Red Mosquito

numbers wrote:The argument, put a different way, is "Let me try and get a cheap bunt hit in a situation that I'd never normally bunt in because I want to stop this guy from getting a no hitter."

Does it matter who the guy is who is bunting? Is it the power hitter who hasn't bunted in three seasons or the second baseman who leads the league in bunt base hits?

It does to me, if it's a guy that bunts for hits all the time I have a lot less of problem.

numbers wrote:The argument, put a different way, is "Let me try and get a cheap bunt hit in a situation that I'd never normally bunt in because I want to stop this guy from getting a no hitter."

It's not just about the hitter making the bunt. If the power hitter who is 0/3 so far puts down a "cheap bunt" he breaks up the momentum the pitcher has going, and makes it easier for the next guy in the lineup.

Both teams should just play to win the game as hard as they can within the confines of the rules and see what happens.

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

spike wrote:

numbers wrote:The Orioles are one of the worst "guardians of the game" teams.

must be a bird mascot thing

I feel like the Jays are being unfairly stereotyped here.

I've never gotten this from the Jays. The biggest ones I notice are Baltimore, the Cardinals, and Tampa. The Braves were a few a years ago, but they've had so much turnover the last few years I don't know if it's the same.

The Braves were justified against Gomez. Not so much against Fernandez

cutuphalfdead wrote:

numbers wrote:The argument, put a different way, is "Let me try and get a cheap bunt hit in a situation that I'd never normally bunt in because I want to stop this guy from getting a no hitter."

It's not just about the hitter making the bunt. If the power hitter who is 0/3 so far puts down a "cheap bunt" he breaks up the momentum the pitcher has going, and makes it easier for the next guy in the lineup.

Both teams should just play to win the game as hard as they can within the confines of the rules and see what happens.

My head agrees with you. But if a team is up 11-0, one out in the 9th and a guy who never bunts drops down a bunt base hit...I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't be pissed if I was a fan of the pitcher.

I think, when a guy has a chance to do something historic and he has a big lead, try to get a hit like a man instead of doing something specifically to stop him from making history, rather than trying to win a game. Let's be honest, if it's 7-0 in the 8th inning and someone lays down a bunt, it's not to break up momentum.

numbers wrote:It's kind of like not giving someone who is one hit away from a milestone a pitch to hit in a game that's in hand, which I would think is bush league also.

this is completely different. you're put in a situation where the opposing pitcher carries a no-hitter late into the game very, very infrequently. in your example the person that's one hit away from a milestone presumably will be hitting 4 times a game for every game to come. now, if that person is retiring after the end of the year and you're playing in game 160, then i can see how your example is appropos.

but i've never understood why you're supposed to accommodate a pitcher playing for a team that you're trying to beat.

CopperTom wrote: Not so much against Fernandez

Ugh. That was the worst. Really, the worst part of it wasn't the Braves, it was the Marlins making him apologize.

cutuphalfdead wrote:Both teams should just play to win the game as hard as they can within the confines of the rules and see what happens.

100% this

Chris_H_2 wrote:

numbers wrote:It's kind of like not giving someone who is one hit away from a milestone a pitch to hit in a game that's in hand, which I would think is bush league also.

this is completely different. you're put in a situation where the opposing pitcher carries a no-hitter late into the game very, very infrequently. in your example the person that's one hit away from a milestone presumably will be hitting 4 times a game for every game to come. now, if that person is retiring after the end of the year and you're playing in game 160, then i can see how your example is appropos.

but i've never understood why you're supposed to accommodate a pitcher playing for a team that you're trying to beat.

It's not the best example, but I was thinking about when no one would throw Maris a strike because they didn't want him to break that record. To me, that's bush league.

numbers wrote:The argument, put a different way, is "Let me try and get a cheap bunt hit in a situation that I'd never normally bunt in because I want to stop this guy from getting a no hitter."

You're making three assumptions here that I think are wrong or inaccurate:

1. Bunt hits are cheap
2. The situation wouldn't normally call for a bunt
3. Getting a bunt hit is really easy

1. I think bunt hits ARE cheap in that situation, but obviously that's an opinion.
2. Nobody bunts down big late in the game.
3. They are easy in that situation because of #2.

Guys, Jonny Gomes plays for the Braves.

I loved Gomes in 2013, but then in 2014 I was like "this guy shouldn't be playing, ever."

I just saw David Price's stat line so far, this guy is going to get 1 billion dollars in the offseason.

Seriously, wouldn't it cheapen it a little for the pitcher if you knew the other team wasn't doing everything they could to break it up?

philpritchard wrote:Seriously, wouldn't it cheapen it a little for the pitcher if you knew the other team wasn't doing everything they could to break it up?

No, it's not like they aren't trying.

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:Seriously, wouldn't it cheapen it a little for the pitcher if you knew the other team wasn't doing everything they could to break it up?

No, it's not like they aren't trying.

Well they kind of aren't.

You guys act like games are rife with bunting late in blowouts, when it rarely happens and that's why it would be uncouth if a guy had a no no going.

If a player has three home runs in a game, what's the unwritten rule about robbing him of a fourth at the wall?