DFA the IBB?
by Lord Duggan on Jun 3, 2011 1:01 PM EDT
in New York Yankees Analysis
Email
Print
Mood Music - Ring of Fire by Johnny Cash
More from me today, sorry.
I was listening to two of my favorite baseball people talk about the game: Bill James and Joe Posnanski on Joe Posnanski's 'Poscast,' and they talked about something that I thought was very interesting.
After Posnanski expressed his frustration with the anti-competitive and anti-climactic way in which intentional walks cause the best and most exciting players (Jose Bautista, Josh Hamilton, Miguel Cabrera, etc.) to get the bat taken out of their hands at crucial points of the game, not to mention intentionally walking the eighth place hitter to bring the pitcher to the plate in the NL, James offered an extremely intriguing solution:
What if the opposing manager and batter had the option of declining a walk? In most cases, the batters would be only too happy to take first base, but if the winning run is in scoring position with two outs, it forces the pitching team to face the dangerous hitter.
To prevent the pitcher from endlessly pitching around the batter they don't want to face, James suggested that after each set of four balls, the batter would have the option of taking another base. For example, if eight balls are thrown, the batter can elect to go to second base and move everyone else up two bases.
I'm sure it's not a perfect solution, but it seemed like some good food for thought, and a great way to stop intentional walks from sapping the excitement out of rallies. Thoughts?
50 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No.
if anything, I’d rather them just walk the batter without throwing 4 pitches
Last night, a comedian died in New York. Somebody knows why. Somebody knows
I love when the other team walks a guy and then the pitcher can’t find the strike zone. I hate when it happens to the Yankees. If pitcher 1 is throwing an IBB, that needs to be his last batter.
"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."
@jscape2000
this
I don’t recall seeing a ball go to the backstop on an IBB, ever. I’m sure it’s happened, but it’s so rare as to make the time wasted with windup and pitch a complete waste.
May 29, 2010: Steven Revetria becomes Giants General Manager. The rest is history.
"118 elements, and still no stanfurdium"- carp, paraphrased
Bandwagons are fun- that's why people get on them in the first place.
by natteringnabob on Jun 3, 2011 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions
sorry
I don’t watch a lot of Anaheim Angles of Los Angeles games. By which I mean none, unless the Yanks happen to be on here today (which they might be).
May 29, 2010: Steven Revetria becomes Giants General Manager. The rest is history.
"118 elements, and still no stanfurdium"- carp, paraphrased
Bandwagons are fun- that's why people get on them in the first place.
by natteringnabob on Jun 4, 2011 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Every once in a while it matters
MCab hit an “intentional” ball for an RBI single a couple years back: http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/13493228/
I know someone hit a home run off of an IBB pitch that a pitcher screwed up at some point. I read about it years ago, don’t remember who that was now.
It happens rarely enough, but it does happen.
"Game's the same, just got more fierce." ~ Slim Charles
I should have scrolled down
This was already posted, nevermind
"Game's the same, just got more fierce." ~ Slim Charles
No, that solution is just weird.
The pitcher has to be allowed to throw the ball where he wants to throw it. What’s the record for IBB? 120 by Bonds in 2004? I don’t see it as enough of a problem to demand fixing.
Just as often, it seems, teams are walking a guy who is struggling because it’s “the smart baseball move.” In that phrase, ‘baseball’ inverts the meaning of ‘smart.’
"Have faith in the Yankees, my son. Think of the great DiMaggio."
@jscape2000
I've thought about this...
I think it would make sense to give the batter the option of declining an IBB, but not before the 4 balls are thrown. If not, then I’d like to do away with throwing the 4 balls entirely and just have the ump tell the batter to take first base, kind of like the defensive indifference to second thing. A “just go” type of thing. But I do think the idea of giving the batter the option of taking an IBB or not is fair. More time than not, they’ll take it anyway.
"Our problem right now is we have too many pitchers on the 15-day Pavano. That's what it's officially called now. Did you know that? The Pavano. His body just shuts down from actually pitching for 6 weeks. It's like when you get an organ transplant and your body rejects it. His body rejected pitching. It's not used to it." - Moose
by luckiBelle on Jun 3, 2011 1:27 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
This is an intriguing possibility
I’d love to see a game go into extra innings and end when the best hitter on the home team gets a 16-ball walk!
That's what they do in coed softball
No thanks.
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
What I wish is that when they try to intentionally walk someone
The batter has a right to jump over the batters box and try to swing at the ball!
"WHO WOULD LEAD?! THE CLOWN?!"
by I'mGivingYouARaise on Jun 3, 2011 1:39 PM EDT reply actions
There's been occasions
where the pitcher has gotten a pitch too close to the batter and has actually given up a hit. Miguel Cabrera did it several years ago, I think it was a game winner. Willie Mays and Ted Williams homered while being intentionally walked. There are many more.
I bet it's good to be playing again, huh?
Really?
Haha, that’s both sad & awesome at the same time.
"WHO WOULD LEAD?! THE CLOWN?!"
by I'mGivingYouARaise on Jun 3, 2011 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh, and speaking of awesome.
X-Men: First Class was excellent!
"WHO WOULD LEAD?! THE CLOWN?!"
by I'mGivingYouARaise on Jun 3, 2011 1:49 PM EDT reply actions
I've never had a problem with intentional walks. It's part of
the strategy of the game. It’s also pretty dramatic when someone is walked to face another who promptly delivers a HR. Changing rules for the sake of changing rules is not the baseball way.
While we are at it
why don’t we put up a baskets in the foul area, and if the batter gets the ball in the basket, its an autmatic home run. Actually, we could put different size baskets, with the bigger baskets being a single, a double, etc., you get the drift. Or let the batter choose to use a spring loaded bat, with the caveat that if he hits a homer, it only counts as a double. Maybe we could use a bigger ball, and require the fielders to bounce pass it to first base. I know, I know, one more great idea. Let’s change the name to Beerball, and, and…
by Cuernos on Jun 3, 2011 2:01 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Great ideas
I think someone should make these things happen.
I bet it's good to be playing again, huh?
Was I too sarcastic in my point?
If so, sorry Duggan. Two of the reasons I love the game is tradition and strategy. The ideas floated go against both. What you need is to protect your good hitters by having good hitters batting behind them. IBB is a way to exploit a weakness, and I love it when it blows up by having the “weak hitter” hit the ball. The last inovation I liked is the DH, and that’s maybe bc it happened so long ago I did not notice (was I eve alive?). I do not like interleague games and would not like an 8 ball double, or a “thanks but no thanks” rule to IBB.
No, No, No
Baseball is great, in part, because the rules don’t change. This is one of those rule ideas that people who say the game is too boring come up with.
One of the things that makes baseball the ultimate team game is that you cannot put your best player in the box with the game on the line, like you can give the ball the LeBron or tell Brady to throw it to Moss.
If Justin Tuck didn't clean his clock in the backfield first
"Game's the same, just got more fierce." ~ Slim Charles
This will not stop intentional walks. Catchers will just set up low and outside when Jose Bautista is up at the plate in a tight situation, he’ll walk on 4 pitches that aren’t even close, and they’ll move on to the next hitter.
I think the idea there is that he can keep declining the walks, and every set of 4 balls thrown, he gets an extra base. So if he technically walks twice, he can get second base.
Contributing writer for Pinstripe Alley.
I believe in the Church of Baseball.
- Annie Savoy
You go through The Sporting News for the last 100 years, and you will find two things are always true. You never have enough pitching, and nobody ever made money.
- Donald Fehr
by Frank Campagnola on Jun 3, 2011 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I just think this is a terrible idea.
First, suppose that A-Rod works the count to 4-1 against Jonathan Papelbon, and A-Rod declines the walk and keeps hitting. What happens to the strikes? Does the at-bat reset, or does he continute with an 0-1 count?
Second, where would you draw the line as far as hitters declining walks? If Brett Gardner sees 4 balls, declines the walk, and then sees another 4 balls, can he keep declining until he scores?
Third, faced with the very real possibility that some of the tougher hitters in the game could now actually see the equivalent of two or more at-bats, back-to-back, what does this do to pitch counts, bullpen rotations, in-game management, and the overall health of pitchers’ shoulders and elbows, let alone the pace of the game? MLB complains when 9-inning Yankees/Red Sox games are 4 hours long as it is; imagine if Kevin Youkilis, Dustin Pedroia, Brett Gardner, or Nick Swisher go from having a couple of 8-10 pitch ABs to having a couple of 15-18 pitch ABs.
Back in the 1800s, the hitter could call for a high pitch or a low pitch, and at times it took as many as 8 balls to issue a walk. There’s a reason they changed the rules.
1) The count is 4-1, A-Rod declines, and continues batting with 1 strike.
2) Throwing 8 balls would result in two bases anyway. And it’s harder for one batter to draw two walks with only 3 strikes than two batters who have a total of six strikes.
3) The idea is that instead of them seeing two at bats, they are pitched to the first time. If it does go longer because they have been thrown 4 balls, it’s the same as walking hitter #1 and facing hitter #2 as far as pitch count goes.
I’m not surprised at the overly negative reaction, but the majority of the complaints about the idea are either “NEVER CHANGE ANYTHING” or issues that are easily handled. It’s definitely not a perfect solution, but neither is the best and most exciting players in the game getting the bat taken out of their hands at big moments in the game.
Baseball Statistics and Acronyms Explained
Follow me on the tweetbox - @LordDuggan12
"never change anything" is the right approach because baseball is fine the
way it is. Then again, if they could find a way to incorporate trampolines, I’m in.
If you really want to eliminate the 8th hitter getting walked to face the pitcher
Just institute the DH in the NL. The NL had 200 extra IBBs than the AL last year, I assume the pitcher batting was a big part. If you really want to ratchet up excitement, give that ninth slot to good hitter.
But yeah, I like the IBB. Baseball is not basketball, it’s a team sport. And pitchers will still pitch around good hitters, it just won’t be so blatant. The IBB is just one more reason you need to protect your good hitters with other quality hitters behind them, that’s all.
"Game's the same, just got more fierce." ~ Slim Charles
DH Excitement!
Nick Johnson says hi!
Leave the NL alone, please.
May 29, 2010: Steven Revetria becomes Giants General Manager. The rest is history.
"118 elements, and still no stanfurdium"- carp, paraphrased
Bandwagons are fun- that's why people get on them in the first place.
by natteringnabob on Jun 4, 2011 3:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Why does everyone want to change baseball lately
First its the talk of no home plate collisions.Now its no intentional walks?In baseball, four balls equals a walk. Just because they throw them intentionally shouldn’t change the fact its a walk. Baseball is PERFECT the way it is. The only changes should be to instant replay and use of umpires. I mean whats next? Home runs are automatic grand slams? Of course it would make the game more interesting but so would adding cheerleaders in g-strings.It seems like every time the Yankees have an off day some odd topic of conversation is brought up. Don’t worry everybody we play tonight at 10.
this makes no sense
how is this fair?
IBB: man on base
decline IBB: can still hit a game winning home run
what does the defending team get out of this?
if they want to have that rule then the offensive team should have to give up an out. Don’t want them to walk you and pitch to an inferior hitter? give up an out and you can stay there as long as it takes to hit it into play. That would be fair…but stupid.
Simple just hit the batter with the ball
by HappyLuckyGoldenDragonNumber1! on Jun 3, 2011 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions
they should just do that anyway
Last night, a comedian died in New York. Somebody knows why. Somebody knows
The game would take to long.
Plus it seems like there are so many flaws in that. I know it’s just a thought, but not a fan.
Hollywood as Hell
Definitely interesting
But besides the fact that I don’t ever see it happening, as it does seem like some sort of rec league rule, the IBB is a classic managing tool and can be exciting in its own rite. You might not want to let the best bat beat you, but at the end of the day, the pitcher tends to have a statistical advantage, from a basic outlook because it is baseball after all, where failing 7 out of 10 times is successful in most eyes. You may take the bat out of a hot hand or set up a force out or outs, but it’s still a free pass, loading the bases means you can’t walk the next guy, and pitchers lose the zone after throwing four straight pitchouts sometimes.
But, an idea that appeals to me more is declining the base on a HBP
That would be a better deterrent to beanballs and warnings that only hamper the pitchers from then on. I know there would be no penalty for the HBP, but the manager could always accept the base if the hitter is weak. If it is A-Rod or Gonzo or Albert or Ortiz, letting him stay up could prove to be the best revenge.
Posnanski article further fleshing it out (link) although he does not articulate the idea himself, but links to the podcast where they discuss it.
Baseball Statistics and Acronyms Explained
Follow me on the tweetbox - @LordDuggan12
not a big problem
but an interesting solution to it anyway
http://mixedmartialartsblogger.wordpress.com/
You wasted a Johnny Cash classic on this drivel?
Only thing I agree with is just put the guy on and don’t waste 4 pitches. Works well in amateur baseball.
"I don't want one of those guys who'll drive in two but let in three every game." Casey Stengel
by tnredneckyankeesfan on Jun 3, 2011 7:29 PM EDT reply actions
Absolutely not.
Just a terrible idea. There’s being innovative and then there’s stuff like this. I pretty much agree with all criticism of it so far and see far too many flaws for this to even be considered. as people mentioned before, this is the reason baseball is the ultimate team game- your best players don’t always end up in the best situations.
Unless you're a pitcher or Gustavo Molina, kindly SWING THE BAT and ignore the Binder's bunt signal.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Pinstripe Alley
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
