Scioscia bunting Mike Trout over with Erick Aybar

[Blarg]

Lifetime is owning this argument.

[Eric]

Lifetime has pulled a number of Strawman arguments out in a sad attempt to be "technically correct" while missing the entire point of the discussion.

 

I have placed a very simple and easily verifiable wager on the table of which no one has been willing to take me up on.

 

Until that happens, my point is validated.  And if someone steps to the plate and takes me up on it, my point will be even more validated.

 

Anyone that thinks that the number of bunt attempts that Aybar made in the 2012 season is 40 should be more than happy to take me up on it.

 

The offer still stands.  Any takers?

 

I didn't think so.

[Lifetime]

LOL there's no strawman and you're wager is meaningless. Fact, the number of qualifying bunt attempts made by Aybar according to accepted statistical practice was 40. The number to support your meaningless definition is unknown and irrelevant. Oh and I like how you attribute validation to your point when no one agrees to your ridiculous wager, and even more so if someone does. Brilliant!

[Wallerrrr]

see what you started chuck

[Eric]

If it's such a ridiculous wager, you stat freaks ought to be jumping all over it.  How can you pass up such a good thing?  You're sure to win and prove your point!

 

Only one problem.  You know the statistic you cite to support your argument is bogus and cannot stand the fact that you know you are wrong and will lose.

[Blarg]

Lifetime has pulled a number of Strawman arguments out in a sad attempt to be "technically correct" while missing the entire point of the discussion.

 

I have placed a very simple and easily verifiable wager on the table of which no one has been willing to take me up on.

 

Until that happens, my point is validated.  And if someone steps to the plate and takes me up on it, my point will be even more validated.

 

Anyone that thinks that the number of bunt attempts that Aybar made in the 2012 season is 40 should be more than happy to take me up on it.

 

The offer still stands.  Any takers?

 

I didn't think so.

If completely ignored you are validated but if challenged then more validated?

 

Also, what is your criteria for a bunt attempt, showing bunt then pulling the bat back to see if the defense adjusts?

 

Second, who gives a shit if Aybar bunts for a base hit? If he is successful that is well ahead of hitting into a double play, a ground out, a popup or strikeout. It's like people saying a walk is good as a knock but then deny a bunt is as good as either. Standing on first base is the point of an at bat at the very least, how a player gets there is inconsequential.

[Eric]

If completely ignored you are validated but if challenged then more validated?

 

Also, what is your criteria for a bunt attempt, showing bunt then pulling the bat back to see if the defense adjusts?

 

Second, who gives a shit if Aybar bunts for a base hit? If he is successful that is well ahead of hitting into a double play, a ground out, a popup or strikeout. It's like people saying a walk is good as a knock but then deny a bunt is as good as either. Standing on first base is the point of an at bat at the very least, how a player gets there is inconsequential.

 

Yet one more Strawman.

 

No one is saying that bunting is a bad thing.  As Chuck pointed out in the first post of this thread, it's the situations where Aybar chooses to attempt to bunt that are asinine.

 

But not as asinine as clinging to an argument that Aybar only tried to bunt 40 times last year.

[Wallerrrr]

Yet one more Strawman.

 

No one is saying that bunting is a bad thing.  As Chuck pointed out in the first post of this thread, it's the situations where Aybar chooses to attempt to bunt that are asinine.

 

But not as asinine as clinging to an argument that Aybar only tried to bunt 40 times last year.

 

you never answered what Blarg asked...how do you define a bunt attempt? Just curious

[Lifetime]

Uh it's ridiculous because it's meaningless regardless if you end up being correct. No one cares. Why would anyone care to wager on such a ridiculous statistic?

The statistic I cite to support my argument is not bogus. As I stated previously, it is the accepted Statistical method. No one tracks bunt attempts as you suggest. That is what is bogus here.

[Eric]

I did define it.

 

In fact, you don't even need to click anything since it's still at the top of the page.

[Wallerrrr]

lol..alright alright...ill scroll back and look..i just figured all that was you and lifetime arguing..

[Eric]

Now that you've looked, you see what I mean.

 

Lifetime's definition of a "bunt attempt" means that the ball was bunted and put into play.  No ball that was bunted foul nor any ball that Aybar tried to bunt at but missed counts as a "bunt attempt", even though they were both counted as strikes.

 

However, over here in reality, any time a batter squares up to bunt and touches the ball is instantly called by everyone in baseball a bunt.  As in "He bunted it foul."  Or "He pops the bunt up". Or "He misses the bunt, strike two." Or "He bunts....and gets thrown out at first."

 

According to Lifetime, only the last would count as a "Bunt attempt".  The rest of them do not qualify as bunt attempts except if they result in strike three.

 

Yet, by everyone around the game, those attempts to deaden the ball with the bat while squaring up to the plate are seen as attempting to bunt, or.... drumroll please.... "bunt attempts".

[Wallerrrr]

Now that you've looked, you see what I mean.

 

Lifetime's definition of a "bunt attempt" means that the ball was bunted and put into play.  No ball that was bunted foul nor any ball that Aybar tried to bunt at but missed counts as a "bunt attempt", even though they were both counted as strikes.

 

However, over here in reality, any time a batter squares up to bunt and touches the ball is instantly called by everyone in baseball a bunt.  As in "He bunted it foul."  Or "He pops the bunt up". Or "He misses the bunt, strike two." Or "He bunts....and gets thrown out at first."

 

According to Lifetime, only the last would count as a "Bunt attempt".  The rest of them do not qualify as bunt attempts except if they result in strike three.

 

Yet, by everyone around the game, those attempts to deaden the ball with the bat while squaring up to the plate are seen as attempting to bunt, or.... drumroll please.... "bunt attempts".

hmmm, i was hoping to avoid this topic like the plague moving forward but since you addressed the post to me...

 

i look at it like this...Aybar squares around to bunt ALOT however I do not believe he is actually attempting to bunt every time he does so. I think he shows the bunt and pulls it back a lot of the time with no intention of ever making contact, regardless if its a strike or not. I think he does it to keep defenses off balance and I also think its like a nervous freaken twitch for him now...he just has to do it. lol.

[Lifetime]

Actually, no one counts bunt attempts as a statistical measure using your method. No one but you apparently.

[Chuck]

see what you started chuck

 

I made my point and stand by it. I won't go rounds with people who want to shove their opinion on me. 

 

I don't want to see Aybar bunting with Trout on base. Period. 

 

Game over. 

[Eric]

But let me ask you this. If Aybar bunts the ball foul, or stabs at the ball while squared up and misses, or misses a drag bunt, are those not all "bunt attempts" regardless of the outcome?

[Lifetime]

I made my point and stand by it. I won't go rounds with people who want to shove their opinion on me.

I don't want to see Aybar bunting with Trout on base. Period.

Game over.

who's doing that Chuck?

[Wallerrrr]

lol, i dont wanna play this game anymore..

 

i'm up for a mathis/napoli debate tho

[Blarg]

Napoli is having a better spring than Mathis and he isn't bunting.

[stormngt]

If we are not talking about every bunt attempt, even those that do not end the AB, then what the hell qualifies as a bunt attempt?  If I attempt to jump into a pool, and miss the pool entirely and go to the hospital instead, does that no longer qualify as an attempt?

my god you can't be serious.........Yes it would qualify as a bunt attempt....just like attempted a bunt and getting an out!  How about the times Aybar attempted to bunt, didn't pull it off and got a hit by swinging away?  How do we count those?

 

C'mon, the only way to objective measure the stat is the bunt attempts.  I am sorry you don't believe it is only 40, but that is what major league baseball has.  

[stormngt]

I believe what Eric is saying is true. Aybar squares up most every at bat, whether it gets counted or not.

He does square up almost every AB, but most of the time it is a fake bunt.  A square up and pull the bat back hoping the pitch is a ball.  He does that almost every AB.  The purpose for such an attempt is to get the defense to play in, thus getting him a better chance of hitting the ball pass the closer infielder.

[stormngt]

hmmm, i was hoping to avoid this topic like the plague moving forward but since you addressed the post to me...

 

i look at it like this...Aybar squares around to bunt ALOT however I do not believe he is actually attempting to bunt every time he does so. I think he shows the bunt and pulls it back a lot of the time with no intention of ever making contact, regardless if its a strike or not. I think he does it to keep defenses off balance and I also think its like a nervous freaken twitch for him now...he just has to do it. lol.

Thank you!  An intelligent voice.

[CaliAngel]

He went 15-27 on bunt hit attempts last year -- a .556 success rate which was 8th best in baseball.   He went 14-32 for a .438 success rate in 2011, good for 8th best in baseball.

 

 

 

There seem to be 2 conflicting numbers representing Aybars bunting success last year. I don't know who's right, Dochalo says 16-40, which is a .400 success rate. I can't seem to find the splits on ESPN, so I don't know for sure.

 

Anyway, I was not arguing the success rate of Aybars' bunt attempts, I was simply stating this his successful bunts tended to happen at a time where they had little to no impact on the outcome of the game. Kinda like Vernon Wells hitting a home run in the 9th inning of a game when we're down by 4 runs. 

 

Wellsy-esque (adj.) : Hitting a home run in the 8th or 9th inning when the team is winning, or losing, by 4+ runs.

 

Yeah, you get the mark on your stats, and 25 for Wells in 2011 looks nice, but how much did it really help the team? 

 

So maybe I'm wrong, I'm just recalling what I've seen the past couple years from Aybar, and I do pay attention to a lot of Angel games during the season. And you know what? I'm definitely pulling for Aybar to reek some havoc in the box and on those basepaths this year. He pushes the envelope when it comes to aggressiveness, and it's nice to see the passion. But like I said, I would like him to take those risks with a smarter approach. 

 

Successful teams DO NOT waste outs. And with the bats we have, there's no reason to. 

[Blarg]

Since when is it every hit has to be in a time when the team needed one? Sometimes a hit just has to happen to make something better happen. 

 

Aybar was batting 7th and 8th most of the season, long after the MOTO bats had finished up. He was lead off hitter in 17 games and lead off an inning 92 of his 141 games. 29% of his plate appearances were as the leadoff hitter for an inning. His batting average leading off an inning was .326 with an .833 OPS.

 

Just what are your expectations? I'd bet you would be exalting his plate patience if he had all of his bunt hits turned into walks. Instead he put a bat on the ball and ended up at first base all the same.

 

You guys bitch about nonsense so much you believe the nonsense to be a factor in games. And yet you won't put one minute of time to research the basics that put most of this silliness into perspective.

[YouthofToday]

I'm just glad DiPoto gave him the extension when he did. I remember many in here were quiet upset that we overpaid for Aybar. We kept him on a nice under market contract during his prime years.