Do I Really Hate Bunting?

Coach, I would just like to clarify, I don't actually "hate" bunting. I know you may have heard me say, "Ugh! I hate bunting!" But that was likely just a sigh of frustration after watching the second batter of the game in the 1st inning sacrifice bunt.

...or, perhaps it was when the 3-hole sac bunted in the 5th inning because there were runners on 1st and 2nd with no outs, but it was after a 3-run rally had given your team a 5-run lead.

...or, perhaps it was after a hitter led off the 4th inning with a double and you sac bunted the next batter to get the runner to 3rd.

...or, perhaps it was when you sac bunted a runner to 3rd with one out.

...or, perhaps it was the fact that every time a runner gets on 1st base you think it is necessary to immediately sac bunt, regardless of the game situation.

I don't "hate" bunting. I am just not in love with it. So let me clarify my true feelings on the bunting game––the short game or small ball, as it has been called.

I believe it is an extremely valuable part of the game. I believe every player needs to be prepared to execute a good bunt whenever it is needed. I believe every team needs to make sure it reps multiple types of bunts (left side, right side, sac, hit, squeeze) every day in practice.

Before I talk about what I believe to be some of the appropriate moments for a bunt during a game, it may help to understand the bigger picture of my philosophy of "offense." Here are some of the convictions I have about generating offense:

Outs are precious. In a 7-inning game, both teams get 21 outs. When those are gone, the game is over. My goal is to preserve and be very stingy with my outs. The more outs I preserve, the greater chance we have of scoring runs and winning the game. Therefore, if I CHOOSE to give up one of our outs voluntarily, I had better have a darn good reason for it. Before sacrificing an out, I always ask myself, "Is there another way that we can possibly get the result we want without giving up an out? Is the probability high or low that we could get the result we want without giving up an out?" Outs are a precious commodity in the games of baseball and softball. In terms of producing offense, the most precious commodity.

Play for big innings. A big inning occurs when our team scores 3 or more runs in an inning. I always keep in mind that a big inning can happen at any time, and especially early in the game. By definition, we have a much better chance for a big inning by swinging away than by playing "small" ball. A team having one big inning so often can single-handedly win the game. I want 7 chances for a big inning. Sac bunting significantly decreases a team's chances for a big inning.

Team and player makeup. Some teams and players are better suited for bunting, while other teams or players are not. For example, some players have a knack for bunting away from where the defense is positioned. This is a great skill, and it puts pressure on the defense. Some players are very fast runners, and so whenever they bunt there is always a chance of beating it out for a base hit. However, there are some teams and players that are better suited for hitting doubles in the gap or better yet, dingers over the wall. Why on earth would I elect to have such a player sac bunt? The probability of that player hitting a ball in the gap is nearly always going to be greater than the probability of our team scoring a run after we sacrifice his or her out. If I have a team that struggles to score runs, and we are getting into the later innings of a game with the score tied or down one or two runs, I would consider utilizing the bunt to see if we can make something happen. But I don't even like that phrase, especially in the context of coaching––"make something happen." That's not my job as a coach, to make something happen. My job is to prepare our players and team and to put them in positions where THEY can make something happen. Whenever I hear a coach talk about how they had to "make something happen" it always sounds to me like a coach who loves to insert themselves into the game unnecessarily, which is by definition, over-coaching.

Probability is no longer a guessing game or a gut instinct in the game of baseball. It is real data. Run expectancy data has been available for coaches to study for a number of years now (MLB has collected data on this topic since 2002). "Run expectancy" is how many runs we can expect to score, on average, given a specific base/out situation. "Base/out" is the situation every batter is faced with in every at-bat. It is basically, how many runners are on base and how many outs there are. For every base/out situation, there has been a mountain of data gathered over the years to show the probability of scoring a run in each situation. Here's the punchline... in every base/out situation, a sacrifice bunt REDUCES the number of expected runs. Why? Because outs are the biggest detractor from a team's chance of scoring. And, what is a sacrifice bunt? It is giving away an out.

The chart on the right illustrates the expected chances of scoring a run according to where runners are on base and how many outs there are. As you can see, the chance of scoring runs is significantly lower with less or no base runners (of course), but also significantly lower with one out, and especially lower with two outs. So again, I will ask, why give up an out?

So, whenever someone hears me say out loud, "I hate bunting," what I am actually saying is, "I don't like the overuse of the sacrifice bunt." I appreciate a good, well-placed, well-timed bunt for a hit. And even when I have my players "sacrifice" bunt, I want them to put it down in a way that gives them the best chance to beat it out for a hit. Put pressure on the defense. Now, if we are playing against a team that does not defend very well, something a bunt can do is force the defense to field, throw, and catch. If they do that poorly, then a bunt could put pressure on them. But typically a bunt will be one of the easiest plays to defend when the defense knows it is coming. Don't just give them an easy out. Make them earn every single out they take from us.

I consider myself to be someone who appreciates the old-school aura of the game of baseball. I like the principle behind a sac bunt––sacrificing self in order to help the team. However, when I see that the numbers show that more often than not any sacrifice bunt hurts the team and hurts our prospects of scoring, then I have to readjust my mindset on what it means to "help the team." A sac bunt rarely actually helps the team.

Something I have done in recent years is work with my teams on being GREAT base runners, reading balls in the dirt, reading pitchers, stealing bases. If getting to second base is a priority, then I would prefer to do it this way. The chances of getting thrown out at second base on a steal or dirt-ball are much less than the chances of getting thrown out at first base on a sacrifice bunt. I prefer to teach my teams to put pressure on the defense with our running game more than with our bunting game.

As always, I will remind my readers that I believe there is never just ONE right way to play the game. While there may be good ways and better ways, there are a lot of "right" ways, and there are a lot of factors that can make something right for one team but not for another. I happen to hold the conviction that a sac bunt-heavy approach is rarely ever the most positive approach for any team. But I also know good coaches and friends who might argue with me on that point. It's all good. And it's all part of what makes the game beautifully the greatest game in the world!