Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

Would you ever intentionally walk in the tying run?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Would you ever intentionally walk in the tying run?

    Here's the situation. It's a pretty important game, and your team is up by one run (let's just say it's 5-4) and it's an away game. There are two outs, and it's the 9th inning. However, the bases are loaded, and Barry Bonds is up, in all his 2001-2004 glory. Up after him is a mediocre batter, and the SF Giants have no great hitters on the bench. Do you walk Barry Bonds, and hope for the best next inning? I think I do.
    Lou Gehrig is the Truest Yankee of them all!

  • #2
    Pitch to him.

    Babe Ruth is dead.

    (remember those t-shirts pitchers used to wear?)

    "Throw Strikes, Babe Ruth is Dead"
    Your Second Base Coach
    Garvey, Lopes, Russell, and Cey started 833 times and the Dodgers went 498-335, for a .598 winning percentage. That’s equal to a team going 97-65 over a season. On those occasions when at least one of them missed his start, the Dodgers were 306-267-1, which is a .534 clip. That works out to a team going 87-75. So having all four of them added 10 wins to the Dodgers per year.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hCIvMule0

    Comment


    • #3
      I'd pitch to him, since even during his best season he made an out about 62% of the time (when he wasn't walked). Plus, the mediocre next hitter still probably gets on base 30% of the time.

      Comment


      • #4
        No way in the world Bonds gets that free pass. The manager would be roasted by his players, the press, hometown fans and club administrators - especially if he ended up losing.

        If he has such disrespect for his men than perhaps the team should have a different manager. If the manager can't handle the heat than perhaps he would be better off in a different profession.

        If you're going to get beat, you should get beat on the field, not give it away.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ipitch View Post
          I'd pitch to him, since even during his best season he made an out about 62% of the time (when he wasn't walked). Plus, the mediocre next hitter still probably gets on base 30% of the time.
          Bonds in '04 had a stunning .609 OBP, so he had about a 61% chance of getting on base anyway. Why not just minimize the ammount of runs that come in with a walk? You can't pitch him over the plate, he'll crush it. And forget about him chasing a pitch. I dunno, this is a tough, tough call.
          Lou Gehrig is the Truest Yankee of them all!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Brian McKenna View Post
            No way in the world Bonds gets that free pass. The manager would be roasted by his players, the press, hometown fans and club administrators - especially if he ended up losing.

            If he has such disrespect for his men than perhaps the team should have a different manager. If the manager can't handle the heat than perhaps he would be better off in a different profession.

            If you're going to get beat, you should get beat on the field, not give it away.
            So what would you do, unintentially walk him? Or give him pitches to hit?

            IMO, the manager would be a realist. Kind of like those people who say they would fight anyone, even if they lose. Why fight a Mike Tyson, Chuck Ladell, Tino Ortiz, or Bruce Lee? Since you can't win, back down from the fight like a little girl, or run.
            Lou Gehrig is the Truest Yankee of them all!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by White Knight View Post
              So what would you do, unintentially walk him? Or give him pitches to hit?

              IMO, the manager would be a realist. Kind of like those people who say they would fight anyone, even if they lose. Why fight a Mike Tyson, Chuck Ladell, Tino Ortiz, or Bruce Lee? Since you can't win, back down from the fight like a little girl, or run.
              Then why show up? If you aren't going to fight to win, then why play?
              Your Second Base Coach
              Garvey, Lopes, Russell, and Cey started 833 times and the Dodgers went 498-335, for a .598 winning percentage. That’s equal to a team going 97-65 over a season. On those occasions when at least one of them missed his start, the Dodgers were 306-267-1, which is a .534 clip. That works out to a team going 87-75. So having all four of them added 10 wins to the Dodgers per year.
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hCIvMule0

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by JDD View Post
                Then why show up? If you aren't going to fight to win, then why play?
                The team is playing to win, that's why they should walk him, get the next batter out, and score in the top of the 10th. He has a 61% chance of getting on anyway.
                Lou Gehrig is the Truest Yankee of them all!

                Comment


                • #9
                  A couple of things:

                  1. I'll treat Bonds' 2004 stats as his real ability for the sake of argument, but that doesn't make it so. His true OBA talent level was almost certainly lower than .609.

                  2. The .609 includes intentional walks, and you need to take those out. That some other manager chose to walk him intentionally has no bearing on what you should do.

                  3. Even if .609 was his true OBA, a 61% chance of getting on base leaves a 39% chance that he will make an out and you will win the game.

                  4. So, to put it all together, in PAs where Bonds was not intentionally walked, he got on base 41.5% of the time (this may understate his impact because some of the IW occur after an attempt to pitch around him fails, you fall behind 2-0 and say the heck with it, etc.) Your strategy would take a situation in which you have an ~60% chance of winning and turn it into one in which you have an approximately 67% chance of losing(*). Why on earth would you want to do this? A batter would have to have a real on base ability of .670 to make this a (possibly) breakeven decision.

                  The reason why Bonds was intentionally walked so often is that opposing managers feared his power. But in your scenario, you don't care about power. Any on base event ties the game, and most hits win the game. If he hits a grand slam, so what? It's no worse than if he had hit a double or most singles.

                  The much more interesting question is whether you should walk him intentionally to force in a run in a case in which you do not surrender the lead. That at least is not absurd on its face.

                  (*) You can obviously get a lot more involved than this, but I just assumed that the next batter had a 33% of reaching base and thus ending the game, and that the probability of winning in extra innings was 50%. So:

                  .33*(1) + (1-.33)*.5 = .665
                  Last edited by Patriot; 06-29-2008, 03:33 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by White Knight View Post
                    The team is playing to win, that's why they should walk him, get the next batter out, and score in the top of the 10th. He has a 61% chance of getting on anyway.
                    Which would be lost first, the game, the respect of your players, or your job as manager?
                    Your Second Base Coach
                    Garvey, Lopes, Russell, and Cey started 833 times and the Dodgers went 498-335, for a .598 winning percentage. That’s equal to a team going 97-65 over a season. On those occasions when at least one of them missed his start, the Dodgers were 306-267-1, which is a .534 clip. That works out to a team going 87-75. So having all four of them added 10 wins to the Dodgers per year.
                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hCIvMule0

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Patriot View Post
                      A couple of things:

                      1. I'll treat Bonds' 2004 stats as his real ability for the sake of argument, but that doesn't make it so. His true OBA talent level was almost certainly lower than .609.

                      2. The .609 includes intentional walks, and you need to take those out. That some other manager chose to walk him intentionally has no bearing on what you should do.

                      3. Even if .609 was his true OBA, a 61% chance of getting on base leaves a 39% chance that he will make an out and you will win the game.

                      4. So, to put it all together, in PAs where Bonds was not intentionally walked, he got on base 41.5% of the time (this may understate his impact because some of the IW occur after an attempt to pitch around him fails, you fall behind 2-0 and say the heck with it, etc.) Your strategy would take a situation in which you have an ~60% chance of winning and turn it into one in which you have an approximately 67% chance of losing(*). Why on earth would you want to do this? A batter would have to have a real on base ability of .670 to make this a (possibly) breakeven decision.

                      The reason why Bonds was intentionally walked so often is that opposing managers feared his power. But in your scenario, you don't care about power. Any on base event ties the game, and most hits win the game. If he hits a grand slam, so what? It's no worse than if he had hit a double or most singles.

                      The much more interesting question is whether you should walk him intentionally to force in a run in a case in which you do not surrender the lead. That at least is not absurd on its face.

                      (*) You can obviously get a lot more involved than this, but I just assumed that the next batter had a 33% of reaching base and thus ending the game, and that the probability of winning in extra innings was 50%. So:

                      .33*(1) + (1-.33)*.5 = .665
                      Increasing your advantage, Bonds' true OBP against southpaws was .393 (after adjusting for IBB) and the man batted .091 with no extra base hits all year in 0-2 counts. So getting your hardest throwing left-hander on the mound to challenge Bonds and throw strikes would go a long ways towards increasing your odds of winning the at bat.

                      You're faced, before the decision, with two outcomes. Either Bonds makes an out or Bonds reaches. If Bonds makes an out, the game is over. If Bonds reaches, the game is tied with the possibility of a loss. When you've got a 60% chance of ending the game right then and there, you take it. You don't eliminate your chance to win the game that inning in order to minimize your chance to lose. That's counter intuitive.
                      "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
                      "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
                      "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
                      "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Two of the numbers I like to look at to demonstrate an offensive players production are AB/R and AB/RBI. In the years mentioned 2001-2004 for Bonds, his numbers were 3.4 AB/R and 3.8 AB/RBI. Looking at that and considering the average HoFer can usually average 5-6 AB/R and/or RBI I would put Bonds on.

                        That said I would not IBB him I would HBP him, but I am OLDE SCHOOL!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Let's figure the odds here.

                          When pitched to, Bonds gets on base at about a .380 clip so it's 38% that he drives in the tying run at least...about 30% that he wins the game...but that's 62% that he fails to produce and you win...Odds are still in your favor. I pitch to Bonds.

                          If youw alk him, it's 0% to win that inning, and at least 30% to lose on the next batter even if he's mediocre.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            brian mckenna: No way in the world Bonds gets that free pass. The manager would be roasted by his players, the press, hometown fans and club administrators - especially if he ended up losing.

                            If he has such disrespect for his men than perhaps the team should have a different manager. If the manager can't handle the heat than perhaps he would be better off in a different profession.


                            the answer to your unasked question: larry dierker.
                            "you don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. just get people to stop reading them." -ray bradbury

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by White Knight View Post
                              Here's the situation. It's a pretty important game, and your team is up by one run (let's just say it's 5-4) and it's an away game. There are two outs, and it's the 9th inning. However, the bases are loaded, and Barry Bonds is up, in all his 2001-2004 glory. Up after him is a mediocre batter, and the SF Giants have no great hitters on the bench. Do you walk Barry Bonds, and hope for the best next inning? I think I do.
                              I think there are a few select hitters throughout history (Bonds in his prime, Ruth, Gehrig, Williams) where it would be wise to allow the game to be tied and take your chances with the next guy. But there are so many factors to consider. Who's pitching? How many outs? If there are two, as your question originally asks, you may be tempted to go after the hitter to get the final out. I'm not a big proponent of intentional walks, but I do think you can create a situation where it would be advisable. Ideally, you could have your pitcher throw a couple in the dirt early in the count, hoping to get lucky and get ahead 0-1, 1-2, or 0-2. If he doesn't offer at the junk, and the count runs to 2-0, then the intentional walk may be the right play.
                              Visit www.statonebaseball.com to learn why traditional statistics are ultimately flawed...and why P/E Averages are not!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X