Last week I railed against improper use of closers and starters.
This week, my topic of choice is the intentional walk, one of the most inane plays in baseball.
It seems almost axiomatic for a lot of managers -- if the opposition has a runner on second, or runners on second and third, walk the next guy. Whether it's to set up the double play, or even if there are already two outs in an inning, it seems like it gives managers of teams in the field the heebie-jeebies if the deck (or in this case, the bases) is *NOT* fully loaded against them.
Now, obviously, there are scenarios in which the intentional walk makes sense. If the next guy due is the pitcher, and you have reason to believe the other manager won't pinch-hit (i.e., the starter is in the game, and you're still in the early innings...another stupid and axiomatic move that I railed against last week), then it makes sense to walk the #8 guy. By extension if the guy due up next is a *GREAT* hitter, and the guy up now is a creampuff, then in also makes sense.
But that's about it. Because intentional walks that load the bases GREATLY reduce the pitcher's margin for error. If you go 2-0 on a batter with the bases loaded, he can just about sit dead-red, and that just might turn a .200 into a .400 hitter. Of course, with 3 balls and the bases loaded, a pitcher is absolutely obligated to throw a strike. The batter knows this, and that knowledge gives him a much better shot.
Much moreso than the movement of his pitches, the success of any pitcher is predicated on his ability to fool the batter. That requires an extensive arsenal of different pitches to throw and the liberty to be able to throw the ball anywhere on, above, below or around the plate. Not only does having a bases loaded situation put enormous pressure on the pitcher, his effectiveness is further limited by the batter's knowledge that he *MUST* throw a strike.
Managers nowadays seem to have forgotten the art of the unintentional intentional walk. It *IS* possible to direct your pitcher to avoid giving the batter anything to hit, without throwing the ball 15 feet outside. I can't for the life of me understand why managers don't ALWAYS direct their pitchers to give the unintentional-intentional pass when the situation calls for it, rather than the automatic IBB. In the worst case scenario, the situation ends up exactly as it would have with a conventional IBB. In the best case scenario, the overzealous batter swings at the pitchers junk and strikes out or hits a weak groundball.
In almost all scenarios, I HATE intentional walks.
This week, my topic of choice is the intentional walk, one of the most inane plays in baseball.
It seems almost axiomatic for a lot of managers -- if the opposition has a runner on second, or runners on second and third, walk the next guy. Whether it's to set up the double play, or even if there are already two outs in an inning, it seems like it gives managers of teams in the field the heebie-jeebies if the deck (or in this case, the bases) is *NOT* fully loaded against them.
Now, obviously, there are scenarios in which the intentional walk makes sense. If the next guy due is the pitcher, and you have reason to believe the other manager won't pinch-hit (i.e., the starter is in the game, and you're still in the early innings...another stupid and axiomatic move that I railed against last week), then it makes sense to walk the #8 guy. By extension if the guy due up next is a *GREAT* hitter, and the guy up now is a creampuff, then in also makes sense.
But that's about it. Because intentional walks that load the bases GREATLY reduce the pitcher's margin for error. If you go 2-0 on a batter with the bases loaded, he can just about sit dead-red, and that just might turn a .200 into a .400 hitter. Of course, with 3 balls and the bases loaded, a pitcher is absolutely obligated to throw a strike. The batter knows this, and that knowledge gives him a much better shot.
Much moreso than the movement of his pitches, the success of any pitcher is predicated on his ability to fool the batter. That requires an extensive arsenal of different pitches to throw and the liberty to be able to throw the ball anywhere on, above, below or around the plate. Not only does having a bases loaded situation put enormous pressure on the pitcher, his effectiveness is further limited by the batter's knowledge that he *MUST* throw a strike.
Managers nowadays seem to have forgotten the art of the unintentional intentional walk. It *IS* possible to direct your pitcher to avoid giving the batter anything to hit, without throwing the ball 15 feet outside. I can't for the life of me understand why managers don't ALWAYS direct their pitchers to give the unintentional-intentional pass when the situation calls for it, rather than the automatic IBB. In the worst case scenario, the situation ends up exactly as it would have with a conventional IBB. In the best case scenario, the overzealous batter swings at the pitchers junk and strikes out or hits a weak groundball.
In almost all scenarios, I HATE intentional walks.