What Actually Happens After An Intentional Walk?

When I’m watching baseball, I’m almost always also on Twitter. Twitter has made watching a game by yourself in your home a social experience, and so now, it’s almost like watching a bunch of games with a bunch of other people. It’s great. Twitter is really an amazing creation, considering that the idea is basically mass text messaging.

Among the people I follow on Twitter is Keith Law. Keith is a prolific tweeter, and he interacts with his massive audience pretty much every night. An ongoing point of this conversation between Law and his followers is a derision of the intentional walk. Seemingly every night, someone will send Law an example of a manager putting a batter on, followed by the guy behind the IBB’d hitter launching a bases clearing extra base hit, scoring everyone including the guy who just got walked. Or the pitcher, now without the safety net of having a base open, will end up walking the next guy unintentionally, occasionally forcing in a run without ever forcing the opponent to swing the bat.

Just based on the data that shows up in my Twitter feed on a nightly basis, it feels like the average hitter bats .950 and slugs 2.500 after the guy in front of him gets walked intentionally. And, you frequently hear announcers talk about the disrespect the IBB is showing to the on-deck hitter, and how that might motivate them to prove the opposing manager wrong. All of this talk led me to realize that I actually had no idea what really happened after an intentional walk was issued, but I wanted to find out if the narrative held up to the light of data.

So, as is my usual approach now, I asked Jeff Zimmerman to run a complicated query for me, and now I’m going to take credit for his hard work. Jeff was kind enough to extract the play-by-play data following an IBB, and then removed all of the situations where the next batter was a pitcher, since I don’t think too many people have problems with an intentional walk that forces a pitcher to swing the bat. What we really want to know is how often an intentional walk to get to a worse hitter, or to gain the platoon advantage, ends up working out.

The answer? More often than you might think.

Since the start of the 2010 season, Jeff’s data returned 2,955 plate appearances by position players following an IBB. There have been more intentional walks than this during the last 3+ years, but many of them led to pitchers hitting, and some of them resulted in plays that don’t really fit our criteria, such as a caught stealing or a pickoff. With almost 3,000 IBBs where the play involved the next batter, I think we have a decent sample with which to evaluate the post-IBB outcomes.

Okay, so, what is the overall batting line for hitters following an IBB? Not that impressive, honestly.

PA BB% K% BABIP ISO BA OBP SLG
2,955 9% 19% 0.269 0.141 0.242 0.317 0.382

In all situations with baserunners on, the average line for all major league position players since 2010 is .267/.339/.417, so post-IBB hitters perform worse than hitters who come up in similar situations where an IBB was not involved. In some ways, this should be expected, because the guys who get intentionally walked are usually the best hitters in the game, so the pool of hitters that gets to bat after an IBB is selected for their lack of intimidation. Major League managers are essentially trading an extra baserunner for the right to get to face a worse hitter, and if the overall batting line was higher than the average with men on base, they’d essentially be making that trade-off with no benefit.

This result is needed for the IBB to be a useful strategy, or else MLB managers would be simply giving away runs. Just based on this very simple comparison, it does appear that there is a benefit received from issuing intentional walks, as the production of the next hitter is indeed lower than the league average in those situations.

Of course, nothing is ever that simple. 25% of the intentional walks issued since 2010 have come with a runner on third base and less than two out, so the post-IBB hitters have been hitting in situations where the marginal difference between a hit and a fly out is smaller than it is in most situations. You could make a case that post-IBB batters were incentivized to hit the ball in the air, thus increasing their odds of making an out, because a sacrifice fly is considered a positive result for most batters. Perhaps the base/out states that induce IBBs also create a lower expected batting line?

It’s possible, but the data seems to suggest otherwise. Last year, for instance, Major League hitters hit .316/.351/.478 with a runner on third and zero or one outs, while they hit just .230/.333/.364 with a runner on third and two outs. The same is true in any year you want to look at; Major League hitters hit better, not worse, in sacrifice fly situations. That’s probably because the population of pitchers who allow runners to get to third with less than two outs is worse than the population of pitchers who don’t allow that runner to get there until there are two outs and because the infield will occasionally play in when there’s less than two outs and a runner on third. Those effects seem to outweigh any sac fly attempt bias that would bring down a batter’s line in those situations. Tom Tango points out the real reason; it’s because a good number of outs in those situations don’t count as at-bats, since they’re classified as sacrifice flies. That should have been obvious. Whoops.

And, to be honest, there aren’t that many post-IBB sacrifice flies to begin with. Out of the 2,955 PAs we are looking at, only 138 of them (4.6%) resulted in a sacrifice fly. The intentional walk is not usually followed by an intentional fly out, so I don’t think we can blame that effect for the lowered offensive performance we see from hitters following an IBB. The most obvious culprit is that managers are issuing an intentional walk in a situation where a poor hitter is due up, and poor hitters are less likely to drive in runs than good hitters. And when an IBB is issued and a good hitter is due up, they almost always are facing a same-handed pitcher, and often times a same-handed reliever.

There are certainly times when the IBB does backfire, and I wouldn’t use this data to suggest that the IBB is always the correct decision. There is a real cost to giving the opponents an extra baserunner, and there needs to be a substantial increase in likelihood of getting an out in order to offset the larger potential for an extra run to score from giving the opponent a free baserunner. However, I do think the data suggests that IBBs do serve a strategic function, and can reduce the odds of giving up a run in a situation where preventing one run is of the utmost importance.

For those interested, here’s the matrix of outcome rates after an IBB forces a position player to bat (where Other is a catch-all for things that happened less than 1% of the time, such as triples and triple plays):

Play %
Strikeout 18.1%
Fly Out 15.2%
Single 14.3%
Ground Out 10.1%
Fielder’s Choice 8.8%
Walk 6.6%
Double Play 5.7%
Sac Fly 4.6%
Double 4.4%
Home Run 2.4%
Foul Out 2.4%
Line Out 1.6%
Hit By Pitch 1.5%
Other 2.2%


Print This Post



Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.


Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Tony Fernandez
Guest
Tony Fernandez
3 years 3 months ago

Simple question: what is your expected runs produced before the IBB and after an IBB?

Jaker
Guest
Jaker
3 years 3 months ago

This.

Synovia
Guest
Synovia
3 years 3 months ago

Expected Runs is only useful in a context-neutral situation (IE, in theory), or very early in the game.

If you’re rie in the 9th, with 2 outs, men on 2nd and 3rd, it doesn’t matter if walking the #5 guy to get to the #6 increases the expected runs. All that matters is what it does to the chance to get the next out. There’s functionally no difference between a walk and a grand slam in that situation.

Walking a .325/.375/.300 guy to get to a .250/.300/.600 guy can be a completely reasonable decision despite expected runs going way up.

Jon S (not Shields)
Guest
Jon S (not Shields)
3 years 3 months ago

You’re right. Maybe fully answering the question “are IBBs a good idea” requires a retooled WE stat that takes into account an estimation of each hitter’s true talent level and their place in the batting order.

I do think that change in expected runs is a better place to start to answer the question than difference in hitting stats between average players and players who came up after an intentional walk.

adohaj
Guest
adohaj
3 years 3 months ago

This

Synovia
Guest
Synovia
3 years 3 months ago

“I do think that change in expected runs is a better place to start ”

And I disagree, because IBBs almost always happen in the sorts of situations where Expected Runs aren’t really relevant. Nobody gets IBB’d in a tie game in the 3rd inning with a man on 2nd and nobody out.

David Ortiz hit .318/.415/.611 last year.
Jarod Saltalamachia hit .222/.288/.435 last year.

In the situation where you’d think about an IBB, it increases your chance of getting out of the inning without giving up a run by about 4% by walking Ortiz vs pitching to him. (this ignores the increased chance of wild pitches facing 2 batters vs 1)

Its small, but its meaningful, and the situations needs to be right. Generally walking guys intentionally is a bad idea, because you don’t have a big enough dropoff for it to overcome the tradeiff between OBP and AVG.

ABW
Guest
ABW
3 years 3 months ago

I don’t know, that guy who is hitting .325 and slugging .300 must be doing something wrong. I think you should try and pitch to him, since some of the time even when he gets a hit he isn’t getting on base.

novaether
Member
novaether
3 years 3 months ago

What we need, then, is a run expectancy tensor using some offensive metric including platoon split for the next batter as the 3rd order of the tensor.

Jon S (not Shields)
Guest
Jon S (not Shields)
3 years 3 months ago

This is a great question, and the only question that matters when considering whether a move is “correct”.

I appreciate that Dave and Jeff put together this information for us, but I do wish there was a little more analysis to go along with it. Fangraphs usually tries to get to the heart of the matter (does this player/strategy help ballclubs win?), which is why I come here.

I’m hopeful of a followup where your question is answered and the worth of the IBB is determined.

SoledadY
Member
SoledadY
3 years 3 months ago

It seems this is too complicated of a situation to answer definitively, but I feel this article did a good job providing the context for how it is a legitimate strategy.

What I would be interested in is an analysis of individual teams, managers, and players because there are definitely individuals who should not be trusted with the responsibility of issuing the IBB. And I for one would like to see stats being applied to managers such as; a clutch type of rating for pinch hits, bullpen use, and perhaps even line up construction. Manager stats wouldn’t be simple for sure but maybe the IBB is a good place to start.

Tommy
Guest
Tommy
3 years 3 months ago

Is there any IBB included in Other? are there examples of intentionally walking two consecutive batters?

The Only Nolan
Member
The Only Nolan
3 years 3 months ago

I’m sure there are. Bottom of the 9th, 1 out, man on 3rd, I could see a manager calling for 2 straight IBBs.

siggian
Guest
siggian
3 years 3 months ago

More like none out to set up the force at home. If there’s only one out, you IBB one guy to set up the double play. You wouldn’t often do the second guy unless there’s a really good split for the next guy or he is the pitcher.

Horace
Guest
Horace
3 years 3 months ago

How funny, because that actually happened tonight. Houston intentionally walked 2 Detroit players in the 14th inning (man on 3rd, 1 out). It backfired.

All Balls No Brains
Guest
All Balls No Brains
3 years 3 months ago

This is certainly more appropriate on Not Graphs.

Bryz
Guest
3 years 3 months ago

I don’t think you get the purpose of NotGraphs.

the sauce
Guest
the sauce
3 years 3 months ago

To be fair, there’s clearly not a graph in this piece.

All Balls No Brains
Guest
All Balls No Brains
3 years 3 months ago

A sad attempt to be tongue in cheek. Of course this shouldn’t be in Not Graphs (and neither should other articles where people make the same comment).

TKDC
Guest
TKDC
3 years 3 months ago

I feel smart that I got that this was a joke without it being explained.

Tucker
Guest
Tucker
3 years 3 months ago

I’d be more interested to learn how the batting line of a player after an intentional walk compares to his batting line with runners on base generally.

SoledadY
Member
SoledadY
3 years 3 months ago

The article answers your question “In all situations with baserunners on, the average line for all major league position players since 2010 is .267/.339/.417”. This type of information is simple to look up yourself with the tools provided on this site. For example so far this year non-pitchers are batting .261/.334/.412 with men on base and .258/.344/.401 with runners in scoring position.

jacjacatk
Guest
jacjacatk
3 years 3 months ago

The batting line being lower after an IBB isn’t sufficient to show whether it works or not (though I suppose it being higher would indicate that it was a bad idea). A lower overall batting line with an extra runner on base could pretty easily still lead to more runs scoring.

Another tactical reason for the IBB is to set up a force play or DP. I’d be curious to see if there was a way to analyze the value of this part of decision.

TKDC
Guest
TKDC
3 years 3 months ago

It looks like they occur 5.7% of the time. I have no idea about this, but maybe the percent of intentional walks with 2 outs is 43% (just ballparking it). That would mean the double play works about 10% of the time, which is less than the number of doubles and homers together.

There’s a lot more that could be done on this, but it at least leaves open the possibility that most late game IBBs where one run is key are good moves.

However, one very simple thing was once pointed out to me about the -23 intentional walk. Take a bottom 9, tie game situation. If you IBB the first hitter, you are basically trading batting average for OBP. Here, it seems that the average OBP is .317, which is still much higher than almost every players’ true talent batting average. I think the #1 thing managers ignore in late-game IBBs is the fact that the next hitter could be walked.

adohaj
Guest
adohaj
3 years 3 months ago

To say the IBB in that situation is trading BA for OBP assumes the hitter only hits singles

Synovia
Guest
Synovia
3 years 3 months ago

In the vast majority of IBB situations, there’s not a whole lot of difference between the value of a single and an XBH. On 2 outs, the base runners are going, and will most likely score on a single.

TKDC
Guest
TKDC
3 years 3 months ago

And to take that one step further, what run are you trying to prevent? If you are up two, maybe you have a point because a walk to the next hitter would mean that you are only up one, and still would win if you get the batter after him out. But in that situation, you have just put yourself in a position where instead of the offense needing a home run to win the game, they only need an extra base hit. So you are also trading the chances of a home run for the chances of any extra base hit. So whether you are tied, up one, or up two, normally you are adding significant ways for the other team to tie or win by walking the hitter. If your facing the Marlins #3 hitter (not now, but normally), maybe this makes sense, but I highly doubt in most situations you are actually looking at that big a difference in the batters you might face.

Tangotiger
Editor
Member
3 years 3 months ago

Go to my site:
http://www.tangotiger.com

Click the Amazon link.

Once on Amazon, do a “Look Inside”.

Search for: intentional walk

In the results section, choose page 288, and start reading! A few pages are missing, but most are there.

Thomas Grantham
Guest
Thomas Grantham
3 years 3 months ago

Read this, my takeaway:

There aren’t too many .400+ wOBA hitters these days, so the only time you should intentionally walk (even an elite) hitter is with 2 outs, runner(s) on 2B/3B, and the pitcher on deck.

Therefore, setting up the double play ball is nearly always a sub optimal strategy.

Tim_the_Beaver
Member
Tim_the_Beaver
3 years 3 months ago

He won’t say it, but I will: I suggest everyone ignore the first three instructions and replace it with “Buy ‘The Book'”.
If you spend any time on this site it’s a must have.

Richie
Guest
Richie
3 years 3 months ago

Another factor. Walking the 8th-place batter sucks because you’d much rather start off the following inning with the pitcher than the leadoff guy. The effect would be much smaller regarding less-good-than-other-guy hitter, but still there.

Overall, the query is too simple to be of much use. It’s a good start, but little else. My first followup question: how bad/good is pitched-to hitter on average?

Second: how often is it not to get to a (much) worse hitter, but rather gain the platoon advantage + set up the double play?

Nate
Guest
Nate
3 years 3 months ago

Walking the #8 hitter to get to the pitcher is a common strategy. I’ll bet the pitcher’s batting line is disproportionally represented in those numbers which may be bringing the numbers down.

Dave, I think you would need to remove the pitchers from the data set to get a better comparison.

That Guy
Guest
That Guy
3 years 3 months ago

I’ve seen the pitcher referenced a number of times – wouldn’t most of these situations involve pinch hitters anyway? 8th/9th inning, down a run, man on third, pitcher at bat – I don’t think so.

Frank10007
Guest
Frank10007
3 years 3 months ago

The IBB I really hate is that which loads the bases, especially with two outs. You force the pitcher to throw strikes, giving an unusual advantage to the batter. Don’t the data show that hitters do significantly better with bases full? I’d like to see those tabulations.

SonOfDaveRoberts
Guest
SonOfDaveRoberts
3 years 3 months ago

Wasn’t this covered exhaustively in The Book? You can’t look at the batting line of the subsequent hitter out of context; you need to calculate a run expectancy for the subsequent (presumably inferior) hitter with an extra man on vs. the same for preceding (presumable superior) hitter with first base empty.

Otherwise, what are you supposed to conclude from the batting line in isolation? That human beings tend to see patterns that don’t exist and that people like posting nonsense on twitter? Stop the presses!

Dustin
Guest
Dustin
3 years 3 months ago

I think you almost need to go even further and get win% before and after the IBB. You almost never see IBBs early in games. Later on it happens more often. Do managers realize it’s a net negative play, but perhaps one that can improve win%?

A contrived example, but imagine facing the Marlins up 1 in the 9th. Man on 3rd, any number of outs and Stanton up. Doesn’t the winning percentage go up by walking him? Even if the Marlins run expectancy increases a little?

adohaj
Guest
adohaj
3 years 3 months ago

I believe the title of the article is “what happens after an intentional walk?” The article title is not, “Are managers making the right choice by using the IBB?” I find it interesting to see the batting line in isolation.

MGL
Guest
MGL
3 years 3 months ago

“Just based on this very simple comparison, it does appear that there is a benefit received from issuing intentional walks, as the production of the next hitter is indeed lower than the league average in those situations.”

Ditto what everyone else is saying. The batting line of the batter after the IBB gives you exactly zero insight as to whether the IBB was “correct” or not (reduced the batting team’s WE). Why would you even write that? Of course the next batter is going to have a low batting line. As you did say, that pool does not typically include all the good batters and that pool of PA has lots of same-side pitching and batting.

It is complicated. You have the extra runner. You have the increased chance of the DP with less than 2 outs. You “clear” the next batter, such that you increase scoring in future innings. You have alternatives to the IBB, such as pitching around the batter. You have the option of leveraging the count, but starting out pitching to the batter and then issuing the IBB only if the count goes in the batter’s favor. Etc.

GermUrn
Guest
GermUrn
3 years 3 months ago

What about a pitcher’s ability in the wind up versus the stretch? See: Zack Greinke. It’s probably more of an outlier, but it is something manager’s should take into consideration when putting a guy on.

Krog
Member
Krog
3 years 3 months ago

IBB rarely occur with the bases empty. I doubt this would ever be a significant factor.

LK
Guest
LK
3 years 3 months ago

Son of a BITCH

Schuxu
Guest
Schuxu
3 years 3 months ago

Pitchers use windup also with a runner on 3rd or 3rd and second.

LK
Guest
LK
3 years 3 months ago

IBB’s with the bases empty are pretty rare, so I don’t think this would be much of a factor – the pitcher is already working from the stretch.

jessef
Guest
3 years 3 months ago

intentionally walking someone to load the bases lets the pitcher go back to the windup

TKDC
Guest
TKDC
3 years 3 months ago

The only time that would come up is 1-3, and if you are intentionally walking anyway, the runner on 1st shouldn’t matter, so you can just let him take second while pitching from the windup. If he does matter, you should not advance him to 2nd on purpose.

Jianadaren
Guest
Jianadaren
1 year 1 month ago

If the pitcher is willing to go to the wind-up after intentionally walking the bases loaded, then he’s willing to go to the windup before he loaded the bases.

He’s obviously not concerned about runners taking free bases or stealing home if he’s willing to load them and then pitch from the windup.

Al Dimond
Guest
3 years 3 months ago

With all the sacrifice fly talk in this article, has anyone done any work on whether hitters actually have any control over sac-flying? The idea of an “intentional fly out”, as mentioned in this article, seems weird to me — it isn’t something any player can expect to execute with a high rate of success against MLB pitching, right? As with bunting, it’s hard to distinguish a “sacrifice attempt” from a “hit attempt”, but it’s probably even harder than that.

I think it’s telling that fans often criticize players for failing to hit a sac-fly, announcers occasionally do, and managers do not. And I don’t think our standard stats do us any favors in the way they omit sacrifices from the record.

LK
Guest
LK
3 years 3 months ago

This article doesn’t seem to be saying much. The fact that the batting line is lower than league average with men on base means that the IBB decision isn’t irrevocably, catastrophically bad in most cases, but that doesn’t mean it’s good. Is the gap between those two batting lines large enough to make up for an additional runner? That’s really the question to determine if IBB’s are in aggregate doing any good.

jessef
Guest
3 years 3 months ago

that’s the really strange part — he talks about how it has to be worse to offset the effect of putting a runner on but doesn’t quantify that effect at all. it seems like giving up a free base would be a fairly big deal . . . now, usually IBBs come with at least one out so the run expectancy of a walk should be quite a bit lower but that is a question that needs to be teased out

what about something like:

run expectancy of average hitters (.267 / .339 / .417) weighted by frequency of base-out state vs. run expectancy of hitters following intentional walk (.242 / .317 / .382) weighted by frequency of base-out state

MrKnowNothing
Guest
MrKnowNothing
3 years 3 months ago

so, what dave is saying is that the guy being faced at the IBB isn’t as good as normal. well…duh?

jvm98311
Guest
jvm98311
3 years 3 months ago

Does anybody have a list of good baseball people to follow on twitter. I follow buster, stark, the guys that write for yahoo, ect. I hadn’t even though of Keith law. I like the idea of watching baseball with a twitter feed at the same time.

vikedawg
Member
vikedawg
3 years 3 months ago

Law is pretty good, but can get a bit preachy at times.
Jonah Keri
Mark Simon
Ahem…Dave Cameron
Other Fangraphs writers

Patrick
Guest
3 years 3 months ago

This article doesn’t answer any key question one might have wrt IBBs

Like when is giving an IBB +EV?
or do any given hitter tend to hit better after an IBB than not? (due the massive affront to their manhood)

craigjedwards
Guest
3 years 3 months ago

Maybe I missed this but if there are many more IBB with two outs, it greatly decreases the number of sac flys after an IBB compared to the general situation with runners on that could lessen the gap between the runners on stats versus the after IBB stats.

Daven
Guest
3 years 3 months ago

Great post Dave. Now I’d really like to know if the squeeze play works out enough to justify it and whether the “contact play” (runner at third with less than 2 outs running on contact) also works out enough to make it worth its while.

chuckb
Guest
chuckb
3 years 3 months ago

The squeeze play is an entirely different can of worms b/c it gets much more into game theory than the IBB does. For example, if the squeeze should be used more frequently, and then is used more frequently, teams will start defending it more vigorously. Teams will then be incentivized to NOT use the squeeze in an attempt to hit the ball past the drawn-in infield.

It’s a much more complicated analysis than “what happened after an IBB?”.

Tom
Guest
Tom
3 years 3 months ago

Is it easy to cut the data to determine what percentage of the next batter after IBB is a pinchitter versus a regular in lineup, and what those results are?

Sivart
Member
Sivart
3 years 3 months ago

Is the reason the double play rate after an IBB is so low is because it’s often done with 2 out?

Richie
Guest
Richie
3 years 3 months ago

You’d need to cut the data a TON! to get to anything that would address the issues raised. This reads like something Dave and Jeff cranked out quickly in order to quick generate some content.

Which we all have to do sometimes, so no biggie when it happens as irregularly as it does here. It does answer the basic question asked at the beginning, then Dave tries to stretch the basic data past its point of officially-sanctioned elasticity.

For basic answers on the IBB, yes, read what tango has about 15 posts from the top.

Skin Blues
Member
Skin Blues
3 years 3 months ago

Something I didn’t see touched on in the article was the fact that you’re “wasting” an easy out to start the following inning by intentionally walking the guy ahead of a weak hitter. Especially early in a game, you’re basically giving away a free out in the following inning if you walk the #8 hitter to get to the pitcher. You can’t look at a single inning’s linear weights to determine if it’s a good idea. It might very slightly decrease run expectancy in the 4th inning to face a hitter with a .200 wOBA instead of a .270 wOBA if there’s a man in scoring position, but you also need to take into account how it affects the rest of the game. What’s the run expectancy in the 5th inning with the 1-2-3 hitters due up rather than the 9-1-2 hitters? Walking crappy hitters means more at-bats from non-crappy hitters. This especially applies to walking the #8 hitter in the NL to get to the pitcher.

Also, the effect of making the batter “better” by loading the bases in front of him. Everybody hits better with the bases loaded. You have a guy off his rhythm by throwing 4 pitchouts in a row and now if he walks the next guy a run scores. I think there’s just so much more to this that isn’t captured by the article, to even begin to make a judgment about when IBBs are beneficial.

Mike
Guest
Mike
3 years 3 months ago

Red Sox and Blue Jays are in the 7th inning and David Ortiz was just issued an IBB with 2 outs and a man on 2nd, which Mike Napoli followed up with a 3-run homer. Not that a single anecdote is worthy evidence by which to judge the IBB strategy, but it didn’t work this time!

waynetolleson
Guest
waynetolleson
3 years 3 months ago

What actually happens after an intentional walk? The batter goes to first base! D’uh!

Superfluous apostrophes
Guest
Superfluous apostrophes
3 years 3 months ago

R’ight you a’re!

dannyrainge
Member
dannyrainge
3 years 3 months ago

Who said baseball players (fans) are dumb? I learn a lot from comments here as well as, obviously, from the articles. #satisfiedcustomer

Tim
Guest
Tim
3 years 3 months ago

I was kind of expecting some sort of Tommy Angelo-esgue discussion of the psychologically proper way for the pitcher to put the previous plate appearance behind him and readjust to throwing competitive pitches again. We talk about pacing but we never talk about how well pitchers handle the emotional gutter between batters.

Marcus
Guest
Marcus
3 years 3 months ago

MGL and others are missing the point. Dave did a bit of research to offset the common perception that an IBB always seems to lead to disaster. He didn’t make many claims as to the general validity of the strategy, just that the next batter (as expected) hit poorer than average, as opposed to what twitter would lead one to believe: “it feels like the average hitter bats .950 and slugs 2.500 after the guy in front of him gets walked intentionally.”

chuckb
Guest
chuckb
3 years 3 months ago

The others who are “missing the point” have only commented on the value of a piece that only asks what happens after an IBB is issued without addressing whether or not the IBB is a proper strategy.

Their point is that there’s much more to the debate than what happened in the PA immediately following the IBB and that the very next PA is not the only one that matters.

Question
Guest
Question
3 years 3 months ago

Does that stats include pitcher at bat? I mean, a lot of IBBs came from 8th hitter from NL

Schuxu
Guest
Schuxu
3 years 3 months ago

No, explicitly mentioned in the article.

Question
Guest
Question
3 years 3 months ago

Thank you. Dunno why I didn’t see it!

ben
Guest
ben
3 years 3 months ago

.269 is a low babip. Is this just a sign the defense is concentrating more and trying harder? In other sports, there is a lot of talk about effort and defense, but I haven’t seen much with baseball. It would be interesting if that is the case

Hurtlockertwo
Guest
Hurtlockertwo
3 years 3 months ago

I dislike Twitter, who really want opinions 24/7??

Noah Schmutter
Guest
Noah Schmutter
3 years 3 months ago

Great analysis, Dave.
I wanted to point out something you so casually dismissed: ‘Jeff was kind enough to extract the play-by-play data following an IBB, and then removed all of the situations where the next batter was a pitcher, since I don’t think too many people have problems with an intentional walk that forces a pitcher to swing the bat.”
Is there a way for you to determine the run expectancy for all base/out situations after an IBB, which brings up the pitcher with 2 outs, and then calculate the run expectancy the follwing inning, which begins with the leadoff batter? It might be worthwhile to see if that is expected to create more/fewer runs than facing the #8 hitter rather than IBBing him, then starting the following inning with the pitcher at bat.

Maybe Jeff and Tom want to chime in?

John DiFool
Guest
John DiFool
3 years 3 months ago

I once studied that season by Barry Bonds where he walked like 232 times, well over 100 of them intentionally. In the plate appearances by his Giants teammates that followed the IBB, the results were absolutely abysmal. The Giants may very well have hosed themselves by not signing a big slugger to bat behind him (‘weak’ vs. ‘strong’ protection, the latter pretty much a myth).

Weston Taylor
Member
3 years 3 months ago

It wouldn’t be reflected through BA, but it WOULD be reflected through OBP; Sac flies get factored into OBP.

Dave
Guest
Dave
3 years 3 months ago

Did your query for hitting with a runner include IBB’s? You didn’t mention that you left them out.

bigboneded
Guest
bigboneded
3 years 3 months ago

In my career, I have had the batter in front of me intentionally walked twice. Once, with first base open, and I hit a bases-clearing double. In another game it was in the bottom of the last because he was more “feared”, I took a pitch to let him steal, and then promptly hit the game winner into right-center to score him.

Didn’t work either time.

wpDiscuz