My apologies if this has been discussed before, but over at National Review Online somebody suggested this:

2) Ban the Intentional Walk. It's hardly a venerable part of the game, and I believe it is the functional equivalent of the old "Four Corners" strategy in basketball: it imparts a marginal competitive benefit(maybe) while costing quite a bit more in entertainment.
Only in baseball may a manager choose to deprive fans the enjoyment of watching the best hitters in action. In football, you can play 9 men in the box, but you can't actually prevent Marshall Faulk from *touching* the ball. You can triple-team Kobe Bryant, but fans still get to see Kobe make a play (pass) that will likely end in a dunk or an open 3-pointer. Here's how my rule would work: managers may designate 2 (or 3) hitters who may decline an intentional walk. If they are pitched four consecutive balls, they may continue to decline a walk until they receive a strike. In fact, a strike any time in the count nullifies this rule...you throw one strike to Bonds, and you're free to throw four wide. There are other ways to make it work, but I think it's time. Call it the Bonds Rule."

Anyone? Anyone?

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
Here's how my rule would work: managers may designate 2 (or 3) hitters who may decline an intentional walk. If they are pitched four consecutive balls, they may continue to decline a walk until they receive a strike. In fact, a strike any time in the count nullifies this rule...you throw one strike to Bonds, and you're free to throw four wide. There are other ways to make it work, but I think it's time. Call it the Bonds Rule."

---

I like your idea in theory, but it sounds like it would result in making these games even longer. It would also have be situational. For example, if there is a man on second or second and third, it often times is sound baseball strategy to walk a guy, whether it is Bonds or Jeromy Burnitz. Well okay, maybe not Burnitz!

My softball league this season eliminated the intentional walk. However, in championship series, I was walked half the time. But they were all intentional, no doubt. Not a single pitch was near the plate. Guess my .765 batting average during the season scared them!

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:

Only in baseball may a manager choose to deprive fans the enjoyment of watching the best hitters in action. In football, you can play 9 men in the box, but you can't actually prevent Marshall Faulk from *touching* the ball. You can triple-team Kobe Bryant, but fans still get to see Kobe make a play (pass) that will likely end in a dunk or an open 3-pointer.
Anyone? Anyone?

---

But in other sports you CAN do things to 'deprive' the fans of seeing plays. You can run out the clock at the end of a football game. You can make intentional fouls in basketball (ie. Hack-a-Shaq). Baseball is the thinking man's game. It's all strategy. And the inentional walk is part of the strategy.

We had a thread on this about a month or two ago. Of course I'm in favor of it, being a Giants season ticket holder!

Good God! Enough of this tinkering with the game.

Ban the Intentional Walk. Really now!

Oooohhhhh George VF, hit .765. What about the other .235 though?

Not a diss on W1865, he was brave enough to actually post on a sports related thread , but the idea is kind of silly. It won't speed up games--bad pitching (ie long counts and multiple pitching changes) and lack of strict enforcement of the 20-second between pitch and stepping out of the box rules are more to blame--but it would remove a key strategy component to the games. It's always nice to see the guy behind the guy who's intentionally walked make the other team pay. Any statsheads out there know how often the Benito Santiago-types get hits?

One thing I've never understood is how Team A will decide to walk a hitter on Team B. Team A brings in the relief pitcher and what's the first thing they have him do? Throw 4 wide ones. Why not leave the guy they're taking out in, have him throw the 4 wide, THEN bring in the reliever? I know that a lot of times, it's a lefty/righty kind of situation, but that has always puzzled me.

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
Here's how my rule would work: managers may designate 2 (or 3) hitters who may decline an intentional walk. If they are pitched four consecutive balls, they may continue to decline a walk until they receive a strike. In fact, a strike any time in the count nullifies this rule...you throw one strike to Bonds, and you're free to throw four wide. There are other ways to make it work, but I think it's time. Call it the Bonds Rule."

---

Part of a good pitcher's game is getting batters to chase pitches out of the strike zone. Tom Glavine and Greg Maddux, to name two, haven't thrown a pitch in the strike zone for years. Teams would designate their free swingers as the "unwalkable" and pitchers would be forced to throw big fat gopherballs to get an out. Batters could wait for a pitch to be thrown for a strike in their "zone." It would turn every ballpark into just another Coors Field.

You see, William, baseball is the game of libertarian-conservatives. A few basic rules, universally applied (except those Braves pitchers that get balls called for strikes), and the players are free to perform within the guidelines. Football is the game of democratic socialism (Scandinavia, not North Korea), with even the minutest details subject to regulation, like when a hold is a hold, or how many players on the line of scrimmage can cover a punt.

[ October 19, 2002: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]

[quote]Originally posted by Jim Allen:
One thing I've never understood is how Team A will decide to walk a hitter on Team B. Team A brings in the relief pitcher and what's the first thing they have him do? Throw 4 wide ones. Why not leave the guy they're taking out in, have him throw the 4 wide, THEN bring in the reliever?

---

The way I've heard it explained is that if the new reliever gives the intentional walk, then that runner becomes his responsibility and would count against his ERA should he score. And thus he's more likely to work harder to not have that runner score than if it was the outgoing pitcher's runner.