OnlyBucs

If you have talent and are scoring runs, you wouldn't need to try to take an extra base or bunt someone over.



What do you do when you aren't scoring is the question?

6E656D6164657E3B3D4A736B6265652469650A0 wrote: If you have talent and are scoring runs, you wouldn't need to try to take an extra base or bunt someone over. 



What do you do when you aren't scoring is the question?


The answer is you take each game situation and player(s) involved as a unique situation and put your team in the best position to succeed. There is no one strategy (aggressive or non-aggressive) that fits all situations. It's also worth noting that a team that doesn't hit or run particularly well (like the Pirates) won't be helped or hurt enough by any base running strategy to make them significantly better or worse.

39323A363332296C6A1D243C353232733E325D0 wrote: Should teams not scoring many runs be more aggressive or less aggressive on the base paths?






More. Based on situation. Number of outs, base trying to be taken, batter coming up.

7E757D7174756E2B2D5A637B7275753479751A0 wrote: If you have talent and are scoring runs, you wouldn't need to try to take an extra base or bunt someone over. 



What do you do when you aren't scoring is the question?


Running into an out at 3rd with 2 outs is always going to be dumb.   Playing for the balk or wild pitch is about as low percentage as it gets in the big leagues.



I'm not so opposed to it in high school and below.   

795D494144280 wrote: If you have talent and are scoring runs, you wouldn't need to try to take an extra base or bunt someone over. 



What do you do when you aren't scoring is the question?


The answer is you take each game situation and player(s) involved as a unique situation and put your team in the best position to succeed. There is no one strategy (aggressive or non-aggressive) that fits all situations. It's also worth noting that a team that doesn't hit or run particularly well (like the Pirates) won't be helped or hurt enough by any base running strategy to make them significantly better or worse.






That doesn't always happen. There are teams that run more than others when put in the same situation.



The Rickey Henderson A's were stealing, very aggressive. The Earl Weaver Orioles were waiting for the blast, not aggressive. Two different strategies in the same situation.

343F373B3E3F246167102931383F3F7E333F500 wrote: If you have talent and are scoring runs, you wouldn't need to try to take an extra base or bunt someone over. 



What do you do when you aren't scoring is the question?
As it pertains to Polanco, there was NO NEED to try for an extra base. His run meant nothing unless the next 2 batters also reached base and scored. What he NEEDED to do was keep the inning alive with 2 outs. His single would have done that. And, no doubt, he could have taken 2B on fielder's indifference a pitch later. But it didn't matter if he got to 2B unless the next 2 batters also reached base and scored. Aggression has to have a purpose to be useful. There was no purpose in trying to stretch a single into a double with 2 outs and 3 runs behind. All he did was take an unnecessary risk that ended the game and had no upside even if successful. That can't be excused as "aggressive running" regardless of whether the team has been scoring or not.

466B66777061763635040 wrote: If you have talent and are scoring runs, you wouldn't need to try to take an extra base or bunt someone over. 



What do you do when you aren't scoring is the question?
As it pertains to Polanco, there was NO NEED to try for an extra base. His run meant nothing unless the next 2 batters also reached base and scored. What he NEEDED to do was keep the inning alive with 2 outs. His single would have done that. And, no doubt, he could have taken 2B on fielder's indifference a pitch later. But it didn't matter if he got to 2B unless the next 2 batters also reached base and scored. Aggression has to have a purpose to be useful. There was no purpose in trying to stretch a single into a double with 2 outs and 3 runs behind. All he did was take an unnecessary risk that ended the game and had no upside even if successful. That can't be excused as "aggressive running" regardless of whether the team has been scoring or not. 


In that situation it was bad. No doubt about it. What if it was the second inning? An overall team strategy can still come into play.

646F676B6E6F743137407961686F6F2E636F000 wrote: If you have talent and are scoring runs, you wouldn't need to try to take an extra base or bunt someone over. 



What do you do when you aren't scoring is the question?


The answer is you take each game situation and player(s) involved as a unique situation and put your team in the best position to succeed. There is no one strategy (aggressive or non-aggressive) that fits all situations. It's also worth noting that a team that doesn't hit or run particularly well (like the Pirates) won't be helped or hurt enough by any base running strategy to make them significantly better or worse.






That doesn't always happen.  There are teams that run more than others when put in the same situation. 



The Rickey Henderson A's were stealing, very aggressive.  The Earl Weaver Orioles were waiting for the blast, not aggressive.  Two different strategies in the same situation.




Of course it always happens because the situation always includes both the game context and the players involved. If Weaver would have had Rickey Henderson his strategy might have been different. He didn't so he used a strategy that worked with the players he did have.



Your point about the A's and Orioles actually supports the idea that it always happens based on a manager's evaluation of the unique context of the game and the players involved.



Just because ice cream has no bones doesn't mean it lacks calcium.

You don't think teams in general have strategies? You think it's always situational?



I think game plans can change, but overall I think teams have general strategies. These are based on the talents of the players.

I am a Hurdle supporter but this is where I hold him accountable. You don't pull a player out of the game immediately after he makes a mental mistake as that is showing him up in front of the fans. However you should sit down with the player after the game and tell him that he is going to be benched going forward until you are confident that he has learned from the mistake. Set a guideline for mental errors. First offense=1 game. Second offense=3 games, Third offense= 1 week, Fourth=30 games, Fifth=Back to the minors if they have an option etc.