I saw the argument in the game thread....

[VanSlawAndCottoCheese]

<!--quoteo(post=53119:date=Jul 29 2009, 01:56 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Jul 29 2009, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Just for the sake of argument, let's say (and I'm just going to make these numbers up):

- batting Fox and having him swing away (or work the count off a wild Valverde) in that situation has a 65% chance of producing a run
- batting Fontenot and having him do the same has a 60% chance of producing a run
- batting Fontenot and having him execute a squeeze play has a 55% chance of producing a run

Why in the fuck would anyone pick anything other than option 1? Even if the percentages were 65%, 64%, and 63%, why would anyone pick anything other than option 1?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Butcher, are you that risk-averse that you would never consider bucking the odds? I mean, while I consider myself a stat wonk (and, for the record, I would have put Fox in there to hack away), I dig the occasional surprise move. In an age dominated by percentages, I find it assuring (and more than a little uplifting) that a manager try an occasional loopy gambit.