MLB Tuesday 8/16

[Wiretowire]

YTD Still Monday but I am golfing early in the morning so I am posting tonight.

In response to a couple of emails...... Contrary to popular belief I actually prefer betting unders in MLB. I always have. Unfortunately, the pitching has been so bad I have taken many more overs to unders in recent years. There are 2 reasons for this return to unders. One, the totals this year have been so jacked out of where they should be that I have reverted back to unders. Books also know most bettors hate betting unders in any sport so they tilt the totals up even by a run or two in MLB. Two, the hitting is so bad with most of these guys always guessing they aren't producing with runners on base. Take a look at these clubs lineups. There are barely one player hitting .300 or more on any team. Some have no .300 hitters. GL

All for 5 units each.

MLW #1 +2 1/2 -130

Cubs #2 -250

Cleveland -170

AZ +2 1/2 -180

Minn/Atl under 8 1/2

Bost/Balt under 10

KC/Det under 7 1/2

StL/Hou under 8 1/2

GL

 

[wiseplayer]

Cleveland is down 3-2 bottom of 9th, runners at 1st and 2nd with NOBODY out. They don't bunt the runners over vs a tough closer. Result? No more hits and no runs. 2 questions. Why oh why wouldn't they want a shot at scoring from 3rd without needing a hit. 2, Why oh why wouldn't they want the winning run at 2nd in case there is a hit? This isn't baseball.

 

[Jeffeo]

Cleveland is down 3-2 bottom of 9th, runners at 1st and 2nd with NOBODY out. They don't bunt the runners over vs a tough closer. Result? No more hits and no runs. 2 questions. Why oh why wouldn't they want a shot at scoring from 3rd without needing a hit. 2, Why oh why wouldn't they want the winning run at 2nd in case there is a hit? This isn't baseball.

UNREAL! My son play 13U and said the same thing! This is pro baseball?

 

[Lareux]

Cleveland is down 3-2 bottom of 9th, runners at 1st and 2nd with NOBODY out. They don't bunt the runners over vs a tough closer. Result? No more hits and no runs. 2 questions. Why oh why wouldn't they want a shot at scoring from 3rd without needing a hit. 2, Why oh why wouldn't they want the winning run at 2nd in case there is a hit? This isn't baseball.

I'm one who likes to bunt more than others, obviously situation specific, and this would be one case I probably would have opted to bunt. However, on the other side of the coin, the reason they didn't is most likely based on the fact that Boston would have just walked the guy after Cleveland sacrificed the guys to 2nd and 3rd, setting up a game ending double play, as well as setting up a force out at home regardless of whether or not they can get the double play.

So while I more than likely would have bunted in that situation, there is a very valid and reasonable reason as to why they didn't. Also playing into the decision is what you said about them facing a closer at the time...it's not necessarily easy to bunt off of closers, and you may just end up giving away an out without getting the runners over. I agree that more guys should be able to handle the bat better and bunt off of anyone, but that's just not how it is right now.

 

[Botanical]

Forgot to mention that long strike dude hit as Kimbell had to throw a strike.a almost a week all off hr.I said the same shit with bunting but when u got the meat of the order up prolly would take your chances with moving him over one way or another..tough spot, cause Kimbell don't mind throwing pitches and getting into shitty situations he loves it and that high heat is nearly unhittable just overmatching his opponents

 

[Wiretowire]

YTD +69.5

I agree Wise. Like Lareux I lean to bunt. But I always would take a bases loaded situation, when they walk them loaded after the sac, as opposed to 1st and 2nd with noone out. Bases loaded makes it easier to score. Walk, hit batter, passed ball, error, or wild pitch ties it as well as the sac fly or base hit. So I bunt. I am definitely more Billy Martin than Earl Weaver when it comes to the bunt. GL

 

[wiseplayer]

I wouldn't look at walking the next batter to set up the double as a negative. Situation remains the same. I don't need a hit to score the tying run and if I do get a hit, the game is over assuming the runner from 2nd scores. As wire mentioned, there's several other ways to score.
I also look at it this way. If I'm playing defense, I don't want you to bunt. I'd prefer you hit into a double now without the threat of the winning run on 2nd.

 

[wiseplayer]

Ignorance is running wild in baseball. Just now Cubs had runners on 2nd and 3rd with no outs. Fly ball to rightfield, runner from 3rd tags, there's going to be an obvious play at the plate. There's a throw at home, the runner is safe...where do you think the 2nd base runner is? The dumb fuck watches the fly ball and then proceeds to watch the throw home and then proceeds to watch the catcher attempt to tag the runner out and dickhead remains at 2nd base. Runner is safe. Next batter with 1 out hits a fly ball plenty deep enough that would have scored him from 3rd.
When you watch the absolute ignorance of baseball players and coaches today, you wonder how they made it this far.