Using that logic would mean every time a batter grounded out and a runner moved up a base it would be a sacrifice. Obviously that is not the case. There are times when a batter will intentionally ground out to the right side in order to move a runner from second to third but that's not a sacrifice either because hitting to the right side also allows for the possibility of a base hit, thus the batter is not sacrificing himself.
I read an article a year or so back on this topic, I'll post here if I can find it again. If my memory is correct, there have been periods where all it took was advancing a runner to get the AB scored as a sacrifice, but that is going back to pre WW2 time periods. The scoring system that is in place now and was described in the documents you posted has been in effect since then. And I'm using WW2 as just a broad line of demarcation, it may be even further back in time than that when the change was made.
Yes… I should’ve known that a solution so elegantly simplistic has no place in baseball statistics.
While I’ll appreciate your effort to somewhat validate my question, I can assure you that my scorekeeping tenure does not predate the war.
For a bunt, it has to be deemed as a true sacrifice bunt for it to be a sacrifice. If the official scorer believes the batter was trying to bunt for a hit, but makes an out. Then, it is not a sacrifice even if the runner(s) advance.Yes… I should’ve known that a solution so elegantly simplistic has no place in baseball statistics.
I knew that the ground ball was not, but always thought a fly out to move a runner was.
So a bunt for an out that moves a runner is always a sacrifice.
A fly out that moves a runner may be a sacrifice if it moves the runner home.
A ground out that moves the runner is just an out…. Or maybe a fielders choice.
While true, I will note that in college ball a bunt that advances the runner is almost always scored a sacrifice. I can remember a couple times this season where Tech batters tried obvious drag bunts and failed, but the AB was still scored as a sacrifice. In one instance the "sacrifice" was around the 7th inning, we were down 4 runs or so, and on another Tech message board it led to a diatribe against CFDH about how it was stupid to sacrifice bunt down 4 late in the game.
Is it REALLY funny?
Poor choice of words. But it is interesting when you consider the considerable talent that has come through Tech on the offensive side that the so many of the players that are climbing the ranks to the major leagues seem to be pitchers of late. To be sure with the likes of players like Bart, Malloy and McCann we have seen some success from position players as well, but considering what we have all felt has been a traditional sore spot it is a bit comical that we are seeing such success at that position. Though I suppose the amount of time it takes for most players to make it to the League results in the guys we are reading about coming from a time when it was not the sore spot it is now explains it for the most part. I am wondering how long it will take Parada to make it to the Show and if/when it happens will he still be a catcher or at 1B/3B?Is it REALLY funny?
We have all said this numerous times, the talent has been there for a handful of our guys. We just don’t have the right staff to get the best out of them.
Was hoping he would get to Durham this season. Went to a Bulls game tonight. Season almost over for AAA.
www.mlb.com
