Ned Yost Bunts and Sometimes That's Okay

Since there were five full days between the time the Kansas City Royals won the American League pennant and the World Series began, baseball writers needed to fill space writing about something. One of the topics of conversation during the playoffs has been Royals manager Ned Yost and his bunt-happy, statistics-be-damned ways.

Tom Haudricourt of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel wrote about Yost earlier this week, reflecting on his stint in charge of the Brewers that ended when he was fired with 12 games left in the 2008 season with the team still in the playoff hunt. Naturally the conversation with Milwaukee GM Bob Melvin turned toward bunts:

"Yost’s success in Kansas City hasn’t stopped him from being a human piñata for critics who chafe over his bunt-happy, off-to-the-races, Moneyball-defying tactics, even as the Royals were running the table in the postseason. While superior defense and a lockdown bullpen are primary reasons for the team’s success, Yost’s managerial style remains counterculture to the analytics-driven approach to modern baseball. “I know the analytics people don’t like the way he manages,” Melvin said. “But he’s in the World Series, so he must be doing something right. It’s fun watching that team, the way they play. “I’m not huge on bunting, either, but there are times when it can help you win games. That’s why you have to let the game play out. You manage according to the situation. You have to go by your instincts at times. We continue to try to kill our game with all these numbers.”"

The “kill our game” line to describe statistics coming from a general manager is somewhat eye-opening given the amount of data collection MLB teams use trying to glean a small advantage over the competition. It sounds more like something a fan or old school broadcaster like Hawk Harrelson would say in disgust. It’s also interesting Haudricourt would label someone decidedly old-school like Yost as counterculture, but I guess that’s where we stand with baseball in 2014.

One other takeaway from the Melvin quotes is the dynamic between general manager and field manager in analytics-driven world of baseball. Will GMs allow managers to have autonomy to call for bunts or make decisions against the percentages or will we see more situations develop like we saw in Houston between Jeff Luhnow and Bo Porter, which eventually contributed to a parting of ways in September?

Of course, you can still enjoy the game whether you worship at the alter of stats like wRC+ and fancy yourself as Andrew Friedman‘s next front office recruit or if you can recite Don Mattingly’s RBI total in 1987 (115!) and use it in a credible argument.

Every situation is different in baseball. Trying to find a catch-all strategy that works and produces a World Series winner, be it small-ball or on-base percentage teams waiting for the proverbial three-run homer, is a good idea at the organizational level but sometimes once the game begins that over-arching philosophy is overruled in the moment by managers pulling whatever strings they think will win a ballgame regardless of he percentages, ie. what Yost has been doing most of the playoffs. (Save the 7-1 loss to the Giants in Game 1 last night.)

Here’s some simple math via Baseball Prospectus Run Expectations data from 2012. A runner on first with no outs produced a runs yielded of 0.86, with a runner on second with one out it dropped to 0.65. With runners on first and second with zero outs the runs yielded check in at 1.44, while runners on second and third with one out went to 1.29. So the numbers say in at the macro level bunting doesn’t actually help and potentially takes you out of a bigger inning. Yost, I’d guess, has heard this more than once and still doesn’t care or is under any pressure from above to change his ways.

In a late-game situation in a close game, yeah, maybe playing for one run isn’t such a bad idea, especially with this current Kansas City team which has a lock-down bullpen built to protect a one-run lead over 2-3 innings. Alhough runs are down across the board in baseball it’s unlikely teams will give away outs to play for one run as a means to overcome a power shortage, as the Royals did this season.

Baseball, as crazy as this might sound is remains a game and not a bunch of actuary tables inside someone’s MacBook. Sometimes, riding with a manager’s gut feeling does work, as Yost showed when the Royals rolled off eight straight wins to start the postseason. That said, long-term it’s probably a smarter strategy to follow the proven percentages than someone’s gut reaction, however nothing says the two can’t work in concert with each other. A smart, modern baseball manager will certainly be required to follow both as time progresses.

Either way, something tells me this debate won’t be settled regardless of how the World Series turns out for the Royals.