Sacrifice bunt success rates

[lt2cents]

Does anyone notice a significantly material difference in sacrifice bunt success rates between no out and one out attempts? Any data?

Is this true of real baseball? because of defense anticipation/considerations.


My impression playing many hundreds of games out manually in solo league since version 2006 ( I guess the bunt model has not changed in that time) is that sacrifice bunt success rate is much higher with one out than with no outs.

This is after controlling (well, anecdotally, but a lot of anecdotes) for both bunters and fielders.

Runners on 1st and 2nd, no outs, weak #8 hitter but good bunter fails, pitcher, not as good a bunter, with one out succeeds. This is very typical. What, defense only defends against sac bunt with no outs? Is this realistic? (Sure, this is a pseudo historical heavy bunting era).

Any insights ?

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by lt2cents

Does anyone notice a significantly material difference in sacrifice bunt success rates between no out and one out attempts? Any data?

I'm not aware of anyone collecting data like that. Usually it's someone like you, who has taken an interest, who does that.

Is this true of real baseball?

Don't know. I don't think there is data out that splits SH success rate by situation.

Runners on 1st and 2nd, no outs, weak #8 hitter but good bunter fails, pitcher, not as good a bunter, with one out succeeds. This is very typical.

I'm curious about how you determined that the pitcher was not as good a sac bunter. You may be right, but I can't think of a way to determine that.

What, defense only defends against sac bunt with no outs? Is this realistic?

The AI clearly has some programming for the defense anticipating an SH attempt. I've only investigated this by observing for awhile. The AI will play corners-in any time a pitcher comes up to bat with runners in position to move up (though I'm not sure about a runner on 3rd situation -- the AI never calls a squeeze play, but a human manager might). For non-pitchers, I think what the AI calls for defense varies based on a number of factors: the batter's two bunt ratings, whether the batter attempts a bunt earlier in that PA; the number of outs; and baserunner situation. Though I haven't collected real data, I think it likely that the AI will play corners-in when there are no outs more often than when there is one out -- but again subject to the other variables. However, I believe this would be true only for non-pitchers.

Any insights ?

The only thing about SHing in OOTP that has ever bothered me is that pitchers SH more often in OOTP than they do IRL, and therefore other batters don't SH enough. This is true in all eras, though it gets worse as you go back in time to when pitchers were expected to hit more routinely. I do various modifications to get OOTP to play more realistically in that regard. So I no longer really could say anything about what happens with default settings related to your main question.

Edit: Actually, there is another problem with SHing in OOTP, which is that batters hit into FC and DP plays way more often than in real life. I modify the config file to fix this. It's possible that, by doing this, I've increased overall success rate, but I've never bothered to collect the data on that. If so, it's simply another trade-off call that I make in setting up a league. It isn't the only one. : )

[lt2cents]

Thank you for your feedback.

People do get into the data for these various things but that is beyond me.

In the example it's just that the pitcher sac bunt rating (and general hitting skills) is lower. But this happens all the time (anecdotally)-- a great sac bunt rating with no outs will attempt sacrifice and fail while the next batter, one out, no matter how poor a sac bunter, will succeed. Also, the no out batter will have fouls, etc. while the one out batter regularly succeeds on first pitch.

Your focus on where the infield is I have to pay more attention to-- maybe it is the key. Still, if the infield is back with the pitcher up, even with one out, seems wrong, they should suspect bunt. (At least in my eras).

It seems (anecdotally) that even considering base running skillls and defense skills of C, P, 1B, 3B that what feels distorted to me happens.

But it seems a good bunter should have more success with a sacrifice attempt even with the infield ready for it. OOTP has the infield too good defending no out sac bunts. Its not like the batter needs the perfection of a bunt hit.

What you said about the FC and DP results of sac bunt attempts also strikes me as being right, that they are out of whack.

Although I have played OOTP quite a lot for a long time I have not done any modifying settings. I just want to expect a certain feel to the (era related) reality of the game OOTP produces. It may be the case that it requires more of what you are doing.

[SteveP]

[QUOTE=lt2cents;2910962In the example it's just that the pitcher sac bunt rating (and general hitting skills) is lower. But this happens all the time (anecdotally)-- a great sac bunt rating with no outs will attempt sacrifice and fail while the next batter, one out, no matter how poor a sac bunter, will succeed. Also, the no out batter will have fouls, etc. while the one out batter regularly succeeds on first pitch.[/QUOTE]

Bunting is the forgotten child of OOTP. Hardly anyone pays any attention to this dimension of the game. So, there's not a lot of knowledge to draw upon. However, here is what I think:

The two bunt ratings are purely a measure of frequency, not of skill. There is no attempt to differentiate bunting skill. Bunting success rate is hard coded into the game engine, but can be modified by changing settings in the config files (not something that most gamers will ever do). That aside, I think that bunting skill is the same for all batters.

Your focus on where the infield is I have to pay more attention to-- maybe it is the key. Still, if the infield is back with the pitcher up, even with one out, seems wrong, they should suspect bunt. (At least in my eras).

You might be misinterpreting what I said. I said that the AI will always bring the corners in when the pitcher is up, with men on base, with less than 2 outs. Period. Where things get variable is with non-pitchers. This works OK because pitchers in OOTP always SH in those situations. This is not true in real life. So OOTP has simplified things and made them more predictable than in real life.

OOTP has the infield too good defending no out sac bunts.

I don't know if this is true, but the AI will expect an SH in that situation more than if there is one out. Period. If it's a pitcher batting, than the AI will expect an SH regardless.

What you said about the FC and DP results of sac bunt attempts also strikes me as being right, that they are out of whack.

There's no doubt about it. But I don't think this will get fixed soon, because it's too obscure an aspect of the game.

Although I have played OOTP quite a lot for a long time I have not done any modifying settings. I just want to expect a certain feel to the (era related) reality of the game OOTP produces. It may be the case that it requires more of what you are doing.

The bunting game in OOTP is what it is. I don't know that it will improve in the immediate future. If you want to invest a little time in learning about the options for improving this, I can give you some direction on that. But it does add to making management of a league a bit more complicated.

[lt2cents]

Your understanding of the bunt ratings as a frequency rather than ability and fixed bunt success rates independent of who is bunting is key. That explains quite a bit.

I suppose for a game that is mostly focused on the current era, that for all it says about simulating classic eras is really weak. Release after release this remains true.

Thanks for all your analysis and insight-- you have explained more about the subject than I would have guessed was there.

[OldFatGuy]

From the OOTPX manual:

Sacrifice Bunt

Sacrifice Bunt is a measure of how well a player can execute a sacrifice bunt. Players with a high rating in Sacrifice Bunt are more likely to execute the bunt correctly, advancing the runner. They are also less likely to strike out while bunting.

Bunt for Hit

Bunt for Hit is a measure of how well a player can execute bunt in an attempt to reach base safely. Players with a high rating in Bunt for Hit are more likely to bunt to a good location for reaching base. Players with high Running Speed and high Bunt for Hit have the best chance at bunting for a hit. Left-handed hitters are also better at bunting for a hit.

I'm pretty sure the ratings are a measure of how good the player is.

As far as success with one out, well it may be because the defense isn't playing for the bunt, since a sacrifice with one out is a bad play with anyone other than a pitcher. I've posted the numbers on here before, but IRL it's almost excusively pitcher's that do it with one out, as it is exceptionally rare in the AL, and very rare compared to the numbers with two outs.

I know if I were on defense, and the other team had a guy on first with one out and a non-pitcher hitting and wanted to bunt, I'd say go right ahead, make my day.

I don't have the data, but I'd bet it's available somewhere, and I'd bet money (even though I may be wrong) that the odds of scoring with one out and a man on first is much much higher than with two outs and a man on second. In fact, I'll see if I can find that data. Probably around these toobz somewhere.

[OldFatGuy]

Blah, as usual I can't do a search well. I got about a million responses, clicked on two pages worth, and gave up.

I'm sure the data is out there for folks that are smarter than I. I'd still bet money though that the odds of scoring are higher with a man on first and one out than with a man on second and two. And that doesn't even take into account the how successful the one out sacrifice is. He could bunt into a double play, bunt foul with two strikes and strike out, pop it up, or they could get the lead runner.

The only time I've ever seen it IRL is with a pitcher hitting. Then it does make some sense, since pitchers suck so badly at hitting if you can get an extra base with the likely out he's going to make, it is worth it I suppose.

[SteveP]

I stand corrected!

Actually, I think both the manual and I are/were wrong. The two bunt ratings are both about frequency and skill, which makes some sense. I think I knew it was that way at one point, but got my thinking off track more recently. Must be old age ...

[lt2cents]

More information and useful comments on this subject-- thank you both-- chance to learn something.

No doubt about the one out bunting-- but I wonder about a differential between eras.