Never understood the reason behind this strategy

vegas0023 · Jul 28, 2005

Watching last night's STL/SD game. Top 9, lead off single with Pujols at the plate. LaRussa did not want a steal attempt because Pujols would have been walked intentionally. So he stayed on 1st and let Pujols hit. This is my question.

If the guy successfully stole 2nd, they would have most likely walked Pujols putting runners on 1st & 2nd because 1st base was open. If SD was satisfied with this, why didn't they just walk him? The end result would have been the same, 1st & 2nd.

Same thing with runners on 1st and 2nd. They will pitch to the guy in this situation rather than intentionally walking him to load the bases. However, if runners were on 2nd & 3rd, they will intentionally walk the guy. End result would have been the same: bases loaded in both situation.

I don't understand this thought process.:sad3:

blueedwards · Jul 28, 2005

its all about the potential for a double play. pujols is a great hitter but, he is a nice dp candidate if he hits it on the ground

D2bets · Jul 28, 2005

vegas0023 said:
Watching last night's STL/SD game. Top 9, lead off single with Pujols at the plate. LaRussa did not want a steal attempt because Pujols would have been walked intentionally. So he stayed on 1st and let Pujols hit. This is my question.

If the guy successfully stole 2nd, they would have most likely walked Pujols putting runners on 1st & 2nd because 1st base was open. If SD was satisfied with this, why didn't they just walk him? The end result would have been the same, 1st & 2nd.

Same thing with runners on 1st and 2nd. They will pitch to the guy in this situation rather than intentionally walking him to load the bases. However, if runners were on 2nd & 3rd, they will intentionally walk the guy. End result would have been the same: bases loaded in both situation.

I don't understand this thought process.:sad3:

I think you are completely discounting the potential and risk/reward of the runner being thrown out attempting to steal. While 1st and 2nd for STL might have been slightly more desirable for STL, considering that Pujols was at the plate it was not enough better to be worth risking the runner getting thrown out stealing.

PokerKingJim · Jul 28, 2005

It's all about moving the baserunners up a base. Would they rather have a runner on first with Pujols up or would they rather have 1st and 2nd with somebody else up? usualy they'd rather have Pujols up with just a guy on first. That is why they wouldn't "intentionally" walk him there. Intentionally walking a guy with runners on 2nd and 3rd is much different than walking a guy with runners on 1st and 2nd because now the runners advance a base by walking the batter - not to mention that it now puts the double play into account as Blue mentioned.

royalfan · Jul 28, 2005

vegas0023 said:
Watching last night's STL/SD game. Top 9, lead off single with Pujols at the plate. LaRussa did not want a steal attempt because Pujols would have been walked intentionally. So he stayed on 1st and let Pujols hit. This is my question.

If the guy successfully stole 2nd, they would have most likely walked Pujols putting runners on 1st & 2nd because 1st base was open. If SD was satisfied with this, why didn't they just walk him? The end result would have been the same, 1st & 2nd.

Same thing with runners on 1st and 2nd. They will pitch to the guy in this situation rather than intentionally walking him to load the bases. However, if runners were on 2nd & 3rd, they will intentionally walk the guy. End result would have been the same: bases loaded in both situation.

I don't understand this thought process.:sad3:

Very simple. The team obviosly isn't satisfied with it so they don't do it. But once the base is already open it is a no brainer to walk the best hitter AND set up the double play. I think you are just having a brain glitch and if you think it through you will understand it is not an intelligent question.

And to answer your first part, there is no guarantee the steal will be successful so no need to risk it with arguably the best hitter in the bigs at the plate but if he knew it would work I think he would take it.

PanchoSanza · Jul 28, 2005

He is only walked if the steal is successful, which isn't guaranteed.

Can't see how the answer isn't obvious.:monsters-

royalfan · Jul 28, 2005

Pancho Sanza said:
He is only walked if the steal is successful, which isn't guaranteed.

Can't see how the answer isn't obvious.:monsters-

Not sure about that, many would unintentionally intentionally walk Pujols with one out none on also.

PanchoSanza · Jul 28, 2005

It was a none out situation, in that case no way does he get walked intentionally, putting a man in scoring position with none out.

royalfan · Jul 28, 2005

Pancho Sanza said:
It was a none out situation, in that case no way does he get walked intentionally, putting a man in scoring position with none out.

Not trying to get in a long argument but you said "the only way he would be walked is if the steal is successful." Call me nuts but if the steal isn't successful there would be one out and nobody on.