clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Curtis Granderson: Bunting is OK in a no-no

Ya'll remember that no-no Josh Beckett was spinning last week? Do you remember Gerald Laird's bunt attempt in the sixth inning as well? Curtis Granderson says there shouldn't be a problem bunting in a no-hit game -- that's baseball:

"The name of the game is to try and win the game," Granderson wrote. "If bunting is a part of your game, like it is for Gerald, why not try a bunt? I have always been confused by all these unwritten rules in baseball that make no sense to me."

Granderson reasons that if Laird would have bunted to break up a no-hit bid in the third inning, he shouldn’t be criticized for trying to do the same thing in a later at-bat. In a close game, why wouldn’t a player try to get a hit — or a run — any way he can?

"A bunt is a hit and has to be defended," Granderson wrote. "It’s part of the game."

I agree with Mr. Granderson here, who, by the way, is an outfield star for Nine Pedroias (that's my fantasy team's name!). While it may be, in some situations, a "cheap" way to break up a no-no, it's part of the game. If a bunt's going to work (and at least give the team a chance at coming back to win -- presuming they are already losing), then it shouldn't be taken out of the scenario just because it's not a hard-hit ball to center field.

Here's my problem: Gerald Laird is a catcher. What the? Who the? What the hell kind of catcher in the American League bunts? That's where Granderson is wrong. Catchers are meant to hit into a double plays and occasionally hit 500-foot bombs. Not bunt. That's like Granderson not striking out 100 times in a season -- it just doesn't happen.