The Contact Play

[Troutstanding]

Situation:

Runner on third, one out.

Infield in, hard ground ball to short stop. 

Short throws home, catcher tags out the runner.

Now here's where every goes crazy saying the contact play is the stupidest thing in the world.

However,

Had the runner not gone on contact:

Short throws to first base, batter-runner out at first. 

Runner on third, two outs. 

Questions:

How much worse is it really to have a runner on third vs first with already two outs?

With the infield in, how many more ground balls split the gaps, thus scoring the runner AND allowing the batter-runner to reach base? 

How often does the runner at third base go on contact, realize he will likely be tagged out, get caught in a rundown, and allow the batter-runner to get to second or third, anyway?

How often does the play go to home, only for the runner from third to be safe, allowing also the batter-runner to be safe, too?

Is there some sort of intangible value in putting pressure on the infield defenders to make the play, perhaps on rare occasion causing them to make a mistake?

The numbers show that the contact play works well for the Angels. It seems to me we are more likely to remember the contact play backfiring than when it works. This Jeff Fletcher article from 3/27/16 sums it better:

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/play-709926-contact-angels.html

[Angel Oracle]

I really only have an issue with the contact play, if there are 0 outs.  

There, it makes no sense because you still have one more out to make to bring a run in.

[Troutstanding]

8 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

I really only have an issue with the contact play, if there are 0 outs.  

There, it makes no sense because you still have one more out to make to bring a run in.

That's fair.

[eaterfan]

14 minutes ago, Troutstanding said:

Situation:

Runner on third, one out.

Infield in, hard ground ball to short stop. 

Short throws home, catcher tags out the runner.

Now here's where every goes crazy saying the contact play is the stupidest thing in the world.

However,

Had the runner not gone on contact:

Short throws to first base, batter-runner out at first. 

Runner on third, two outs. 

Questions:

How much worse is it really to have a runner on third vs first with already two outs?

With the infield in, how many more ground balls split the gaps, thus scoring the runner AND allowing the batter-runner to reach base? 

How often does the runner at third base go on contact, realize he will likely be tagged out, get caught in a rundown, and allow the batter-runner to get to second or third, anyway?

How often does the play go to home, only for the runner from third to be safe, allowing also the batter-runner to be safe, too?

Is there some sort of intangible value in putting pressure on the infield defenders to make the play, perhaps on rare occasion causing them to make a mistake?

The numbers show that the contact play works well for the Angels. It seems to me we are more likely to remember the contact play backfiring than when it works. This Jeff Fletcher article from 3/27/16 sums it better:

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/play-709926-contact-angels.html

It's 15% worse having a runner on 1st with 2 outs than a runner on 3rd with two outs. I can't answer your other questions definitively.

[tdawg87]

Runner on third with two outs = a single or an error scores the run. 

Runner on first with two outs = a single or an error doesn't score the run

[Troll Daddy]

Typically we talk about the negatives ... there's also positives. I like the opportunity of scoring a run and one less out than standing a runner on third base with one more out.

[Dick B Back]

1 hour ago, tdawg87 said:

Runner on third with two outs = a single or an error scores the run. 

Or a wild pitch, passed ball, balk.

[stormngt]

Runner on third and first.  No outs.  

Hard hit ball to first base throw goes home and the runner is tagged out.  The entire Angel board goes ape shit.  

 

Now one out runner on first and second.  Next two batters strike out.  

The runner on third would never have scored anyway.

[Troll Daddy]

5 minutes ago, stormngt said:

Runner on third and first.  No outs.  

Hard hit ball to first base throw goes home and the runner is tagged out.  The entire Angel board goes ape shit.  

 

Now one out runner on first and second.  Next two batters strike out.  

The runner on third would never have scored anyway.

If he's safe you have not only score a run ... you have runners on first and second no outs

Edited May 27, 2016 by Troll Daddy

[Troll Daddy]

The only time it doesn't work is if the ball is hit directly at a infielder but then you still have a chance of a bad throw or missing the tag. 

Edited May 27, 2016 by Troll Daddy

[stormngt]

The point to be made:

 

It only isn't worth the risk when the next batter gets a hit.  

[AngelsFanSince86]

3 hours ago, stormngt said:

Runner on third and first.  No outs.  

Hard hit ball to first base throw goes home and the runner is tagged out.  The entire Angel board goes ape shit.  

 

Now one out runner on first and second.  Next two batters strike out.  

The runner on third would never have scored anyway.

I think its hard to say that.  Trout would have been hitting just for contact to get a sac fly had there been a runner on 3rd.  9 times out of 10 he executes.  He instead came up with the need to get on base so his approach was different.  He was looking for his pitch instead of just a pitch.