Poll: Intentional Walks - Good or Bad for Baseball

[Garet Jax]

I think they're bad, because they allow a team to take another teams best player out of the game.

 

[waylman]

neither good or bad, it is just part of the game.

 

[anxi80]

i dont like when they do them, but i understand its part of the game and its stragety. it cant really be prevented either, you cant force a pitcher to throw strikes or at least a pitch near the plate.

edit: forgot to add, so yeah, im impartial.

 

[Tom]

It's part of the game.

What is BAD is designated hitters !! Completely screws up one of the most interesting parts of baseball strategy.

 

[Spoooon]

It's just strategy.

 

[Spoooon]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
It's part of the game.

What is BAD is designated hitters !! Completely screws up one of the most interesting parts of baseball strategy.

I think there was an article on ESPN discussing designated hitters. The author, if I remember correctly, thought that it added an element of strategy to the game.

 

[spaceman]

part of the game
and if there were no such thing pitchers would just do it anyway..if they needed to.

 

[Ynog]

IBB is just giving four balls. Its part of the game. Thats like saying that you cannot walk someone.

If a guy hits four homers off you, you'd be stupid to pitch to him.

I think though, you should always have to throw the four pitches. I don't care if it takes longer.
A walk is four balls. And if you want to give a guy a free base, then you have to pitch those
four balls. Raise your pitch count four balls.

Also if you have a man on second and third with one out, and the game is tied, you put a guy on first
to give you the double play.

DH on the other hand has some benifits, and it has its disadvantages.
Its always nice to see a pitcher get a hit, on the other hand its kinda nice to see a older player
continue to play as a DH. Personally if they got rid of it, I wouldn't care nor would I care if they
kept it.

 

[Garet Jax]

Originally posted by: Ynog
If a guy hits four homers off you, you'd be stupid to pitch to him.

I think you should have to pitch to him. It would be a more exciting game. IMO

 

[nitsuj3580]

Originally posted by: Garet Jax

Originally posted by: Ynog
If a guy hits four homers off you, you'd be stupid to pitch to him.

I think you should have to pitch to him. It would be a more exciting game. IMO

The only way that would work is if there were no walks in baseball. Without intentional walks, pitchers would still pitch to a guy but that doesn't mean they'd have to throw strikes. If you got rid of walks, pitchers would try to fine tune there pitches knowing they could keep trying to make the perfect pitch without any penalty. That would result in some loooong at bats

 

[Garet Jax]

Originally posted by: nitsuj3580
The only way that would work is if there were no walks in baseball. Without intentional walks, pitchers would still pitch to a guy but that doesn't mean they'd have to throw strikes. If you got rid of walks, pitchers would try to fine tune there pitches knowing they could keep trying to make the perfect pitch without any penalty. That would result in some loooong at bats

I agree. I didn't say I had a solution , just an opinion.

It would be very difficult to regulate.

 

[Yossarian]

Was it LaRussa who gave Bonds a free pass with the bases loaded? That was pretty cool.

 

[Toasthead]

They help cut down on hit batsmen because, honestly, thats the alternative.

 

[Toasthead]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
It's part of the game.

What is BAD is designated hitters !! Completely screws up one of the most interesting parts of baseball strategy.

You do realize that the national league is the ONLY place where pitchers still hit? Not in the minors, not overseas, nowhere ELSE. Why does ANYONE want to watch 99% of pitchers stand up there and flail horribly and then sit down. Pitchers hitting is stupid.

 

[MaxDepth]

Originally posted by: Spoooon

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
It's part of the game.

What is BAD is designated hitters !! Completely screws up one of the most interesting parts of baseball strategy.

I think there was an article on ESPN discussing designated hitters. The author, if I remember correctly, thought that it added an element of strategy to the game.

Inter-league play. You want a Mets vs Yankees match up? Then win the AL and NL championships. All this is a marketing gimmick to create some local team rivalries across the leagues. Now all it does is water down the specialness of the World Series.

 

[WHSLacrossekid]

I always wanted to see a hitter swing at an intentional walk pitch

 

[nitsuj3580]

Originally posted by: WHSLacrossekid
I always wanted to see a hitter swing at an intentional walk pitch

haven't seen that but I have seen a catcher stand up like he's ready to catch an intentional 4th ball on a 3-2 count only to quickly crouch down half way through the pitchers windup and strike out the guy

I also have memories of long ago when i think it was either the blue jays or dodgers (i remember alfredo griffin doing it) but they were up by a lot and it started raining. To get the game in, the blue jay or dodger batters went up there and intentionally swung and missed every pitch to get far enough into the game so it'd be an official game

 

[ElFenix]

designated hitter is ruining baseball. he is on the field, he should hit. and stupid interleague play. a home and home 3 game rivalry series every year would be good. but some teams don't have natural rivals in the other league. who would the mariners play? but wth is the point of the astros playing the devil rays?

 

[TravisT]

Well first of all, baseball sucks in the first place. On a second note though, I don't really think its that good for the game. Fans want to see homeruns, they want to see grand slams, ect ect. They do not want to see an intentional walking and isn't professional baseball 'all about the fans'?

 

[dxkj]

bleh

 

[dxkj]

It doesnt take them out of the game, it gives them a free spot starting on first base. Guaranteed, no ifs ands or buts.

Seems pretty fair, since even the best batters dont bat 1000

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: TravisT
Well first of all, baseball sucks in the first place.

Stop posting, your posts suck

 

[Toasthead]

Originally posted by: TravisT
Well first of all, baseball sucks in the first place. On a second note though, I don't really think its that good for the game. Fans want to see homeruns, they want to see grand slams, ect ect. They do not want to see an intentional walking and isn't professional baseball 'all about the fans'?

professional sports are about entertainment. If you provide it (Win) then you will have more people come to see you. If winning requires walking people on the other team then yeah it is good. Fans come to see their team win, not to see the other teams players hit homers.

Its like saying its not fair that QBs can throw the ball away if they are out of the tackle box. People come to see sacks and such. I can tell you I NEVER want to see my teams QB sacked no matter how exciting it is.

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: TravisT
Well first of all, baseball sucks in the first place. On a second note though, I don't really think its that good for the game. Fans want to see homeruns, they want to see grand slams, ect ect. They do not want to see an intentional walking and isn't professional baseball 'all about the fans'?

You do not know what a real baseball fan is like. Give me a great pitching duel anyday.

 

[jonnyjack]

Originally posted by: Ynog
And if you want to give a guy a free base, then you have to pitch those
four balls. Raise your pitch count four balls.

yeah, they definitely need to throw the ball. i remember seeing juan acevedo when he was on the yanks threw a wild one when he was intentionally walking someone and the runners advanced. that was great, haha.