- The infield was in, significantly increasing Erick Aybar's chances of producing the run with a swing. Significantly? I don't know how to look this up, but I'd love to see a stat that shows a guy's batting average on ground balls with the infield drawn in versus normal. Certainly it helps, but you still have to hit a ball hard and in the right spot. I'm not sure you could call this significant.
- Aybar was hitting left-handed, giving Jason Varitek a better look at the oncoming runner. I'm not sure why this matters. Why does Jason Varitek need a better look at the runner? If the bunt goes down, no matter who's at the plate, Varitek needs to get in position to make the tag. He's gotta watch the ball, not the runner. Aybar being left-handed also makes it easier for him to bunt the ball.
- The count was 2-0, allowing Aybar to be more selective. A 2-0 count with the infield in is a hitter's paradise. A-Rod might even produce there. Consider also that Aybar drove home the winning run 24 hours earlier with a base hit. This is a decent point, but for slightly wrong reasons. A 2-0 count is just as much of a bunter's paradise as a hitter's paradise, the assumption being that the pitcher has to come in with a strike to avoid being in a bigger hole. The problem is that you can only make that assumption with pitchers who have shown a command of the strike zone, and Delcarmen had not done that, which is my biggest beef with Scioscia's call.
- The previous six hitters who faced Justin Masterson: walk, walk, single, fly ball, double, sacrifice bunt. That means five of the six who tried to get on base did so. What does this have to do with Erick Aybar and Manny Delcarmen, two guys who were very different than the others who had faced off before? Who had gotten on base before? Teixeira, Guerrero, Hunter, and Morales, all better hitters with better pitch recognition than Aybar. Masterson struggled. Who knew what Delcarmen would do?
Yes, it was a big risk. Maybe too big. Well, in hindsight, obviously too big. But the reward was huge. What were Aybar's chances of at least putting a bat on that ball? 80%? 70%? And the thing that makes a squeeze so tough to defend is that the catcher can't help field the ball, so even a bunt that goes fifteen feet in front of home can't be fielded by the catcher. If a batter gets the bunt on the ground, you rarely see the runner at home thrown out. In fact, I can't recall this happening (at least on the Angels) in the past several seasons.
So if Aybar gets the bunt down in fair territory, there's a very good chance the Angels score. If he fouls it off, he's still in a hitter's count. What were his chances of having one of those two outcomes? I don't know, but Aybar's a very good bunter with good bat control (he got 9 bunt hits on 19 attempts during the season, a .474 average), I would put it at over 50%. What were his chances of getting the run in if he swings away? Well, he doesn't have much pop, so a sac fly was unlikely (he had one in 17 chances during the season). He is a slap hitter, so he might have been able to slap something through the infield. I don't know, you add all that up, and I don't think you get to 50%.
Alright, I'm not going to pursue this any further. It's going to drive me insane. I'm probably going to start posting some possible Angels offseason moves today or tomorrow. Maybe that will help my mindset.
No comments:
Post a Comment