PDA

View Full Version : Rays issues Bases Loaded Intentional Walk to Hamilton...


Tragg
08-17-2008, 10:17 PM
scoring a run, putting the tying run on and brings the winning run to the plate. Bottom 9, 2 out.
I don't think I've ever seen that before.
Well it worked - Marlon Byrd Kd

Brian26
08-17-2008, 10:23 PM
To bring up Marlon Byrd, who's batting .291 on the season, .295 vs. RHP, .290 with the bases loaded this year....quickly checking his splits. His numbers aren't as impressive as Hamilton's, but it's not a huge dropoff.

Byrd strikes out, Rays win. Gutsy move that paid off. Tip your cap.

Tragg
08-17-2008, 10:41 PM
To bring up Marlon Byrd, who's batting .291 on the season, .295 vs. RHP, .290 with the bases loaded this year....quickly checking his splits. His numbers aren't as impressive as Hamilton's, but it's not a huge dropoff.

Byrd strikes out, Rays win. Gutsy move that paid off. Tip your cap.
Even more gutsy considering Byrd hit a walk-off homer against Wheeler a couple of weeks ago.

areilly
08-17-2008, 10:47 PM
Unconventional move, but not unheard of. Buck Showalter, for example, had his Diamondbacks do this against Barry Bonds in 1998.

NY Times story (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B07EFD91F38F932A05756C0A96E9582 60)

ChiSoxGirl
08-17-2008, 10:48 PM
I'm just fascinated that the Rays were the ESPN Game of the Week! They sure have come a long way.

Brian26
08-17-2008, 10:51 PM
I'm just fascinated that the Rays were the ESPN Game of the Week! They sure have come a long way.

Were they? I watched the Phillies and Padres tonight. Did they switch games at some point?

ChiSoxGirl
08-17-2008, 10:54 PM
Were they? I watched the Phillies and Padres tonight. Did they switch games at some point?

Oh great, now I look like a dumbass. :redface: This is why I don't post as much as I'd like to sometimes on here. Since the original poster said "tonight's game," I figured it was on ESPN. Don't listen to the chick who doesn't have cable, or at least take what she says with a grain of salt.

arKnaD7
08-17-2008, 10:54 PM
Even more gutsy considering Byrd hit a walk-off homer against Wheeler a couple of weeks ago.

and he's been the hottest hitter in baseball the last week or so

TheOldRoman
08-17-2008, 11:17 PM
Oh great, now I look like a dumbass. :redface: This is why I don't post as much as I'd like to sometimes on here. Since the original poster said "tonight's game," I figured it was on ESPN. Don't listen to the chick who doesn't have cable, or at least take what she says with a grain of salt.Due to the insane heat in Arlington, they often have night games on Sundays. They are the only team that ever hosts Sunday night games that aren't on ESPN.

ChiSoxGirl
08-17-2008, 11:20 PM
Due to the insane heat in Arlington, they often have night games on Sundays. They are the only team that ever hosts Sunday night games that aren't on ESPN.

Oh, I didn't know that. I don't remember the Sox playing a night game down there in recent years, which is probably why this never occurred to me.

nodiggity59
08-17-2008, 11:27 PM
Didn't Big Frank get an IBB with the bases jacked in the 93 playoffs against Toronto?

TDog
08-18-2008, 01:11 AM
Didn't Big Frank get an IBB with the bases jacked in the 93 playoffs against Toronto?

No. He was intentionally walked twice during the the ALCS in 1993. Once there were runners on second and third -- the fourth inning of Game 3 -- and once with a runner on second -- the seventh inning of Game 4. Both times first base was open.

I remember Barry Bonds being intentionally walked with the bases loaded. It doesn't happen often. I have read that Abner Dalrymple was walked intentionally with the bases loaded in 1881 and that Nap Lajoie was intentionally walked with the bases loaded in 1901. The only other bases-loaded intentional walks I've read about were Del Bissonette in 1928, Bill Nicholson in 1944 and Bonds in 1998.

TommyJohn
08-18-2008, 08:46 AM
No. He was intentionally walked twice during the the ALCS in 1993. Once there were runners on second and third -- the fourth inning of Game 3 -- and once with a runner on second -- the seventh inning of Game 4. Both times first base was open.

I remember Barry Bonds being intentionally walked with the bases loaded. It doesn't happen often. I have read that Abner Dalrymple was walked intentionally with the bases loaded in 1881 and that Nap Lajoie was intentionally walked with the bases loaded in 1901. The only other bases-loaded intentional walks I've read about were Del Bissonette in 1928, Bill Nicholson in 1944 and Bonds in 1998.

I believe Andre Dawson may have been intentionally walked with the bases loaded in 1987 or 1988. There was a game where he was walked intentionally five times in extra inninngs. One may have been with the bases loaded.

EDIT: Bless retrosheet. Dawson was given 5 IBBs on 5/22/90 in an extra inning game vs. the Reds. (I remember Harry Caray screaming about it like it was a momentous event in the history of baseball.) None were with the bases loaded.

Eddo144
08-18-2008, 09:42 AM
To bring up Marlon Byrd, who's batting .291 on the season, .295 vs. RHP, .290 with the bases loaded this year....quickly checking his splits. His numbers aren't as impressive as Hamilton's, but it's not a huge dropoff.

Byrd strikes out, Rays win. Gutsy move that paid off. Tip your cap.
I'm not going to praise a poor decision just because it wound up working. This is like hitting on 17 when the dealer is showing a 5, and getting a 3. Just because you got lucky doesn't mean it was a good hit.

daveeym
08-18-2008, 10:32 AM
I'm not going to praise a poor decision just because it wound up working. This is like hitting on 17 when the dealer is showing a 5, and getting a 3. Just because you got lucky doesn't mean it was a good hit.
:rolleyes: Not even close.

Eddo144
08-18-2008, 11:18 AM
:rolleyes: Not even close.
I'm not sure what you mean by that exactly. It is like making a bad hit in blackjack and getting away with it, though the chances of success when hitting on 17 are indeed much lower.

The bottom line is that the IBB with the bases loaded lowered the Rays' chances of winning the game. According to www.fangraphs.com, the Rays' win probability (http://www.fangraphs.com/plays.aspx?date=2008-08-17&team=Rangers&dh=0) was 95.0% before the IBB and 89.8% after it.

asindc
08-18-2008, 12:34 PM
Unconventional move, but not unheard of. Buck Showalter, for example, had his Diamondbacks do this against Barry Bonds in 1998.

NY Times story (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B07EFD91F38F932A05756C0A96E9582 60)

Showalter said during either the 1993 or 1994 season that he would consider intentionally walking Frank with the bases loaded, no matter the score.

daveeym
08-18-2008, 01:49 PM
I'm not sure what you mean by that exactly. It is like making a bad hit in blackjack and getting away with it, though the chances of success when hitting on 17 are indeed much lower.

The bottom line is that the IBB with the bases loaded lowered the Rays' chances of winning the game. According to www.fangraphs.com (http://www.fangraphs.com), the Rays' win probability (http://www.fangraphs.com/plays.aspx?date=2008-08-17&team=Rangers&dh=0) was 95.0% before the IBB and 89.8% after it.
That's exactly what I meant. Cool link though, is this where espn gameday gets their weird stats from?

doublem23
08-18-2008, 02:26 PM
I'm not sure what you mean by that exactly. It is like making a bad hit in blackjack and getting away with it, though the chances of success when hitting on 17 are indeed much lower.

The bottom line is that the IBB with the bases loaded lowered the Rays' chances of winning the game. According to www.fangraphs.com (http://www.fangraphs.com/), the Rays' win probability (http://www.fangraphs.com/plays.aspx?date=2008-08-17&team=Rangers&dh=0) was 95.0% before the IBB and 89.8% after it.

How does FanGraphs get their numbers? Are they just crunching historical stats (what percentage of teams have won when historically in the same situation?) or do they do thousands of simulations for every at-bat, seeing how the game would end with the current players? A 5% drop in win probability is rendered even more meaningless if they're comparing that against historical box scores that, for the most part, would have occurred before the "Live Ball" era, not to mention other factors such as the comparable seasons Hamilton/Byrd are having, historical splits for the two against TB pitching, and the offensive production one can typically expect at the Ballpark in Arlington.

Depending on what's left in the shoe, hitting on a 17 results in a nearly 70% chance of a bust. In principle it's maybe the same, but statistically not so.

Eddo144
08-18-2008, 02:42 PM
How does FanGraphs get their numbers? Are they just crunching historical stats (what percentage of teams have won when historically in the same situation?) or do they do thousands of simulations for every at-bat, seeing how the game would end with the current players? A 5% drop in win probability is rendered even more meaningless if they're comparing that against historical box scores that, for the most part, would have occurred before the "Live Ball" era, not to mention other factors such as the comparable seasons Hamilton/Byrd are having, historical splits for the two against TB pitching, and the offensive production one can typically expect at the Ballpark in Arlington.

Depending on what's left in the shoe, hitting on a 17 results in a nearly 70% chance of a bust. In principle it's maybe the same, but statistically not so.
Hmm...the best I can find is they use data from similar situations (e.g. Team A is winning 4-3, with 2 outs in the top of the 7th, with a runner on 1st) from 1999-2002, with some smoothing done (on the off chance a team is more likely to win with one man on that two on, all else being equal). It looks like they use numbers from Tangotiger's site, which I think is all proprietary information, but I'm not sure (I did find these figures (http://www.tangotiger.net/welist.html)).

Obviously, you're right: there's more to win probability than just the situation. It depends on the actual players (though I would argue that giving Josh Hamilton 2008 the Barry Bonds 2001-2004 treatment is a bit much) as well. Fangraphs is cool to see what each individual player in a lineup has contributed to the win that day, as compared to the absolute average. It helps recognize players who may not drive in the runs, but are still doing things that are important to winning (like a leadoff walk when the team is down two runs, or a single that moves a runner to third, that sort of thing).

As for this specific case, as I think about it more, I become more convinced it was the wrong thing to do. Down four with the bases loaded, Hamilton needed to hit a HR to tie the game. Once he was walked, Byrd only had to hit a double (barring a total disaster, that would clear the bases). As a previous poster pointed out, it's not that much of a dropoff from Hamilton to Byrd, so I'd rather take the chance of Hamilton hitting a HR over the chance of Byrd hitting a double.