The intentional walk. A strategic move, a controversial tactic, and for many baseball fans, a complete buzzkill. After witnessing the Blue Jays repeatedly wave Shohei Ohtani to first base in a crucial World Series game, the question arises: Is it time for MLB to abolish the intentional walk?
For those who shelled out significant sums to witness top-tier baseball, the sight of the game’s best player being intentionally removed from the equation is a frustrating one. This article delves into the debate surrounding the intentional walk, examining its impact on the game and whether it’s time for a change.
We’ll explore the arguments for abolishing the intentional walk, consider its strategic implications, and analyze historical examples, including the infamous treatment of Barry Bonds. Ultimately, we’ll assess whether removing this tactic would enhance the fan experience and maintain the integrity of the game.
The Ohtani Debacle: A Case for Change
In a recent World Series game, the Toronto Blue Jays repeatedly intentionally walked Shohei Ohtani, arguably the best player in baseball. This strategy, reminiscent of the days when Barry Bonds faced similar treatment, sparked outrage among fans who paid top dollar to see Ohtani swing the bat, not jog to first base.
Dodgers manager Dave Roberts acknowledged the validity of the fans’ frustration. “That’s fair. That’s a fair take,” he said, highlighting the sentiment that intentionally walking a star player detracts from the game’s excitement.
The no-pitch intentional walk, implemented in 2017, further streamlines the process, eliminating even the formality of throwing four pitches. This efficiency, however, amplifies the feeling that the game is being manipulated, denying fans the chance to witness a potential game-changing play. In other sports, while strategies exist to limit star players, they don’t involve completely removing them from the action in the same way.
Barry Bonds: A History of Intentional Walks
Barry Bonds’ career was defined, in part, by the staggering number of intentional walks he received. As the article notes, Bonds was intentionally walked a record 668 times. “Just like back in the day when Barry Bonds was intentionally walked a record 668 times in his 22-year career, the target in Game 3 was star Shohei Ohtani.”
This strategy, while seemingly effective in preventing Bonds from directly impacting the game, often backfired. The Giants, as the article points out, scored 30% of the time when Bonds was walked. This statistic underscores the risk associated with taking the bat out of a star player’s hands, as it puts pressure on the following batters to deliver.
The Giants’ experience with Bonds highlights a crucial point: intentionally walking a player doesn’t guarantee success. In fact, it can often lead to the same outcome, but with the added risk of putting a runner on base. This begs the question: Is the intentional walk a worthwhile strategy, or a self-defeating one?
Intentional Fouls vs. Intentional Walks
The article draws parallels between the intentional walk in baseball and strategies used in other sports to contain star players. “Not Patrick Mahomes in football. Not Connor McDavid in hockey. In basketball, you can try to intentionally foul a star 3-point shooter like Stephen Curry, but he still has the chance to attempt a shot before being touched by a defender. And even if he’s hacked, he still gets to shoot from the foul line.”
In basketball, intentionally fouling a player like Stephen Curry still allows him the opportunity to score from the free-throw line. In hockey, while players can be shadowed or double-teamed, they still have the chance to make a play. In football, quarterbacks can still have the chance to make a play.
The key difference is that these strategies don’t completely remove the star player from the game. They still have the opportunity to influence the outcome, even if it’s from the foul line or with a defender draped all over them. The intentional walk, on the other hand, is a complete negation of that opportunity, which is the heart of the fans’ frustration.
Dodgers’ Woes and the Impact on Ohtani
The article emphasizes the importance of the hitters behind Ohtani capitalizing on his presence on base. “Of course, the key here is that Dodgers have to knock him in. They’re hitting .201 in the World Series and since the 18-inning marathon game Ohtani is 0-for-7 with another walk and three strikeouts. Mookie Betts, who bats directly behind Ohtani, is just 3-for-23 in this Fall Classic.”
The Dodgers’ struggles in the World Series underscore the risk associated with intentionally walking Ohtani. If the following hitters fail to capitalize, the strategy backfires, putting even more pressure on the team to score.
The article also highlights the fact that the Blue Jays’ strategy of intentionally walking Ohtani ultimately didn’t pay off, as Freeman eventually homered to win the game. This example serves as a cautionary tale, demonstrating that even the most well-intentioned strategies can backfire in baseball’s unpredictable environment.
MLB’s Accommodations for Ohtani and the DH
MLB has already made rule accommodations for Ohtani, allowing him to remain in the lineup as the designated hitter (DH) after his pitching appearances. ” has already made rule accommodations for Ohtani. When he is done on the mound in games he pitches, he can remain in the lineup as the DH, giving the Dodgers an inherent advantage.”
This accommodation recognizes Ohtani’s unique ability as a two-way player and aims to enhance the game by keeping him in the lineup. However, the intentional walk undermines this effort, as it effectively removes him from the equation in crucial moments.
The DH rule itself is a controversial topic, with some purists arguing that it detracts from the game’s traditional elements. However, it’s undeniable that the DH has added excitement and offense to the game, and accommodating players like Ohtani further enhances this appeal.
Time to Abolish the Intentional Walk?
The intentional walk, while a long-standing baseball tradition, has increasingly come under scrutiny. The Ohtani incident, coupled with historical examples like Barry Bonds, highlights the drawbacks of this strategy. It denies fans the opportunity to see the game’s best players compete, disrupts the flow of the game, and often backfires, putting even more pressure on the team employing it.
As the game evolves, MLB must consider whether the intentional walk still serves a purpose. While strategy is an integral part of baseball, it shouldn’t come at the expense of fan entertainment and the integrity of the game. Abolishing the intentional walk would force managers to make tougher decisions, create more opportunities for exciting plays, and ultimately enhance the overall fan experience.
Perhaps, as the article concludes, “I’d rather see the best hitter hit.” In a sport that thrives on drama and excitement, removing the intentional walk could be a step in the right direction.
Leave a Reply