So bunting doesn't work very well. Giving up an automatic out to advance a runner is normally a losing proposition. There are many ways this has been dissected and analyzed over time. I'd like to introduce one you may not have seen, with some results that might surprise you.
Usually bunting strategies are analyzed by comparing run expectancy for various situations and asking the question "would you be better off with a sacrifice in this situation?" A handy set of tables with this information is available here. Now, bunt attempts don't always result in a successful sacrifice, they sometimes fail and sometimes succeed beyond your wildest dreams. They do occasionally empty the bases and leave the batter standing on third after one or more errors.
outs | runners | Chance of scoring |
Runs expected |
0 | 1B - - | 0.426 | 0.853 |
0 | - 2B - | 0.623 | 1.102 |
0 | - - 3B | 0.84 | 1.34 |
1 | - 2B - | 0.411 | 0.678 |
1 | - - 3B | 0.664 | 0.943 |
1 | - - - | 0.153 | 0.252 |
(This table uses tangotiger's numbers for the 1969-1992 period)
This table shows six of the 24 base-out states. The first row is no outs, runner at first. The last row is one out, bases empty. In any situation where you have no outs and a runner at first, you might expect to score about 43% of the time. When you do score, you will sometimes score more than a single run, so if your team saw this situation one hundred times, you might expect to score a total of 85 runs.
Because you have 4% better chance of scoring with a runner at third and one out, than with runner at 2nd and no out, there might be a use for bunting. The downside is that your total runs expected drops from 1.102 to .943, which means you will score less runs in total, although you come up empty less frequently.
Sacrificing with a man on first reduces your total run scoring by about 1 run for every 5 times you "successfully" sacrifice in this situation. To make things even worse, it actually reduces your chance of scoring at all from .426 to .411 – not good. In fact, it's downright awful.
This as far as you need to go to identify the ONE SIMPLE TRICK to bunt successfully: don't do it unless there are runners in scoring position. (RISP)
Now, that we've found the Secret of the Ages. All that's left is to get an idea of how useful bunting with RISP is. I've previously attempted to show the break-even point for a sac bunt attempt with a runner on second. This time around I'm going to examine the actual historical outcomes for RISP sac bunt attempts. Baseball-Reference.com's play index is super-duper handy in this regard. And it spits out the Win Probability Added for each attempt.
Win probability goes a step further than run expectancy because it takes into account the current score and inning. This is crucial to a realistic assessment of bunting, since the later the inning and the closer the score, the more crucial any single run becomes.
PA | WPA | |
2015 | 683 | 0.3 |
2014 | 591 | 4.3 |
2013 | 600 | 2.9 |
2012 | 789 | 0.2 |
2011 | 834 | 5.6 |
2010 | 796 | 6 |
2009 | 740 | 1.5 |
2008 | 685 | -0.6 |
2007 | 670 | 0.3 |
2006 | 798 | -0.4 |
2005 | 836 | 0.8 |
2004 | 799 | -0.3 |
2003 | 817 | 1.5 |
2002 | 766 | 8.6 |
2001 | 705 | 8.3 |
2000 | 602 | 2.7 |
1999 | 677 | 0.2 |
1998 | 787 | 3.9 |
1997 | 814 | 3.4 |
1996 | 757 | -0.6 |
average | 14746 | 48.6 |
This table shows the WPA for non-pitcher bunt attempts with less than 2 out and RISP.
Turns out that Major League Baseball players have been pretty successfully bunting with RISP for more than two decades. (Why they keep bunting with a man on first, I don't know.) Over the last twenty years, hitters have won an estimated 48 games by utilizing their bunting skills with RISP.
By now you're probably thinking "that sounds OK, but how good is it really?" I did a little digging and guesstimated that it's similar to the value that hitters with a wRC+ around 115 bring their teams. Non-pitchers bunting with RISP have averaged .003295989 per plate appearance. We will now compare that with WPA per PA of various hitters.
The following tables show the hitter's wRC+ for their career, along with WPA and Leverage Index for plate appearances with RISP and less than two outs. They also show a comparison with the WPA theoretically available to an average bunter, factoring in the LI.
BtB stands for "better than bunting," it shows how much better the hitter did versus the average RISP bunt over his career. The final column shows how many additional games the hitter would win per 1000 decisions to swing away. If this last column is negative, the hitter would have been better off bunting.
One caveat on this last column is that bunting happens more often in close games and later innings. Not every PA in these tables fits that description, so bunting wasn't totally appropriate. Nevertheless, it gives you something to compare with bunting's WPA per plate appearance.
career | RISP, < 2 out | Avg Bunting | ||||||||||
wRC+ | PA | WPA | LI | WPA / PA |
PA | WPA | LI | WPA / PA |
WPA / Bunt |
BtB | Per 1000 | |
Miguel Cabrera | 170 | 8322 | 56.0 | 0.99 | .01768 | 1418 | 10.4 | 1.51 | .00733 | 4.0 | 6.4 | 4.5 |
Mike Trout | 167 | 2877 | 21.2 | 0.93 | .04387 | 364 | 7.8 | 1.57 | .02143 | 1.1 | 6.7 | 18.5 |
Joey Votto* | 161 | 4757 | 38.6 | 1.00 | .02591 | 767 | 10.0 | 1.56 | .01304 | 2.2 | 7.8 | 10.1 |
Jose Bautista | 154 | 5642 | 19.2 | 0.98 | .05104 | 866 | 3.6 | 1.55 | .00416 | 2.5 | 1.1 | 1.3 |
Andrew McCutchen | 152 | 4504 | 24.3 | 0.97 | .03992 | 687 | 5.0 | 1.57 | .00728 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 4.3 |
Giancarlo Stanton | 149 | 2958 | 15.3 | 1.05 | .06863 | 472 | 1.2 | 1.62 | .00254 | 1.4 | -0.2 | -0.5 |
Paul Goldschmidt | 148 | 2648 | 19.3 | 1.01 | .05233 | 432 | 4.8 | 1.58 | .01111 | 1.3 | 3.5 | 8.2 |
David Ortiz | 148 | 9465 | 45.4 | 1.00 | .02203 | 1604 | 8.8 | 1.52 | .00549 | 4.6 | 4.2 | 2.6 |
Ryan Braun | 143 | 5255 | 26.4 | 0.95 | .03598 | 832 | 3.9 | 1.55 | .00469 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
Buster Posey | 143 | 3078 | 15.3 | 1.04 | .06797 | 513 | 3.4 | 1.66 | .00663 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 3.5 |
average | 5.4 |
career | RISP, < 2 out | Avg Bunting | ||||||||||
wRC+ | PA | WPA | LI | WPA / PA |
PA | WPA | LI | WPA / PA |
WPA / Bunt |
BtB | Per 1000 | |
Jackie Jensen | 120 | 6077 | 18.7 | 1.07 | .00308 | 1021 | 5.6 | 1.63 | .00548 | 3.1 | 2.5 | 2.4 |
Paul O'Neill | 120 | 8329 | 20.1 | 1.01 | .00241 | 1486 | 4.6 | 1.53 | .00310 | 4.2 | 0.4 | 0.2 |
Darrell Evans | 120 | 10737 | 39.0 | 1.03 | .00363 | 1607 | 8.0 | 1.65 | .00498 | 4.9 | 3.1 | 1.9 |
Carlos Beltran | 120 | 9929 | 29.0 | 0.98 | .00292 | 1583 | 8.0 | 1.5 | .00505 | 4.4 | 3.6 | 2.3 |
Mark Grace | 120 | 9290 | 37.8 | 1.02 | .00407 | 1476 | 9.7 | 1.63 | .00657 | 4.5 | 5.2 | 3.5 |
Dave Parker | 120 | 10184 | 35.6 | 1.03 | .00350 | 1725 | 10.0 | 1.6 | .00580 | 5.2 | 4.8 | 2.8 |
Andy Van Slyke | 120 | 6495 | 14.3 | 1.01 | .00220 | 1127 | 4.9 | 1.59 | .00435 | 3.3 | 1.6 | 1.4 |
Vic Wertz | 120 | 7027 | 30.3 | 1.10 | .00431 | 1042 | 5.7 | 1.71 | .00547 | 3.3 | 2.4 | 2.3 |
Ted Kluszewski | 120 | 6469 | 26.9 | 1.08 | .00416 | 956 | 3.9 | 1.69 | .00408 | 3.0 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
Troy Glaus | 120 | 6355 | 10.4 | 1.01 | .00164 | 1036 | -0.1 | 1.55 | -.00010 | 3.0 | -3.1 | -3.0 |
Mike Greenwell | 120 | 5166 | 15.3 | 1.05 | .00296 | 841 | 6.5 | 1.59 | .00773 | 2.5 | 4.0 | 4.8 |
average | 1.8 |
career | RISP, < 2 out | Avg Bunting | ||||||||||
wRC+ | PA | WPA | LI | WPA / PA |
PA | WPA | LI | WPA / PA |
WPA / Bunt |
BtB | Per 1000 | |
George Hendrick | 115 | 7834 | 13.8 | 1.07 | .00176 | 1277 | 0.1 | 1.64 | .00008 | 3.9 | -3.8 | -3.0 |
Aramis Ramirez | 115 | 8986 | 27.3 | 1.03 | .00304 | 1403 | 9.0 | 1.65 | .00641 | 4.3 | 4.7 | 3.3 |
Craig Biggio | 115 | 12504 | 24.9 | 0.99 | .00199 | 1484 | 0.5 | 1.58 | .00034 | 4.4 | -3.9 | -2.6 |
Billy Butler | 115 | 5412 | 6.8 | 0.99 | .00126 | 801 | 2.1 | 1.57 | .00262 | 2.3 | -0.2 | -0.3 |
Ryne Sandberg | 115 | 9282 | 22.9 | 1.01 | .00247 | 1284 | 6.2 | 1.64 | .00483 | 3.9 | 2.3 | 1.8 |
Kevin McReynolds | 115 | 6039 | 15.9 | 1.06 | .00263 | 915 | -1.2 | 1.75 | -.00131 | 3.0 | -4.2 | -4.6 |
Matt Stairs | 115 | 6024 | 10.0 | 1.05 | .00166 | 971 | 1.1 | 1.63 | .00113 | 3.0 | -1.9 | -1.9 |
Amos Otis | 115 | 8247 | 20.2 | 1.01 | .00245 | 1300 | 7.2 | 1.58 | .00554 | 3.8 | 3.4 | 2.6 |
Smoky Burgess | 115 | 5013 | 13.8 | 1.17 | .00275 | 739 | 7.0 | 1.97 | .00947 | 2.7 | 4.3 | 5.8 |
Richie Ashburn | 115 | 9737 | 18.6 | 0.99 | .00191 | 841 | -2.3 | 1.64 | -.00273 | 2.6 | -4.9 | -5.8 |
Brett Butler | 115 | 9545 | 17.7 | 0.99 | .00185 | 1027 | 1.5 | 1.68 | .00146 | 3.2 | -1.7 | -1.7 |
Johnny Callison | 115 | 7437 | 17.3 | 1.00 | .00233 | 1026 | 5.5 | 1.67 | .00536 | 3.2 | 2.3 | 2.2 |
average | -0.3 |
career | RISP, < 2 out | Avg Bunting | ||||||||||
wRC+ | PA | WPA | LI | WPA / PA |
PA | WPA | LI | WPA / PA |
WPA / Bunt |
BtB | Per 1000 | |
Vada Pinson | 110 | 10402 | 20.8 | 1.00 | .00200 | 1536 | 1.4 | 1.58 | .00091 | 4.5 | -3.1 | -2.0 |
Ian Kinsler | 110 | 6192 | 4.9 | 0.95 | .00079 | 833 | -0.1 | 1.43 | -.00012 | 2.2 | -2.3 | -2.8 |
Matt Williams | 110 | 7595 | 11.7 | 1.03 | .00154 | 1146 | -2.8 | 1.63 | -.00244 | 3.5 | -6.3 | -5.5 |
Raul Ibanez | 110 | 8278 | 15.3 | 1.01 | .00185 | 1217 | 7.8 | 1.58 | .00641 | 3.6 | 4.2 | 3.5 |
David Segui | 110 | 5451 | 3.8 | 1.02 | .00070 | 859 | 0.9 | 1.5 | .00105 | 2.4 | -1.5 | -1.8 |
Torii Hunter | 110 | 9692 | 1.9 | 1.02 | .00020 | 1499 | -4.5 | 1.57 | -.00300 | 4.4 | -8.9 | -5.9 |
Jermaine Dye | 110 | 7214 | 0.2 | 1.03 | .00003 | 1172 | -1.3 | 1.59 | -.00111 | 3.5 | -4.8 | -4.1 |
Pat Kelly | 110 | 5013 | 7.9 | 1.02 | .00158 | 567 | 0.3 | 1.72 | .00053 | 1.8 | -1.5 | -2.7 |
Jeromy Burnitz | 110 | 6580 | 16.7 | 1.06 | .00254 | 997 | 1.0 | 1.64 | .00100 | 3.1 | -2.1 | -2.1 |
Adam Laroche | 110 | 6329 | 9.6 | 1.04 | .00152 | 952 | -2.1 | 1.7 | -.00221 | 3.0 | -5.1 | -5.4 |
average | -2.9 |
So now you can see why the wRC+ 115 for the divider between "should bunt" and "shouldn't bunt." Where do the various members of the 2016 Indians fall? That's for you to decide. STEAMER and I aren't speaking right now because it thinks more or less everybody on the team should bunt in these situations.
The Indians' position players had 866 plate appearances with RISP and less than 2 outs in 2015. They bunted in only(!) 38 of those chances, leaving 828 times they did not bunt. Since they had a wRC+ of 99 last year, there is a good argument to be made that the Tribe should bunt both more and less often.