There are too many unwritten rules surrounding bunting.
The common one is you shouldn’t bunt to break up a no-hitter. The other common one is you shouldn’t bunt with a big lead.
But in regards to breaking up a no-hitter, what if it’s a close game? What if you’re only down one or two runs? Shouldn’t you be trying anything you can to get on base and win the game?
As for bunting with a big lead - first, what defines “big” lead? Five runs? Six runs? 10 runs? And what if it’s still early in the game, say, the fourth inning or earlier?
Ok, so Berrios was going for the shut out, and the Orioles were behind 0-7 in the ninth, but the batter saw a defensive shift and decided to bunt around it. He bunted successfully and beat the shift. This really irked the Twins. Was he supposed to just flail away at the plate and hit into the shift? And wouldn’t the other side of it be … why were the Twins playing a defensive shift with a 7-0 lead in the ninth? Speaking of unwritten rules. Pot, meet kettle.
The on deck circle has a lot of rules, be they written or otherwise, that I don’t really get. As Adrian Beltre found out, the on deck batter is supposed to be inside the on deck circle until he’s up to bat. Hitters love to get as close to home plate as possible to get the most realistic view of the pitcher. Umpires usually don’t pay close attention, except of course to Beltre. The unwritten part is that if a batter gets too close while on deck, or heaven forbid if he goes to other side of the plate while he’s on deck, the first pitch he sees may be close to his earhole. I think on deck batters should be allowed to stand wherever they want.
Eh, I can see the reason for it. Having him wander about can be distracting to the pitcher who should be concentrating on what he’s doing. Plus, players get up to all sorts of shenanigans when left to their own devices. Look up why there’s a third base coaches box sometime.
Another weird one, more superstition than anything else, is not stepping on the foul line. That one’s so ingrained I once saw Mitch Webster make a ballet-like pirouette to avoid it when he was coming down from a leap to catch a ball. He was hyper-aware that the foul line was there and he was determined not to touch it.
If you pitch around someone while first base is occupied, you’re pushing a runner into scoring position. If first base is open, pitching around someone can avoid a dangerous batter and set up a double-play. There’s lotsa factors, but those are big ones.
The pitcher doesn’t want the on-deck batter timing his pitches, or getting a good read on his form that day, or whatever - he wants to keep the batter off-balance when they’re facing each other. So if the on-deck batter is getting too good a look when he’s not the one at bat, he’s kinda ‘cheating’ off the current match-up.
A famous example was when Ben Davis bunted and broke up Curt Schilling’s no hit bid in the eighth inning of a 2-0 game. The thing was, it was a 2-0 game; it’s Davis’s job to try to win ballgames, but get a no hitter for some other team’s pitcher. Davis was being paid good money to win ballgames, and he did the right thing.
OK, I was viewing it the other way (since it’s the defense which is trying for outs). But viewing it as the offense team, I’d think that the “rules” would be “Don’t get the first out at second base. Don’t get the last out at first base. Don’t get the second out at home. In fact, just don’t get any outs at all”.
It’s a matter of risk analysis. Baseball guys not, in general (local exceptions occur. Study Davey Johnson), being math guys they sum up this statement:
“In general, the added risk of ending an inning exceeds the potential payoff. Staying on second instead of aggressively heading for third is a better option for run scoring.”
I know that, but I don’t think it gives the batter any great advantage. As a pitcher I never paid any bit of attention to where the on deck guy was standing. However, my best friend played shortstop in almost every league I did and he was very vigilant about where that guy was and would let me know “can’t let him stand there.” I never cared, but it was important to others, so I’d have to brush that guy back.
The situation I was describing (evidently, not clearly enough) was when a runner is criticized for stealing second with a good hitter up, because that “leaves first base open” and allows the other team to “pitch around” and walk the hitter. Regardless of whether you walk that hitter semi-intentionally with a man on second and first base open or if you do it with a man on first, the outcome is men on first and second.
I’d bunt or do anything else deliberately to foil a shift if it was costing me hits. Eventually the other team would learn it was a bad idea.
I was reading a book about sports happenings in 1941 which partially focused on baseball (DiMaggio’s hit streak and Ted Williams hitting .406). This apparently was the first time an opposing team (the Jimmy Dykes-managed White Sox) put on the “Williams Shift”, and loaded the right side of the infield. Williams happily hit to left field including a double and bunt single and the shift was abandoned - until the 1946 World Series when the Cards used it against him, Williams was too stubborn to take what he was given and refused to hit to the opposite field.
You’re criticized because if you try to steal second, and get tagged out, then the hitter is walked, not only was the steal unnecessary (you’d have been on 2nd anyway) but you cost your team an out in the process. Sure, if you steal second and the batter gets a hit you’re in a better position to make it to third or run home but I think from a risk/reward perspective it’s considered more rational to stay put. And stealing second might be seen as showing off also, and padding your stats in base stealing, at the potential expense of the rest of the team.
Also, if the guy at the plate is a real slugger and has a good chance at a home run, again stealing second gets you nothing. Getting tagged out costs an out and also a run since it would become a solo homer instead of two runs.
It depends on who the batters are, too. It makes sense to walk a scary hitter, whether the runner is on first or second, if there’s a much easier out behind him (Barry Bonds sometimes drew intentional walks with the bases loaded). But if you’re in the middle of Murderers’ Row, go at 'em and take your chances.
These are not “unwritten rules”. These are “accepted strategies”. Unwritten rules are the things that, if you do, your opponents get mad at you over. Accepted strategies are things that, if you break, you’d better win the Series because otherwise, your fans will get mad at you over.
Just how much control do batters have over where they hit it? I’d have to think it’s not very much, given that they don’t even hit it at all two thirds of the time.
We had a thread here two weeks ago, about the defensive shift, and why more hitters don’t try to hit away from it. Consensus: for the sort of player whose batting habits cause a defense to put on a shift, he’s likely hit it to one field much of his career, and “hit it the other way” is probably not as simple as it sounds.
Also, Ted Williams (mentioned in Jackmannii’s post) and Ichiro (mentioned by running coach) were particularly gifted hitters, with amazing bat control, even by MLB standards.
I would also expect a baserunner who’s quick enough to steal second would also stand a fair chance of scoring from first on a double, making the steal even less worthwhile.
