The problem is you shouldn’t be playing for one run in the 3rd inning. You’re increasing your chances of scoring a run, but you’re significantly decreasing your chances of a big inning.

Of course, these general points are being made in a vacuum. The decision was even more egregious considering Granderson was up next facing Price. To give everyone some perspective, that’s not a whole lot dumber than an NL team having the 8 hitter bunt with the pitcher up next. Of course, I wouldn’t expect a person with the intelligence to bat a guy with a .509 OPS vs. lefties in the leadoff spot to be able to understand this.

Of course this is different when you have a below average hitter (pitcher, Sardinha, Everett) at the plate.

Now the 1st and 2nd, nobody out situation, the chances of scoring at least one run slightly increase when you bunt successfully (again, assuming 100% success, and, on the other hand, no throwing errors). But again, the average number of runs scored decreases.

So as a late inning one-run strategy, a bunt makes sense for a bunting-type hitter when it’s 1st/2nd, nobody out. If it’s Cabrera at the plate, it makes no sense. If it’s tie game, man on first, nobody out, 7th inning, Laird up, I’d think about it. If it’s Thames at the plate, no way.

Bunting leads to fewer runs than swinging away. So it’s especially bad when your hitter who is least likely to do something positive is coming up next.

As for Everett, I will never fault moving guys to 2nd and 3rd with one out in a close game. It’s a smart play, but it obviously didn’t work this time.

Either way, nice call Coleman.