ST Alpha - "not really, because in a sacrifice bunt the batter is not hitting with the intention of getting on base. -- nm" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Login
Create Account

Search Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...

RSS Feed

Hosting by DigitalOcean

Support ST on Ko-Fi

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 157

In response to "(coTc) but your IM is negated by the very mention of a sacrifice bunt -- nm" by trish

not really, because in a sacrifice bunt the batter is not hitting with the intention of getting on base. -- nm

Posted by znufrii May 19 '14, 11:41

(No message)

Responses:

(coTc) then sac fly should definitely count as well -- nm - trish May 19, 11:48 7
- a sac fly is an accident of distance, not a function of the batter's intent. - znufrii May 19, 12:02 6
  - (coTc) no, its not - the good contact hitters know dang well what they are doing when they choose to lift the ball in that situation -- nm - trish May 19, 12:07 5
    - but the system needs to be able to score all hitters to equal standards, not just your "good contact hitter." -- nm - znufrii May 19, 12:24 4
      - also you can argue that because the run does not score on the at bat, but on the live ball play after the at bat, it is irrelevant to the metric. -- nm - znufrii May 19, 12:33 1
        
        (coTc) under that distinction, nothing scores on an AB except a bases loaded walk, all come from live balls - trish May 19, 12:37
      - (coTc) I'm going to drop this after this post, but that list of SABR's is stupid and I get anyone defending twisted around - trish May 19, 12:32 1
        
        ^"I can get anyone defending it" -- nm - trish May 19, 12:34

Post a message top

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.