THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

Could step up to the plate with your IBB Bat (42") and actually try to hit one of the pitches.  Of course this would only work once as the pitcher would simply through that much farther off the plate or attack the batter knowing they have an unwieldy bat. 

Of course the batter may be able to switch back to their original bat.  I don’t know what the rules are on switching bats in the middle of an at-bat.

Have there been any studies that look at how batters who come up after intentional walks do as compared to how they otherwise do? I’ve heard baseball people say they don’t like intentional walks because they take the pitcher out of his rhythm. If there is any truth to this, it would make sense to swing at the first or second intentional ball if only to force the pitcher to throw even further outside, and hopefully mess with his rhythm.

I never understood why Barry Bonds didn’t do this. Force the pitcher to at least try to pitch to him. If nothing else it would have been more exciting for Bonds himself to play the game.

[Yes, I understand that usually the defensive manager was wrong to walk Barry Bonds. But I seriously doubt Bonds and his manager were sitting there saying “Ha-ha, they are walking me. That only increases our run expectancy and thus our chance of winning overall!” If everyone in the league thought it was better to walk him, I bet that Bonds and Felipe Alou thought it would have been better for him to get a chance to hit. So, that’s why I don’t understand why he didn’t swing at a few of those intentional balls.]

Of course they would still walk the batter even though it wouldn’t be correct. Since when do managers do things that are mathematically correct?  It’s like when they continue to bunt in a hitter’s count.  Just like the IBB, a sac bunt attempt is usually around a break even proposition, so surely you don’t want to bunt at 1-0, 2-0, 2-1, etc.  Yet managers do that all the time.  TLR did that the other day and that was one of my criticisms…

I like Bill James’s solution, which is to give the the batter the option to turn down the intentional walk (defined as 4 balls in a row to eliminate the “intentional unintentional walk").  If the pitcher walks the batter again, the batter gets *two* bases.

Geri:

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/changes_on_the_fly/

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/changing-on-the-fly/

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/ending_the_intentional_walk_and_breakeven_profiles/

Personally, the IBB doesn’t really bother me as a competitive issue; it only annoys me like any other bad strategy. Just curious. Does the intentional foul in basketball bother you as much as the IBB?

---"What do you think the defense is going to do?”
**********

I’d expect them to issue the IBB, as per the original strategy-whether or not it seems to now be suboptimal given the new count.  The issuing manager doesn’t want to be ‘gambited’ out of his call by the opposing manager. And the opposing manager doesn’t want his own opposition to start doing that to him when he himself calls for an IBB.  So it’s likely an unwritten agreement--you take the IBB when it is offered. Works fine for me.

In fact, the whole IBB scenario works fine for me, as presently constructed. First, the cost/benefit is apparently transparent enough to the managers so that the overall impact of the IBB in practice is close to neutral, as Tango points out. In simplified terms then, half the IBBs work well, and half blow up on the issuing team. I find that an interesting thing to observe and pass judgement on in real time in an individual game.  I’m not sure what is the spread of talent in issuing IBBs that exists among managers, but it surely has to exist. A topic for research?

Second, even if the overall impact is neutral, the ‘enjoyment’ of a managerial tactic that disrupts the mano a mano pitcher/hitter battle is dependent on its frequency. The present frequency of 1 IBB per 4 games, per team, seems about right to me. Of course, this is subjective, but that’s my opinion. If, say, the penalty for an IBB was increased to 2 bases for the batter, along with the implied forced advances for the baserunners, we might see only a few IBB per season, or none at all. In that case, it’s a non-option, and makes the game a bit less interesting, IMO. Others may disagree…

I don’t know the appropriate place to post this comment, but any of you guys feel like weighing on Rany Jazayerli’s seemingly ground-breaking article posted over at BP today?

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15295

No hijacking please.  In the future, find a draft thread, or email me, and I’ll create a thread.

This issue was explored in depth in the South Park episode “the losing edge” although there both the south park little league team and their opponents, Fort Collins both wanted to LOSE the game.
In this scene Stan of South Park is pitching to Morgan of Fort Collins

Umpire: Steerike!
FC Team: Yeah, all right!
Stan: Damnit!
Cartman: [sends the ball back to Stan] Come on, kid, you gotta at least swing at it.
Morgan: No way! I’m striking out!
Kyle: Dude, he’s not gonna swing! So just throw balls. That way he’ll have to walk to first base. [Stan thinks, then throws the pitch. It goes wide and Cartman catches it]
Umpire: Ball!
Cartman: All right! [throws it back to Stan]
FC Pitcher: Morgan!
Morgan: [looks over] What?
FC Pitcher: You have to swing when it’s a ball, otherwise, you’re gonna walk to first base. Don’t swing, only if it’s a strike!
Morgan: [faces the dugout] Well how the Sam Hell am I supposed to know if he’s gonna be throwing a strike or a ball?!
FC Pitcher: You just have to guess.
Morgan: Aw, Jesus! [turns around and goes back to bat. Stan looks to Cartman for cues]
Cartman: Ball. Balll. [Stan pitches right down the middle]
Umpire: Steerike two!
Stan: No!
Cartman: That was no strike, that was a terrible pitch! You need some Goddamned lasik surgery!
Mr. Pratt: Come on Fort Collins! This team can’t pitch! [Stan pitches, Morgan hits] There you go, Morgan! Run run run!
Morgan: Aw damnit! [heads to first base]
FC Pitcher: Why the hell did you swing at it?!
Morgan: Well I thought he was gonna throw a ball that time! 

This is also a good introduction to game theory

One of my teammates get walked intentionally sometimes, he always swings for two strikes just to raise the pitcher’s pitch count.

To raise the pitcher’s pitch count because pitchers in that league have a hard limit?  In that case: great idea!

Is it because he wants to “tire him out”?  In which case, it’s useless.  If he’s throwing a pitch at half-speed, that has virtually zero impact on his arm.  It’s like saying you can get tired playing catch.

I remember a Blue Jays game where there were two out and men on, but not on first.  The count got to 3-2 on John Olerud.  They called IBB and then grooved a called strike three.  I also remember the announcers thinking they might do it

#14

That is outstanding and jumps to the top of the list of stuff I wish I could watch on youtube right now.

If batters want to get all cute in protest to being IBB’d, I would to remind everyone that there is another way of getting the batter to 1B without the other runners advancing, and it only takes one pitch to accomplish it.

Pujols gets IBB’d a lot, so does Cabrera, and it really doesn;t seem to hurt the defense very often. Both guys just take their base. The most demonstrative I’ve seen Pujols get is to start walking toward 1B as the pitcher is making his delivery for ball 4.

My preference is for the pitcher to always challenge the hitter by throwing quality strikes. However, the rules allow for an IBB and teams issue them without having to pay for it more than it seems like they should. So, at times, it could be a good strategy.

In my league, pitchers under 18 are on a hard 100 pitch limit, he had that in mind.

The subject reminds me of the old joke about the guy that took the Scotsman to his 1st baseball game.

After explaining various situations of the game [and as the joke teller you can make this part of the joke as long or as short as you want], the Scotsman asked why the batter was walking to 1st base instead of running? “Because he has 4 balls” was the response.

“Walk with pride, Son. Walk with pride.”