THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

[Recon]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

Leave the rules the way they are and have been for centuries and place a ban on batters looking like Bionic Commandos

I do not agree with the idea of going to second on your 2nd walk. Because a lot of IBB are used to set up the double play.

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

I don't mind the intentional walk... I know Bonds because my friend's dad is Brian Sabean (the Giants' general manager). I know that he doesn't like the fact either, but he knows what he will have behind him... a clutch hitter. That's why he demands to either have Jose Cruz or J.T. Snow behind him, because he knows they are good with RISP. Bonds doesn't mind getting walked, but he minds losing because he gets walked. It's not fun for him if he could've been the one to produce a win instead of a loss.

What I DO mind is the unintentional intentional walk. That has GOT to go. Bonds knows it, and that gets him frusterated. If you aren't gonna pitch to him, intentionally walk him.

I'm not that mad that he gets walked so much, but what I DON'T understand is why do people give Sosa so many meat pitches? I don't get it. I remember in Colorado, there were runners on second and third, no outs, and they don't intentionally walk him. Instead, first pitch right down the middle... and he hit his first of 3 home runs in that game. I don't like how they are so scared of Bonds and no one else.

To keep it short, keep the intentional walk, but use it for strategy... not for Bonds.

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

I don't mind the intentional walk... I know Bonds because my friend's dad is Brian Sabean (the Giants' general manager). I know that he doesn't like the fact either, but he knows what he will have behind him... a clutch hitter. That's why he demands to either have Jose Cruz or J.T. Snow behind him, because he knows they are good with RISP. Bonds doesn't mind getting walked, but he minds losing because he gets walked. It's not fun for him if he could've been the one to produce a win instead of a loss.

What I DO mind is the unintentional intentional walk. That has GOT to go. Bonds knows it, and that gets him frusterated. If you aren't gonna pitch to him, intentionally walk him.

I'm not that mad that he gets walked so much, but what I DON'T understand is why do people give Sosa so many meat pitches? I don't get it. I remember in Colorado, there were runners on second and third, no outs, and they don't intentionally walk him. Instead, first pitch right down the middle... and he hit his first of 3 home runs in that game. I don't like how they are so scared of Bonds and no one else.

To keep it short, keep the intentional walk, but use it for strategy... not for Bonds.

[ryan36]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

I think what the intentional walk does that gets overlooked (in a way, this is a stretch) is help keep salaries down, and make it more of a team sport. Why?
1) stats stay lowered (albeit artifically)
2) Look at say Alex Rodriguez. Say he had nobody batting behind him, so he gets IBB'd all the time. Well he makes 25 million a year to hit doubles, get rbi's, knock homers and play defense. I could take his 25 million, and get two pretty damn good hitters for 12.5 mil each...and all of a sudden my #3 and #4 spots are productive...instead of just my #3.

Conversely, this would probably only apply to small market teams that couldn't afford to put some 15 million dollar protection behind a-rod...but I think you're seeing the pendulum shift to other side in baseball. I think more teams are understanding that you'll have more success by spreading the wealth around then by having nothing but stars. But every team does need a hitter that can go up against Pedro, Randy, Schilling, and get a hit. The teams that don't have the STUD bat somewhere in their lineup are the teams that win lots of regular season games, and then lose in the playoffs. (see the 2001 Mariners) Of course, that being said how does a team with Pedro, Lowe, Ramirez, Garciaparra not accomplish jack s**t in the playoffs?

Yes there are holes in the logic, but it is something to think about,IMO.

[ryan36]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

I think what the intentional walk does that gets overlooked (in a way, this is a stretch) is help keep salaries down, and make it more of a team sport. Why?
1) stats stay lowered (albeit artifically)
2) Look at say Alex Rodriguez. Say he had nobody batting behind him, so he gets IBB'd all the time. Well he makes 25 million a year to hit doubles, get rbi's, knock homers and play defense. I could take his 25 million, and get two pretty damn good hitters for 12.5 mil each...and all of a sudden my #3 and #4 spots are productive...instead of just my #3.

Conversely, this would probably only apply to small market teams that couldn't afford to put some 15 million dollar protection behind a-rod...but I think you're seeing the pendulum shift to other side in baseball. I think more teams are understanding that you'll have more success by spreading the wealth around then by having nothing but stars. But every team does need a hitter that can go up against Pedro, Randy, Schilling, and get a hit. The teams that don't have the STUD bat somewhere in their lineup are the teams that win lots of regular season games, and then lose in the playoffs. (see the 2001 Mariners) Of course, that being said how does a team with Pedro, Lowe, Ramirez, Garciaparra not accomplish jack s**t in the playoffs?

Yes there are holes in the logic, but it is something to think about,IMO.

[gamer]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
I think what the intentional walk does that gets overlooked (in a way, this is a stretch) is help keep salaries down, and make it more of a team sport. Why?
1) stats stay lowered (albeit artifically)
2) Look at say Alex Rodriguez. Say he had nobody batting behind him, so he gets IBB'd all the time. Well he makes 25 million a year to hit doubles, get rbi's, knock homers and play defense. I could take his 25 million, and get two pretty damn good hitters for 12.5 mil each...and all of a sudden my #3 and #4 spots are productive...instead of just my #3.

Conversely, this would probably only apply to small market teams that couldn't afford to put some 15 million dollar protection behind a-rod...but I think you're seeing the pendulum shift to other side in baseball. I think more teams are understanding that you'll have more success by spreading the wealth around then by having nothing but stars. But every team does need a hitter that can go up against Pedro, Randy, Schilling, and get a hit. The teams that don't have the STUD bat somewhere in their lineup are the teams that win lots of regular season games, and then lose in the playoffs. (see the 2001 Mariners) Of course, that being said how does a team with Pedro, Lowe, Ramirez, Garciaparra not accomplish jack s**t in the playoffs?

Yes there are holes in the logic, but it is something to think about,IMO.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Good ideas to think about.

[gamer]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
I think what the intentional walk does that gets overlooked (in a way, this is a stretch) is help keep salaries down, and make it more of a team sport. Why?
1) stats stay lowered (albeit artifically)
2) Look at say Alex Rodriguez. Say he had nobody batting behind him, so he gets IBB'd all the time. Well he makes 25 million a year to hit doubles, get rbi's, knock homers and play defense. I could take his 25 million, and get two pretty damn good hitters for 12.5 mil each...and all of a sudden my #3 and #4 spots are productive...instead of just my #3.

Conversely, this would probably only apply to small market teams that couldn't afford to put some 15 million dollar protection behind a-rod...but I think you're seeing the pendulum shift to other side in baseball. I think more teams are understanding that you'll have more success by spreading the wealth around then by having nothing but stars. But every team does need a hitter that can go up against Pedro, Randy, Schilling, and get a hit. The teams that don't have the STUD bat somewhere in their lineup are the teams that win lots of regular season games, and then lose in the playoffs. (see the 2001 Mariners) Of course, that being said how does a team with Pedro, Lowe, Ramirez, Garciaparra not accomplish jack s**t in the playoffs?

Yes there are holes in the logic, but it is something to think about,IMO.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Good ideas to think about.

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

Did you see today? A's @ Yankees? Runner on 2nd, no outs, bottom of the 9th, and Giambi is up (the possible tieing run). Why don't they intentionally walk him? Stupid not to, considering he hit the game tieing homer... which the A's won anyways... but still.

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

Did you see today? A's @ Yankees? Runner on 2nd, no outs, bottom of the 9th, and Giambi is up (the possible tieing run). Why don't they intentionally walk him? Stupid not to, considering he hit the game tieing homer... which the A's won anyways... but still.

[ryan36]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

I think that Ken Macha (as I'm seeing with Bob Melvin in Seattle) has some little things to get used to. I mean, I'm sure the idea to walk Giambi occured to him, but a more experienced manager would have probably done it. But whenever you walk a guy in that situation, the offense might bunt and get second and third with one out, the go-ahead run at the plate, and the tying run in scoring position. With one out, Giambi would've been walked, IMO. Not that the Yankees ever bunt, but Macha may not have wanted the go-ahead run at the plate.

[ryan36]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

I think that Ken Macha (as I'm seeing with Bob Melvin in Seattle) has some little things to get used to. I mean, I'm sure the idea to walk Giambi occured to him, but a more experienced manager would have probably done it. But whenever you walk a guy in that situation, the offense might bunt and get second and third with one out, the go-ahead run at the plate, and the tying run in scoring position. With one out, Giambi would've been walked, IMO. Not that the Yankees ever bunt, but Macha may not have wanted the go-ahead run at the plate.

[ryan36]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

plus, was a lefty pitching?

[ryan36]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

plus, was a lefty pitching?

[MSRoble33]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

To take the intentional walk out of baseball would be like taking the intentional fouls out of basketball, the "throw out of bounds" in football, and pulling the goalie in hockey.. Just a strategical part of the game that makes the sport as great as it is today.

[MSRoble33]

Re: THE INTENTIONAL WALK MUST GO!!!!

To take the intentional walk out of baseball would be like taking the intentional fouls out of basketball, the "throw out of bounds" in football, and pulling the goalie in hockey.. Just a strategical part of the game that makes the sport as great as it is today.