Bases-empty intentional walks in the postseason
Posted by John Autin on October 13, 2011
The intentional walk that Ron Washington ordered for Miguel Cabrera in game 4 of the ALCS was the 10th bases-empty IBB known to have occurred in the postseason. It was the first that came with only 1 out:
| Cr# | Gm# | Date | Series | Gm# | Batter | Tm | Opp | Pitcher | Score | Inn | RoB | Out | Pit(cnt) | RBI | WPA | RE24 | Play Description | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1978-10-07 | NLCS | 4 | Greg Luzinski | PHI | @LAD | Rick Rhoden | tied 3-3 | t8 | --- | 2 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.02 | 0.12 | .94 | Intentional Walk |
| 2 | 1 | 2002-10-13 | NLCS | 4 | Barry Bonds | SFG | STL | Rick White | tied 2-2 | b8 | --- | 2 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.02 | 0.12 | 1.00 | Intentional Walk |
| 3 | 1 | 2003-09-30 | NLDS | 1 | Barry Bonds | SFG | FLA | Chad Fox | ahead 0-1 | b8 | --- | 2 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.01 | 0.13 | .30 | Intentional Walk |
| 4 | 1 | 2003-10-03 | NLDS | 3 | Barry Bonds | SFG | @FLA | Ugueth Urbina | tied 2-2 | t9 | --- | 2 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.03 | 0.13 | 1.33 | Intentional Walk |
| 5 | 1 | 2003-10-04 | NLDS | 4 | Barry Bonds | SFG | @FLA | Carl Pavano | tied 5-5 | t8 | --- | 2 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.03 | 0.13 | .99 | Intentional Walk |
| 6 | 1 | 2006-10-06 | ALDS | 3 | Frank Thomas | OAK | MIN | Dennys Reyes | ahead 2-4 | b7 | --- | 2 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.01 | 0.13 | .24 | Intentional Walk |
| 7 | 1 | 2006-10-19 | NLCS | 7 | Albert Pujols | STL | @NYM | Aaron Heilman | tied 1-1 | t8 | --- | 2 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.03 | 0.13 | 1.00 | Intentional Walk |
| 8 | 1 | 2009-10-19 | ALCS | 3 | Alex Rodriguez | NYY | @LAA | Brian Fuentes | tied 4-4 | t9 | --- | 2 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.03 | 0.13 | 1.37 | Intentional Walk |
| 9 | 1 | 2009-10-22 | ALCS | 5 | Alex Rodriguez | NYY | @LAA | Brian Fuentes | down 7-6 | t9 | --- | 2 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.04 | 0.13 | 1.46 | Intentional Walk |
| 10 | 1 | 2011-10-12 | ALCS | 4 | Miguel Cabrera | DET | TEX | Mike Adams | tied 3-3 | b8 | --- | 1 | 4 (3-0) | 0 | 0.05 | 0.26 | 1.40 | Intentional Walk |
Nos. 3, 4 and 5 came in the same series, as did nos. 8 and 9.
Let's see how the ploy worked out in each instance:
1. Greg Luzinski vs. Rick Rhoden.
- Up next: Jose Cardenal, Jerry Martin.
- Result: No runs. Cardenal singled Luzinski to 2nd, but Martin struck out to end the threat. Dodgers won in 10 innings and closed out the NLCS, 3 games to 1.
2. Barry Bonds vs. Rick White.
- Up next: Benito Santiago, J.T. Snow.
- Result: 2 runs. Santiago homered for a 4-2 lead. Giants won, 4-3, and took a 3-1 lead in the NLCS.
3. Bonds vs. Chad Fox.
- Up next: Edgardo Alfonzo, Benito Santiago.
- Result: 1 run. After Bonds stole 2nd, Alfonzo doubled him in for an insurance run. Giants won the NLDS opener, 2-0.
4. Bonds vs. Ugueth Urbina.
- Up next: Alfonzo, Yorvit Torrealba.
- Result: No runs. Alfonzo singled Bonds to 3rd, but Torrealba lined out to end the inning. Florida won in 11 innings and seized a 2-1 lead in the NLDS.
5. Bonds vs. Carl Pavano.
- Up next: Alfonzo, pitcher's spot.
- Result: No runs. Alfonzo grounded out to end the inning. Florida won 7-6 and took the series, 3-1, as J.T. Snow was thrown out at the plate to end the series.
6. Frank Thomas vs. Dennys Reyes.
- Up next: Eric Chavez, Jay Payton.
- Result: 4 runs, a.k.a. Epic Fail. Chavez walked, Payton reached on E-3, Nick Swisher walked to score a run and Marco Scutaro doubled home 3 more. A's won, 8-2, and completed the ALDS sweep.
7. Albert Pujols vs. Aaron Heilman (game 7 of the 2006 NLCS).
- Up next: Juan Encarnacion, Jim Edmonds.
- Result: No runs. Encarnacion struck out. Cardinals won the game and the series on Yadier Molina's 2-run HR in the 9th off Heilman. (Nothing at all happened in the bottom of the 9th -- nothing, I tell you!)
8. Alex Rodriguez vs. Brian Fuentes.
- Up next: Brett Gardner (in DH spot), Jorge Posada.
- Result: No runs. PH Jerry Hairston struck out to end the inning. Angels won in 11 innings, but still trailed the ALCS, 2-1.
9. A-Rod vs. Fuentes.
- Up next: Hideki Matsui, Robinson Cano.
- Result: No runs. Matsui singled and Cano was HBP to load the bases, but Nick Swisher popped out to end the game. Angels still trailed the ALCS 3-2.
10. Miguel Cabrera vs. Mike Adams.
- Up next: Victor Martinez, Delmon Young.
- Result: 0 runs. V-Mart bounced a single into RF, sending Cabrera to 3rd (would have been an easy out if 1B were not holding the runner). Young flied to medium RF, Cabrera cut down at the plate by Nelson Cruz to end the inning. Rangers won in 11 innings and lead the ALCS by 3-1.
Totals: In 3 of 10 cases, at least 1 run scored in the inning, with a total of 7 runs. In 4 other cases, the IBB reached 2nd base, and 3 times reached 3rd base, but was stranded. In only 3 cases was the very next batter retired.
The 4 IBBs to Bonds in 2002-03 may have been defensible, but the rest were poor percentage plays, in my opinion -- none more so than Washington's attempt to give the game away. No wonder he said afterwards, "Tonight, it was 'thank you, Nelson Cruz.'"
October 13th, 2011 at 1:41 pm
Anyone have any thoughts on why Leyland didn't pinch run for Cabrera in the 8th? He's the potential game-winning run, assuming a scoreless 9th (you have an elite closer). He's a very below average baserunner. His defense is below average. His bat will not show up again if you win the game in the 9th. I don't know enough about Detroit's bench, but it seemed like a mistake to me.
October 13th, 2011 at 2:15 pm
@1, NRPS -- I'm a Tigers fan and sorely disappointed about the outcome, but I can't criticize Leyland for keeping Miggy in. Frankly, after the first strike to Young, I was pretty sure he would strike out, considering how utterly hopeless he had looked waving at 3 pitches from Ogando in the 6th.
I'm generally not keen on taking your best hitter out of the game in that situation.
October 13th, 2011 at 3:22 pm
@1, NRPS and @2, John Autin -- Ranger's Fan here, and it's the same situation I thought about in game 2 with an injured Beltre on 3rd. One out, Beltre (injured) on third, Murphy's fly-out should have ended the game in the 9th, but Beltre could not run. The concern is, there's a strong possibility you are going to extra innings and no guarantee you can score. Then you've just removed a powerful bat. Then in the 11th, his replacement could have hit into a double play changing the momentum, giving Perry more confidence, and Cruz doesn't hit the Grand-Slam. You want that bat if you go into those innings.
Same as last night. Baring Cruz's 3-run HR, that inning could have easily ended with Hamilton's score off of Napoli's hit. And although Cabrera fouled out, you guys (Tigers) needed him in that situation. The only thing you really could question is whether to send him home, due to how slow he is. But can't fault Leyland for the decision there either, if he made it he's a hero.
October 13th, 2011 at 3:50 pm
All fair points but, as an underdog (in any sport) you generally need to take more risks. (Think trick plays in football - often run by underdogs). If the Rangers true talent level is greater than the Tigers (in my view it is by about half a run or more per game), you not only want to maximize every chance of winning *this game*, but also want to avoid extra innings in any given game, where the more talented team, on average, is likely to win. (My feeling is that at that point the Rangers had the better bullpen and better lineup, but I could be wrong).
Also, at the earliest his bat comes back up is probably the 10th (likely the 11th) (any sooner and the Tigers would have gotten enough people on base that the game is likely over already). But almost half of all extra inning games end in the 10th, lowering the value of the replaced player's bat (http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/402). Finally, the other team gets a chance to score, and the more runs they score, if any, reduces further the value of any one hitter in the bottom of the inning (since down one or more runs, the home team needs contributions from more than just the one hitter).
Obviously the available bench players are very important in the calculus.
October 13th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
@4, NRPS: "If the Rangers true talent level is greater than the Tigers (in my view it is by about half a run or more per game)...."
Care to describe how you reached that assessment?
October 13th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
One last point, I'm not suggesting it was a slam dunk decision to pinch run. Just an interesting question to debate. Ron Washington's IBB was far dumber in my opinion.
October 13th, 2011 at 4:00 pm
@5: With Baseball Reference's trusty SRS (TEX: 1.2, DET .4)
We know that regular-season strength-adjusted run differential is predictive of post-season success, so I think that is a reasonable measure to look at.
Also, this projection system had the Rangers as strong favorites in the series: http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2011/10/8/2476621/postseason-projections-phillies-departure-leaves-texas-prohibitive
October 13th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
@4: "almost half of all extra inning games end in the 10th, lowering the value of the replaced player's bat"
That's a great point to raise. But the count is a bit different in the postseason, when the stakes are higher and teams are more willing to extend their best pitchers.
In the live-ball era, only 50 of 125 extra-inning games have ended within 10 innings (40%).
October 13th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
@4: "at the earliest [Cabrera's] bat comes back up is probably the 10th (likely the 11th)"
You lost me there, NRPS.
The situation in question occurred in the 8th inning, and the question is whether to pinch-run for Cabrera when he's on 3rd base with 1 out and Young (the #5 hitter) at bat.
Cabrera's spot is almost certain to come up in the 10th inning. The only way it doesn't is if Young hits into a DP and Detroit gets no other net baserunners before Cabrera's spot comes up again.
Of course, that's exactly what happened, but it was still very unlikely.
October 13th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
@4: "extra innings [...] where the more talented team, on average, is likely to win."
Evidence? I'm pretty sure that exactly the opposite is true.
Extra inning games are more likely to be close games, and we know absolutely that the closer the game, the less likely it is that the better team wins.
Here are the regular-season extra-inning records of this year's playoff teams:
TOTAL: 56-59
-- Rangers, 4-5
-- Tigers, 6-3
-- Rays, 9-5
-- Yankees, 4-12 (yes, they did)
-- Phillies, 9-10
-- Brewers, 7-7
-- Cardinals, 8-13
-- D-backs, 9-4
October 13th, 2011 at 4:34 pm
I know that the number of playoff games has picked up a lot with the WCs, but it's interesting to note that all but one of the base-empty IBBs have been in the last decade. Even setting aside the Bonds IBBs, what is driving this?
October 13th, 2011 at 4:38 pm
As an aside, it's only happened once before the steroid era? Wow, I find that interesting, and I don't know why!
October 13th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
@12 T,
Yeah, that is interesting I hadn't thought of that. And what's even more odd is the first time it happens it was Greg Luzinski. You would have thought that someone would have walked Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Ty Cobb, Honus Wagner, Mel Ott, Stan Musial, Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, Joe Dimaggio, Ted Williams, Eddie Collins, or Joe Jackson,
October 13th, 2011 at 5:06 pm
It's interesting to think what would have happened had the Mets not walked Albert Pujols in the 8th inning of game 7. Maybe the 9th inning plays out differently had they pitched to Pujols.
October 13th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
@10: John, I would personally be skeptical of a claim that a less talented team (i.e., a team with a lower regular strength-adjusted run differential) is more likely to win an extra inning game when virtually all resources can be deployed and the stakes are very high. That's a strong claim, and I don't think the evidence given is strong enough to justify it.
Yes, close games (1-run games in particular) are virtually a coin-flip between given teams, but simply looking at the extra inning records of this year's playoff teams isn't enough to sway me. Other evidence certainly could change my mind, but I'm betting on the overall stronger team.
Also, if the Rangers are 60/40 favorites to win the series (and leading the series, making them even stronger favorites), all the more reason to take a risk to 'steal' a game by risking long-run success for a maximize the change of scoring 1 run now.
In any case, even if Cabrera comes up in the 10th rather than the 11th, we're still only talking about 1 extra PA for him, with a small chance of a 2nd PA if the games goes very deep. His defense is also very relevant to the analysis, because of the value of run-prevention in a close game.
To the question of why the IBBs now,? Perhaps more viewers and more media scrutiny means that managers are more risk-averse in bigger games. IBB to a 'dangerous' hitter is a risk-averse move with respect to the manager's reputation, because if Bonds/Cabrera hits the home run then you 'let their most dangerous hitter beat you', when you could have faced weaker hitters. But if the IBB is followed up by two singles or a single and sac fly, then you 'tip your cap to the other team, who just outplayed you [and what could the manager have done about that??].' People remember when the elite hitter is pitched to and he hits a decisive HR. People rarely remember when the walk came around to score the decisive run.
October 13th, 2011 at 5:51 pm
@15: "simply looking at the extra inning records of this year's playoff teams isn't enough to sway me"
NRPS, if you go looking for it, the evidence will smack you in the forehead. Extra-inning games are a crapshoot.
I can only present one year at a time because I don't know where to find a larger aggregation. But even one full year's data should be persuasive. Here are all 30 teams for 2011
Tm ... Extras ... Regulation
TOR ... 13-4 ... 68-77
LAD ... 8-3 ... 74-76
CIN ... 12-5 ... 67-78
MIN ... 6-4 ... 57-95
CHC ... 9-5 ... 62-86
SEA ... 6-5 ... 61-90
KCR ... 10-8 ... 61-83
ARI ... 9-4 ... 85-64
WSN ... 12-8 ... 68-73
SFG ... 13-8 ... 73-68
TBR ... 9-5 ... 82-66
DET ... 6-3 ... 89-64
BAL ... 8-8 ... 61-85
NYM ... 7-7 ... 70-78
PIT ... 6-7 ... 66-83
ATL ... 14-12 ... 75-61
BOS ... 6-5 ... 84-67
FLA ... 9-13 ... 63-77
OAK ... 8-11 ... 66-77
CLE ... 6-8 ... 74-74
HOU ... 5-13 ... 51-93
MIL ... 7-7 ... 89-59
CHW ... 7-11 ... 72-72
COL ... 4-8 ... 69-81
TEX ... 4-5 ... 92-61
LAA ... 8-13 ... 78-63
PHI ... 9-10 ... 93-50
STL ... 8-13 ... 82-59
SDP ... 4-12 ... 67-79
NYY ... 4-12 ... 93-53
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2011-standings.shtml
October 13th, 2011 at 6:02 pm
@15. Outstanding analysis in this forum. I have to say, in defense of the Twins walking Frank Thomas, if memory serves me, I'm pretty sure the count went to 2-0, and at that point, you may as well walk him rather than have "Big Sweat" groove a fastball to him. Chavez was a lefty who had alot of trouble with left handed pitching, so it made sense at the time.
October 13th, 2011 at 6:54 pm
How neat was that sixth inning from Detriot just now? It featured exactly one each of a single, double, triple, home run, walk, strikeout, groundout and flyout.
October 13th, 2011 at 7:40 pm
@18- more than "neat", I think little Joey Buck just
said that is the first time in baseball history that
a team cycled in one inning during a postseason game.
This is precisely why we love this game. One never knows
when one will see something never before done.
October 13th, 2011 at 7:51 pm
The single, double, triple, and home run were in that order too.
October 13th, 2011 at 10:16 pm
So far there hasn't been a single postseason sweep. with no sweep in the series, there might not be sweep at all. no sweeps mean more games so i was wondering what the most amount of games in a sibgle postseason was
October 13th, 2011 at 10:17 pm
*world series that is
October 13th, 2011 at 10:57 pm
@21, Ted -- I'm pretty the 2003 postseason had the most action, with 38 games. The four LDS went 5, 5, 4 and 4 games; each LCS went 7; and the WS went 6.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/
October 14th, 2011 at 12:10 am
If my calcuations are correct:
41% of postseason games have occurred since 1995
45% of postseason IBB have occurred since 1995
90% of postseason IBB with bases empty have occurred since 1995 (small sample, of course)
I wonder a bit about the IBB tallies from the early days. IBBs weren't an official stat until the '50s. I think we have the postseason records based on play-by-play accounts, but I don't know if their accuracy is absolute. The Giants were walking Babe Ruth a ton in their early '20s WS matchups, but he isn't shown with any IBBs. Maybe none of them were legitimately intentional. And probably none were intentional with the bases empty. But I don't know for sure.
October 14th, 2011 at 9:26 am
The question is not only whether Leyland should have pinch-run for Cabrera, but also, who the best available options were. While Cabrera's defense may figure into the equation, the Tigers don't have a true backup 1B on the roster. Don Kelly played parts of 15 games at first, but he would be playing out of position-- and he came into the game after the inning as a defensive replacement for Young, playing his strongest position, RF. Martinez filled in at 1B on occasion, but Leyland couldn't shift him without losing the DH.
By not pinch-running for Cabrera, Leyland was able to upgrade the defense at both RF and LF (by shifting Raburn from RF). That upgrade more than makes up for any marginal defensive improvement from Cabrera to Kelly.
Another possibility was to pinch hit Kelly for Young, given that a right-hander was in the game, and to reduce the risk of a DP.
October 14th, 2011 at 10:23 am
@24, JT -- I'm sure you're right to question whether we have accurate records of postseason IBBs before 1950.
As to the Giants walking Ruth in the 1921-23 WS ... Yes, he did draw 15 walks in 17 games -- about the same as his regular-season rate. But McGraw was famously dismissive of Ruth, and his intentions (at least, for public consumption) are clear from this quote:
"Why shouldn't we pitch to Ruth? I've said before, and I'll say it again, we pitch to better hitters than Ruth in the National League."
-- Giants manager John McGraw, before Game 2 of the 1923 World Series
Ruth did OK in the '21 series but didn't have a big impact, and he was shut down in the '22 series. But after McGraw's bluster in '23, the Babe homered twice in game 2 and drew 2 walks in that game and the next two, and wound up with 8 for the series. None were recorded as intentional, but it's a fair bet that some were at least mentally intentional.
October 14th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
@John Autin Re: "Evidence? I'm pretty sure that exactly the opposite is true."
You're assuming he was saying the better team was more likely to win in extra innings than overall. I think what he meant is just that the better team is more likely than 50% to win -- which is self-evident and a valid strategical point: the longer a game drags out, the more likely the better team is to win. So if you somehow know that you're the lesser team (or had lesser bullpen left, etc), you should be more willing to take risks to end the game ASAP.
The only reason superior teams are less likely to win close/extra games than 9-inning ones is that if the game goes that long, it means they haven't managed to demonstrate their typical superiority over a longer period of time and it's down to comparatively lucky single innings at a time. That fact doesn't have any effect on the strategy going forward -- just means they have already in a sense failed.
October 14th, 2011 at 9:32 pm
@27, Halejon -- It took me a while, but I finally see the truth of your point.
But while aggressive strategies gain in value in that situation, I'm still not convinced that the incremental edge gained by using a pinch-runner for Cabrera -- given that there are no burners on Detroit's bench -- was worth losing his bat, which was almost certain to come up 2 innings hence.
The Rangers had their middle infielders playing back for the DP, so the speed of the runner on 3rd was unlikely to be a factor on a ground ball to them; and with the corners in, even a fast runner isn't likely to score on a grounder there.
Mike Adams has thrown 1 wild pitch in the last 4 years. Doesn't mean he couldn't uncork one, but the odds are slim.
So, with 1 out, we're basically talking about one AB and one specific possibility -- a medium fly ball -- in which a faster runner makes a difference. Delmon Young is certainly not an extreme fly ball hitter; his GB/FB ratio this year (which was consistent with his career rate) ranked 21st-highest among 73 AL qualifiers, and his ground-out/air-out ratio was 34th. He has 32 career sac flies in 220 chances, about 15% -- a shade below this year's AL average.
I won't say it would have been a mistake to pinch-run, but I wouldn't have done it.
October 23rd, 2011 at 8:44 am
Internet Web Directory...
[...]Bases-empty intentional walks in the postseason » Baseball-Reference Blog » Blog Archive[...]...