Ron Wash: addicted to bunts and he doesn't care who knows

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • NAHSTE
    Probably owns the site
    • Feb 2009
    • 22233

    Ron Wash: addicted to bunts and he doesn't care who knows



    This is infuriating stuff as a neutral observer. Can only imagine how Rangers fans feel.



    To bunt…or not to bunt? That is the question.

    Baseball’s new analytics — and a Greek chorus of bunt-loathing fans and media — will tell you that the sacrifice bunt is the most self-defeating tradition in baseball.

    In fact, a member of the spring training media tried to tell Texas Rangers manager Ron Washington just that Sunday morning. Washington wasn’t angered by the question. But as often is the case with Wash, a topic that’s passionate to him unleashed a passionate and colorful response.

    “I think if they try to do that, they’re going to be telling me how to [bleep] manage,” Washington said. “That’s the way I answer that [bleep] question. They can take the analytics on that and shove it up their [bleep][bleep].”

    Washington has heard all the moans and complaints about his bunting.

    “Mike Scioscia dropped 56 sacrifice bunts on his club, the most in the league, and he’s a genius,” Washington continued. “But Ron Washington dropped 53 and he’s bunting too much? You can take that analytics and shove it.

    “I do it when I feel it’s necessary, not when the analytics feel it’s necessary, not when you guys feel it’s necessary, and not when somebody else feels it’s necessary. It’s when Ron Washington feels it’s necessary. Bottom line.”


    The reporter’s original query, it should be noted, was framed against the backdrop of the Rangers’ daily situational hitting drills. Washington’s team isn’t just working on its bunting. It’s trying to become more proficient at the plate in recognizing the moment and responding accordingly.

    Washington had a lengthy, stats-based observation of his own to give to the media.

    “Our weakness the past couple of years going down the stretch has been situational hitting,” he said. “Having runners in scoring position with less than two out and not being able to get them home. Having runners at second base with nobody out and not being able to move them. Having runners with the infield in and not being able to get the ball to the outfield. Having the infield back and not being able to play pepper with the middle of the infield.

    “Those are the little things that killed us the past two years. Yeah, our offense went stale, but if we could have executed in those situations, it would have made a big difference, especially against the Oakland Athletics.

    “Look back at the games we played against Oakland and the opportunities we had just to execute. I’m not talking about getting doubles and triples, but where we didn’t execute and left runners on the bag and when the game was over it made a difference. Look.”

    Until his team shows that it can be trusted to rise to the appropriate situation, Washington reaffirmed Sunday that his preference is to bunt, no matter what baseball’s new math says.

    Signaling for a bunt early in the game will depend upon who the opposing pitcher is, Washington said. An early bunt opportunity may be one of the few opportunities the Rangers have on that night.

    And don’t expect to see Prince Fielder or Adrian Beltre bunt. They are the lineup’s “bus drivers,” Washington said.

    Until others in the lineup — Washington named Jurickson Profar, Leonys Martin, Elvis Andrus and Geovany Soto — show that they can execute properly in a situation, the manager asserted Sunday that he will continue to call for his “safer” choice.

    “The percentages for me in that situation go up by them squaring and bunting it rather than me allowing them to swing,” Washington said.

    Don’t blame just him for bunting too much, in other words. Blame the Rangers for not giving Washington the confidence that they can identify the situation and execute.

    That’s what the Rangers’ daily situational hitting drills have been for. That’s also what spring training is for, no matter how colorfully the manager wants to put it.
    Last edited by NAHSTE; 02-24-2014, 11:00 AM.
  • ThomasTomasz
    • Nov 2024

    #2
    While it should be seldom used in games, it is good to frequently practice it, because you never know when it might be a good time to bunt. However, the top offensive teams had little use for the sacrifice The Red Sox were tops in runs scored last year in the AL, and 12th in sac bunts. The Tigers were second, and were sixth in sac bunts. The Athletics were third in runs scored, 14th in sacrifices. The Orioles and Indians rounded out the top five, and they were 10th and 7th in scarifies.

    The one team with the most were the Tigers. Hate to say it, but Washington and Leyland are both older and it might be a generational thing. Then again, Showalter and Melvin both had no use for it either.

    Is the sac bunt still needed? I think so, but not in the frequency that either the Angels and Rangers tried to do it. And especially not early in the games like Washington likes to do it. It should be later in the game when one run is what you're desperately looking for, against an ace who is lights out that day.

    Comment

    • Warner2BruceTD
      2011 Poster Of The Year
      • Mar 2009
      • 26142

      #3
      He makes a good point here:

      “Mike Scioscia dropped 56 sacrifice bunts on his club, the most in the league, and he’s a genius,” Washington continued. “But Ron Washington dropped 53 and he’s bunting too much? You can take that analytics and shove it."

      Like most things, the truth is in the middle. The OMG LOL BUNT YOU SHOULD NEVER BUNT crowd is wrong, too. Because while your run expectancy charts will tell you that your chance of scoring drops slightly by bunting with a man on first and nobody out, run expectancy charts also do not account for things like who is at the plate, who is running, who is on deck, who is pitching, game situation, etc.

      8th inning, down 1, Billy Hamilton on 1st, nobody out, a bunt is a bad play. He can score on a double or just steal the base if you are insistent on getting him to 2nd.

      Same situation, Todd Frazier on 1st, Zack Cozart at the dish, a bunt is a good play. Throw your run expectancy out the window, I have no use for it. Cozart is a strike out risk, a double play risk. His OBA is around .300. The bunt becomes the higher percentage play, and you take your chances that one of the next two guys can get a hit.

      All bunts are not created equal. Early game bunts, generally I am against. But again, lets say you've lost 5 straight, scoring 4 total runs. You need a spark. Maybe you want that first run to get some juice going in the dugout. Get your guys feeling good. Play from ahead for once. I know we like to pretend baseball is played by robots, but it isn't.

      I don't watch the Rangers every day. From what I see, Wash bunts too much. But you know, Baker heard the same shit. And Baker bunted a lot. But somebody broke it down, and the majority of his non P sac bunts were from Zack f'n Cozart (13, more than double of any non pitcher), usually to put a man on second for a much better hitter. I mean, ZACK COZART. Who cares? How many of those 13 sac bunts would have resulted in Cozart getting on base had he hit? Three? Four? And how many of the 8 or 9 outs had he hit would have been K's or DP's or something else unproductive? Three? Four? So are we really supposed to get out the pitchforks over Zack Cozart moving a runner up? Meh.

      Managers probably bunt too much. But not every bunt is the worst thing ever.

      Comment

      • Glenbino
        Jelly and Ice Cream
        • Nov 2009
        • 4994

        #4
        Originally posted by Warner2BruceTD
        He makes a good point here:

        “Mike Scioscia dropped 56 sacrifice bunts on his club, the most in the league, and he’s a genius,” Washington continued. “But Ron Washington dropped 53 and he’s bunting too much? You can take that analytics and shove it."

        Like most things, the truth is in the middle. The OMG LOL BUNT YOU SHOULD NEVER BUNT crowd is wrong, too. Because while your run expectancy charts will tell you that your chance of scoring drops slightly by bunting with a man on first and nobody out, run expectancy charts also do not account for things like who is at the plate, who is running, who is on deck, who is pitching, game situation, etc.

        8th inning, down 1, Billy Hamilton on 1st, nobody out, a bunt is a bad play. He can score on a double or just steal the base if you are insistent on getting him to 2nd.

        Same situation, Todd Frazier on 1st, Zack Cozart at the dish, a bunt is a good play. Throw your run expectancy out the window, I have no use for it. Cozart is a strike out risk, a double play risk. His OBA is around .300. The bunt becomes the higher percentage play, and you take your chances that one of the next two guys can get a hit.

        All bunts are not created equal. Early game bunts, generally I am against. But again, lets say you've lost 5 straight, scoring 4 total runs. You need a spark. Maybe you want that first run to get some juice going in the dugout. Get your guys feeling good. Play from ahead for once. I know we like to pretend baseball is played by robots, but it isn't.

        I don't watch the Rangers every day. From what I see, Wash bunts too much. But you know, Baker heard the same shit. And Baker bunted a lot. But somebody broke it down, and the majority of his non P sac bunts were from Zack f'n Cozart (13, more than double of any non pitcher), usually to put a man on second for a much better hitter. I mean, ZACK COZART. Who cares? How many of those 13 sac bunts would have resulted in Cozart getting on base had he hit? Three? Four? And how many of the 8 or 9 outs had he hit would have been K's or DP's or something else unproductive? Three? Four? So are we really supposed to get out the pitchforks over Zack Cozart moving a runner up? Meh.

        Managers probably bunt too much. But not every bunt is the worst thing ever.
        Yeah because the Angels have been cleaning up lately.

        Nothing infuriates me more than when anyone but Bourjos is laying one down.

        Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk

        Comment

        • Warner2BruceTD
          2011 Poster Of The Year
          • Mar 2009
          • 26142

          #5
          Some perspective on Washington.

          Dusty Baker is widely considered the king of the sac bunt. As noted in the article, Washington called for 53 last year. Baker called for 37 (non pitcher).

          Washington called for almost as many in the first four innings (29) as Baker did all year.

          So yeah, that dude probably is bunting too much.

          Comment

          • Warner2BruceTD
            2011 Poster Of The Year
            • Mar 2009
            • 26142

            #6
            Originally posted by Glenbino
            Yeah because the Angels have been cleaning up lately.

            Nothing infuriates me more than when anyone but Bourjos is laying one down.

            Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk
            Was it infuriating when the Angels were winning, and a lot of that credit was given to the manager and his style? And do you think they are losing now because of bunts?

            The point here is Washington is right. People should be consistent. You can't rip one and call the other a mastermind. It's the same "cool kid" theory I talked about in the Brian Kenny/Billy Beane/GM thread.

            Comment

            • Glenbino
              Jelly and Ice Cream
              • Nov 2009
              • 4994

              #7
              Originally posted by Warner2BruceTD
              Was it infuriating when the Angels were winning, and a lot of that credit was given to the manager and his style?

              The point here is Washington is right. People should be consistent. You can't rip one and call the other a mastermind. It's the same "cool kid" theory I talked about in the Brian Kenny/Billy Beane/GM thread.
              It made sense when you had a lineup full of Ecksteins, DiSarcinas and Kennedys.

              To remove the bat from potential base runners batting in front of power guys the team has invested heavily in for the past decade ( Guerrero, Teixiera, Pujols, Hamilton) is counterintuitive to what the FO is trying to do, and at least part of the reason the organization is a disaster.

              Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk

              Comment

              • NAHSTE
                Probably owns the site
                • Feb 2009
                • 22233

                #8
                Originally posted by Warner2BruceTD
                Was it infuriating when the Angels were winning, and a lot of that credit was given to the manager and his style? And do you think they are losing now because of bunts?

                The point here is Washington is right. People should be consistent. You can't rip one and call the other a mastermind. It's the same "cool kid" theory I talked about in the Brian Kenny/Billy Beane/GM thread.
                Intentionally making an out is fucking moronic and counter productive. What more consistency do you need? No manager should bunt as frequently as they do, but it's especially hard to understand it in the AL.

                Comment

                • Warner2BruceTD
                  2011 Poster Of The Year
                  • Mar 2009
                  • 26142

                  #9
                  Originally posted by NAHSTE
                  Intentionally making an out is fucking moronic and counter productive. What more consistency do you need? No manager should bunt as frequently as they do, but it's especially hard to understand it in the AL.
                  The consistency I need is the same consistency Wash is looking for. If you think he's "fucking moronic", fine. But then so is Scioscia. The media perception is Scioscia is "smart", but Wash is dumb. That clearly gets under Washington's skin if he's bringing it up publicly.

                  Comment

                  • NAHSTE
                    Probably owns the site
                    • Feb 2009
                    • 22233

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Warner2BruceTD
                    The consistency I need is the same consistency Wash is looking for. If you think he's "fucking moronic", fine. But then so is Scioscia. The media perception is Scioscia is "smart", but Wash is dumb. That clearly gets under Washington's skin if he's bringing it up publicly.
                    I have repeatedly called Sioscia a terrible manager during my time at VSN. Same shitdick who used to bury Mike Napoli for 100 games a year in the interest of playing Jeff fucking Mathis.

                    Comment

                    • Warner2BruceTD
                      2011 Poster Of The Year
                      • Mar 2009
                      • 26142

                      #11
                      Originally posted by NAHSTE
                      I have repeatedly called Sioscia a terrible manager during my time at VSN. Same shitdick who used to bury Mike Napoli for 100 games a year in the interest of playing Jeff fucking Mathis.
                      Noted & recalled.

                      I was just backing up that singular statement from Wash, which I think is fair, and I can understand why it drives him nuts. I'm not even defending the amount of bunting he does. I was pretty surprised to see he bunts significantly more than Baker.

                      Comment

                      Working...