[Population: One] <A HREF="http://popone.innocence.com/ar

[bryant]

Stupid baseball.

OK, so you have a man on third, two outs, it's the top of the 11th inning. The score is tied. Your pitcher runs up three balls on the batter, no strikes. You have two choices; you can either pitch to the batter, who knows you're in a hole, or you can shrug and walk him and go for the next batter.

I dunno, it's not like I've run the numbers, but I can't see how the second choice isn't better. You run the risk of additional runs, sure. On the other hand, there is no possible scenario for the third out which does not stay the same or improve if you have the man on first, since you now have the force out at second, removing a possible throwing error from the outcome matrix.

Lots of people know baseball better than me. I've never seen a manager turn a three-ball zero-strike situation into an intentional walk. Do they ever? Should they? Is there a remote chance that Coco Crisp, Jason Varitek, and Alex Gonzalez will squeeze out a run and make us suffer through more of this?

Crisp hit a double. That's something. Varitek flew out. That's not something. Gonzales fouled out. That's not something either. Eh, it's the bottom of the order, we don't expect miracles. Youkilis has an RBI! I'm still peeved at Francona for not walking Rollins; this coulda ended with that. Loretta walked. Go ahead, make Ortiz a hero again. Yep, Ortiz whacks a single, Youkilis wanders on home, game over.

Nonetheless, I wanna know why you don't walk the batter with two outs, tie game, extra innings, one man on third.

Comments

[eyelessgame.livejournal.com]

May also depend on who's on deck. What game was this? I think I've seen it happen (intentional walk in situation like that). I recall a time, late in a close game, when they decided to walk a batter after 2 balls.

The thinking might be that being down by 2 is much worse than being down by 1, so you don't advance the second guy in a tie game if you can possibly help it.

But I agree with you, based on my experiences of watching the Cubs lose about three hundred games over the course of several summers growing up: putting myself in the pitcher's position, I would certainly rather have two outs, runners at first and third and a fresh batter than two outs, runner at third, behind on the count 3-0.

[eyelessgame.livejournal.com]

Ah, I found the game. Hey, they won anyway, what are you complaining about? :) :)

[ramurphy.livejournal.com]

I've seen a batter walked deliberately in that situation. I think it depends a good deal on who's on deck and what the pitcher's history is against the man in the batter's box and his history against the man on deck.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

ProTrade has an "expected runs" number for every play in a game. If you go to today's Sox-Phillies GameDay, you can see that when Rollins came up, the Phillies were expected to score .37 runs. A walk would increase that expected score, although i wouldn't know by how much. Besides, Rollins is a threat to run, so that can be a distraction (or you can just concede it, which isn't helpful, either).

Anyway, walking Rollins to get to Utley sounds like crazy talk to me, because Utley's a much better player, even though he's in a slump right now.

[bryant]

Yeah, but it's not walking Rollins to get to Utley -- it's giving up on the at bat after your pitcher's already three balls in the hole. The question is what the expected runs became at that point, and I'm not sure anyone measures that.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

I'll ask the ProTrade guys if you won't. I'm definitely curious. I do think you have a point about the 3-0 count.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

> So in the top of the 11th, there's two outs and a man on 3rd
> and Delcarmen has gone 3-0 on Rollins. Now, i think we know
> that walking Rollins to get to Utley is crazy; but a friend
> asks if it's better to just walk Rollins at that point due to
> the serious advantage that the batter has at 3-0, and go
> after Utley with a clean slate. Or, to put it another way,
> do Expected Runs change with the batter's count?

We originally started looking at count, but cut it out.

The reason: ES [Expected Scoring] goes up as the count gets in the hitter's
favor and down in the Pitcher's favor. But when we talk about allocating
the play value, the intra-count up/down does not change what the pitcher or
hitter would ultimately receive. (so while it matters, it does not matter
from an allocation stand point since it washes out once the ball is play).

[bryant]

Eh. It's not about what he ultimately receives; in this case, the batter ultimately received a run. I think they're measuring something slightly different than what I'm interested in.

What you really wanna know is the probability of Rollins getting an RBI in that situation and the probability of Utley getting an RBI with the men on first and third. If the second is higher than the first, you don't walk him.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

I agree; i wasn't too happy with the answer.

[sebastian-tombs.livejournal.com]

An outright intentional 4th ball happens, although it is much more common for the pitcher to be directed to throw a pitch deliberately out of the strike zone, maybe the hitter will chase it and level the odds out. As someone else said, a lot has to do with the hitter and the man on deck, and depending on the manager, it may have much to do with the previous history with the pitcher.

With one out, the manager is much more likely to issue the intentional pass on the 4th pitch, setting up the double play.

[totient]

Agreed with all of this. I've definitely seen the 3-0 count turned into an intentional walk on one out. I don't think I've seen it on two outs.

Remember that Hansen, who was pitching at the time, is a righty, which makes the steal easier. And that we were out of relievers; if Hansen's pitch count goes too high, our next move is either Lester or Beckett.

[bryant]

The pitch count problem is a fair point. The steal is not an issue -- if you walk the batter and he steals second, you're still better off than if he gets any kind of a hit.

[totient]

The steal is not an issue
It's a little bit of an issue because it means you don't have a fielder's choice opportunity on the next play.

[bryant]

Yes. If he steals, your chances of getting an out are smaller than if he doesn't steal; on the other hand, they're still very slightly better than the chance of getting an out if you let him bat.

The question of the expected number of runs if you intentionally walk him remains open. :)

[sebastian-tombs.livejournal.com]

Again, this really comes down to the matchups. In some cases, the 3-0 count wasn't accidental anyway - they were pitching around him, and he didn't bite on a bad pitch. In other cases, it wasn't as clear until it became a 3-0 count, and they decided they had better start over.

In this case, where the hitter behind is clearly a better hitter, then it makes a little less sense, but if it were, say, Howard at bat, and anyone else behind him, the 4th ball is almost a certainty.

[bryant]

(This, parenthetically, answers most of my question -- it is indeed something that happens from time to time.)