The Year’s Most Pointless Intentional Walk
All baseball managers have strategies, and all manager strategies are supposed to function to maximize a team’s chances of winning. They don’t all work out that way, of course, and one need only explore the world of sacrifice bunts, but the managers’ hearts are in the right place. When managers get involved, they do so because they believe their involvement will bump the chances of winning the game. And managers don’t like to concede a game before it’s over, and one could never be critical of a manager for not giving up. There always exists some chance of victory, before the conclusion, and there’s something noble about pursuing long odds. But the necessity of managerial involvement follows a spectrum. In close games, in high-leverage situations, it makes the most sense to try something strategic. In not-close games, there’s hardly any benefit, so while such strategizing isn’t pointless, it is the most pointless.
As a sort-of example, the Giants closed out the Cardinals in the NLCS in Game 7. The Giants were up 1-0 after one, 2-0 after two, and 7-0 after three. It was still 7-0 at the seventh-inning stretch, with the Giants at home. They’d add two more runs, just for the hell of it. In the top of the eighth, Bruce Bochy replaced Santiago Casilla with specialist Javier Lopez. In the top of the ninth, with two outs, Bochy replaced Lopez with closer Sergio Romo. Bochy managed as if the game were close when it wasn’t, and there wasn’t much in the way of benefit. But Bochy gets a pass, because (A) whatever, and (B) it was Game 7 of the NLCS and those are high stakes. This was essentially pointless strategizing in a very important baseball game.
What you’ll find below is an example of mostly pointless strategizing in a very much less important baseball game. Last year, around Major League Baseball, there were 1,055 intentional walks issued. (Zero to pitchers.) Of those, 993 went four pitches. 57 went five, two went six, two went seven, and one went eight. The Dodgers issued the most, with 62. The Reds were issued the most, with 54. Aaron Harang issued ten by himself. Joey Votto and Prince Fielder both were issued 18. Of all intentional walks, 93 were issued by teams in the lead, while 607 were issued by teams who were trailing. The rest, obviously, came with the score tied.
I found myself wondering about the most pointless intentional walk. There was no such thing as an utterly pointless intentional walk, but there would’ve been a most pointless intentional walk, and it would’ve come in a low-leverage situation. According to Baseball-Reference, 250 intentional walks were issued in what they define as being low-leverage situations. Of these, 107 came in situations with deficits of at least four runs. Five came in situations with deficits of six runs. Five came in situations with deficits of seven runs. One came in a situation with a deficit of eight runs. One came in a situation with a deficit of nine runs. And one came in a situation with a deficit of ten runs.
Once last year, a team issued an intentional walk in a game in which it was trailing the opponent by double digits. I’m satisfied in referring to this as the year’s most pointless intentional walk. It was issued on July 3, in a game between the Rangers and the White Sox.
At that point, the Rangers were a good team, and the White Sox were a pretty good team. It was a Tuesday, and it was late, locally, and Roy Oswalt started opposite Chris Sale. The White Sox scored four runs in the bottom of the first, then they added another three in the bottom of the second. It was 7-0 then, and it remained 7-0 going into the bottom of the fifth. More damage would be done. Oswalt faced six batters before getting yanked, and Yoshinori Tateyama immediately allowed an RBI single. The hit made it 10-0, and put runners on second and third, having advanced on a throw home.
So it was 10-0 Chicago in the bottom of the fifth, with two outs and runners on second and third. Lefty Adam Dunn was coming up to face righty Tateyama with righty Paul Konerko on deck.
Tateyama has shown huge platoon splits, so Dunn was a bad matchup. There was a base open. Hence:
Perfectly sensible, given the numbers. Except for the score numbers, which showed Texas having a zero and Chicago also having a zero, except with a one in front of it. In a double-digit ballgame, Ron Washington played the platoon splits, and no other manager did that all season. Neither the Texas broadcast nor the Chicago broadcast expressed much in the way of surprise. They talked about the intentional walk as if it were any other intentional walk, intended to get the better matchup for the pitcher. Sure enough, Tateyama got to face the righty Konerko like he wanted.
Konerko singled. Then Alex Rios singled. Then A.J. Pierzynski homered. The inning ended with the score 16-0. The game ended with the score 19-2. Not that the ultimate outcome has anything to do with the decision, but this would be a forgotten intentional walk. At least until right now.
According to Baseball-Reference, the leverage index at the time of the walk was 0.00. According to FanGraphs, it was 0.02, which is infinity times higher. The walk served little purpose, and the walk didn’t work. Incidentally, the crowd didn’t respond when the catcher first stood up and signaled for the intentional walk. The boos only began to cascade down upon the throwing of the first pitch. If we can even refer to those as being pitches.
From a statistical perspective, the move was perfectly justifiable. Tateyama hasn’t shown that he can pitch to lefties. He has shown that he can pitch very well to righties. Dunn is a lefty and Konerko is a righty and there was a base wide open. Chicago’s a small ballpark and Texas had a powerful offense, so a comeback wasn’t impossible. This is why there’s no such thing as a truly pointless intentional walk. There’s always a point. There’s always an argument in favor, leaning on the existence of a non-zero game situation win expectancy.
But while there might be no pointless intentional walk, there is a most pointless intentional walk, relative to the group. In a double-digit ballgame, Ron Washington could’ve elected to let Tateyama try something against a lefty with the stakes really low. That’s a good opportunity to mess around, in a situation of minimal consequence. Washington played it by the book, and the Rangers still got blown out. No, it didn’t significantly slow down the game. No, I wouldn’t characterize it as being objectionable. The walk is just a thing that was, that didn’t need to be.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.





As a Ranger fan, I’m shocked to find out that Wash would make a questionable decision! Sort of. Alright…maybe I’m not.
Worst intentional walk of the year had to be game one Yankees vs. Rays, having CC Sabathia intentionally walk Sean Rodriguez to load the bases and face Carlos Pena. Inevitable Grand Slam ensues.
And it was in the 1st inning no less!!!
Don Mattingly walked a Giant to get to Pagan or Scutaro, who smashed in the go ahead run i believe in like the 2nd to last game of the year. Then Mark Ellis gets thrown out at 3rd trying to stretch a double, it should have come down to the last game of the season for a playoff spot for the Dodgers but another one of Donnie’s moves backfired.
Jeff. Seriously. Where do you keep finding these? Do elves come and visit you at night?
If I were to guess, he probably ran a query and sorted it by highest current run differential.
Jeff is the elf who comes to visit us every day.
I’m interested in the intentional walks issued with two strikes on the batter. Is that ever a good idea? Is it ever a good idea if the pitcher isn’t on deck?
Do pitchers start pitching to a batter, only to change course and issue an intentional walk? Hard to see an IBB beginning with two strikes.
Every once in a while, someone may steal a base and they need someone on first for a DP opportunity. I don’t know how effective it is, but I have seen it once or twice.
Thanks, Daniel — that’s a very helpful scenario!
Not necessarily beginning with two strikes, but including two strikes. Apparently it happened five times this year, though I don’t see a way to find them without subscribing to bb-ref.
“Every once in a while, someone may steal a base and they need someone on first for a DP opportunity.”
And when that happens, Tim McCarver always claims that it was poor baserunning, because it took the bat out of the batter’s hands.
Happens all the time, Book.
This Year’s Most Pointless Fangraphs entry.
My apologies. I’ll get right on writing up Kip Wells’ bullpen workout for the Mariners.
I, for one, am beyond intrigued.
About Kip Wells of course.
FINALLY!
I love these things. The piece on the worst called ball of the year was jaw-dropping. I had to show my wife. It helped that the called ball in question was probably, with respect to the strike zone, the most centerally located pitch on the chart.
And it lead to an even more amazing article about the best pitch framers in MLB, something I had never even thought of thinking of.
Doesn’t touch last years winner:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/a-tardy-farewell-to-the-anti-deceiver/
I was at this game. I remember wondering why they would bother depriving me of seeing Dunn try to hit a ball 700 feet. Texas may have a good offense, but this was when Sale really had it going on.
The more amazing thing was Ventura sending Sale out to start the eight with a 19 run lead. The All Star break was coming up, but they had already announced that Sale would pitch in it instead of being held out. He had been moved to the pen earlier in the year for the stated reason that they didn’t feel his arm could hold up for a whole year as a starter and by the end of the month he would set a career high in innings, even going back to college. So I was pretty incredulous when he came out to pitch the eighth.
There’s definitely some interesting work to be done in terms of bullpen usage and leverage. For example, Jim Tracy said the Rockies didn’t want to expose their young lefty Rex Brothers to “pressure” situations (i.e. setup or closing)… but the Rockies’ bullpen leader in Cumulative Leverage Faced was, in fact, Rex Brothers.
Wouldn’t this be the most insignificant intentional walk? Maybe I’m wrong on the semantics, but I would consider the most pointless intentional walk the one with the highest risk/reward ratio. I’d imagine the ultimate would be someone allowing the tie run to come to the plate on an IBB with two outs in the ninth. I would hope that no MLB manager would do that.
Minor point, but in regards to putting in Romo in NLCS game 7 you forgot (c) letting your closer be on the mound to finish a very important game, regardless of score, for “chemistry” purposes (or an “unwritten rule” or “right thing to do” if you prefer). May not be statistical strategery, but it definitely has its justifications that I agree with. See also Grant Balfour closing Game 162 vs. Rangers
Tim the Beaver, might you have attended MIT?
The NLCS Game 7 is not a valid example because d) the weather forecast was for heavy rain any minute, and Bochy wanted to avoid having to finish it the day after. Surely Romo was ordered to throw only strikes. And it did pour before the game was over, but the umpires were merciful and let the G finish the game. In fact I remember I was fretting over a possible postponement that day, before the game, because the pitching match up would become less favorable for the Giants.
It was already heavy rain and I’m fairly certain that if Romo had walked someone, they would have postponed the game. That whole 9th inning was a deluge and I’m surprised no one got hurt with the infield that soggy.
Yeah, it was raining pretty hard when Javier Lopez was out there, I remember thinking that it seemed like he couldn’t get a good grip on the ball in the rain.
I didn’t mind Bochy’s over-strategizing, the Cardinals don’t ever give up. But that sure was a strange game.
I am bothered by the construction “most pointless”. “Pointless” seems like a binary thing to me; a point has no dimension and thus it’s either there or it isn’t, and even if there were gradations of existence, how could you tell? May I suggest instead of “most pointless”, “least pointy”?
Obviously the least pointy IBBs were all to Prince Fielder; dude is round.
I can’t believe I’m about to defend Ron Washington but here it goes: Nothing in baseball is ‘statistically impossible’. If there is even a whisper of a chance that something could happen in baseball it does – including coming back from 10 Runs down. That’s why we love baseball.
Washington played it by the book because it gave his team the best chance to keep the score from going higher. And, even though the Sox went on to nearly double up on the score Washington made the right call for three reasons: 1.) It was the best play to keep the Sox from scoring (what would have been pointless was bringing in a matchup reliever from the bullpen when behind by 10 runs) 2.) With a 10 run lead, Sale on the mound and the AS game coming up, Ventura should have pulled his starter and Washington knew it. (Ventura made the bigger managerial error in my opinion) and 3.) The Rangers have the horses at the plate to make a comeback.
As the author rightly points out, no IW is pointless.
I’ve having trouble reconciling 1)Wash walking a guy with a 10-run deficit because it gives his team the best chance to win and 2) Wash giving Michael Young 650 plate appearances and even starting him at SS for a couple of games.
“I can’t believe I’m about to defend Ron Washington but here it goes”
that was where you should have stopped yourself
I commend you as the only person willing to cut against the grain on this one.
I’m having a hard time deciding on this one. I mean, how about this hypothetical: Wash doesn’t call the IBB and Dunn pops a HR. Now it’s 11-0. Then the inning ends, the Rangers come storming back and scrap back to 10 runs, but ultimately fall short.
If the Rangers wind up losing by a run, do we all start looking back and say “Hey, that was a stupid match-up to ever let occur”.
Let’s also flip this around. Why NOT give the IBB? Jeff’s only answer ” Ron Washington could’ve elected to let Tateyama try something against a lefty with the stakes really low. That’s a good opportunity to mess around, in a situation of minimal consequence.”
Mess around? I suppose. I always like letting the bench guys get some playing time in hopeless situations. But is there really a benefit to giving Tateyama more experience against an MLB lefty? Maybe, but that benefit is also minimal in the long run, right?
Fun topic to discuss whilst letting that Pitcher and Catcher countdown tick along.
I thought the idea was finding the IBB whose value was closest to zero. Surely there were plenty of significantly-negative ones. So the article isn’t saying “here’s an IBB that never should have happened,” it’s saying “here’s the IBB where we’re most indifferent to whether it happened or not.”
Let’s not forget that Dunn strikes out or walks in the majority of his plate appearances. That has to outweigh the splits. You’re more likely to get a K or the walk anyway!
This is an example of why Jeff is awesome. He can write about anything and make it interesting and insightful. Thank you, Jeff.
More of these! Justin Upton’s future value is interesting and all but I can get that analysis anywhere. What I can’t get anywhere is evidence of a Major League manager playing lefty-righty splits with a ten run lead. Billy Beane must have been proud that day. His Doubting Thomas finally a believer!
LOL leading the league with 18 IBBs!
I’d be more interested in which IBB resulted in the largest decrease in win probability. Basically, the worst decision.
Perfect time to break out an eephus.