Spaceman wrote:
Bob Hulsey wrote:
But, dangit, there are times too where scratching out a run wins a close game. Good teams need to be able to do both.

Bingo. The SABR types analyze at a macro level, and I do believe they are right in the big picture. HOWEVER, individual games are won at the micro level, sometimes coming down to a single at bat. Sabermetrics break down at that level, but good teams AND good managers must be able to do the things needed to win in many different situations. One can approach the game with a general "big-inning" philosophy and still utilize small-ball when the situation dictates.

The point that MGL is making is that a correct sabermetric analysis may well agree with what you and Bob are saying. Larry Dierker's book was relying on a win expectancy table (comparing "take an out and take a base" to "stay on 1st and swing away"), and MGL pointed out that such tables don't answer the question, because a reasonably good bunter can get on base without an out 20% of the time, not to mention the other variables like avoiding DPs and the like. I recall that Tangotier, also a co-author of The Book, chimed in with a blog entry showing that the value of the sac bunt varies with the "run environment," which is a fancy way of saying that the sac bunt has greater value in low scoring games (also the same point that you and Bob are making).