the 3-run homer.