Does Bonds walk too much? [Archive]

View Full Version : Does Bonds walk too much?

Little Big Sheff

09-21-04, 04:35 PM

Or more exactly, do people walk Bonds too much?

I just read a story about that on ESPN and I was wondering if the great saberminds around here could help me make up my mind on this.

I am fully aware of the importance of OBP for the offensive part of the game. But isn't the reverse true for the pitching / defense part? That is, aren't people better off in the long run if they try their best not to allow people to be on-base?

Wouldn't it be better to allow the jack here and there and trade IBB's for actual outs?

In the ESPN story, someone mentioned this disturbing split :

The Giants have scored 600 of their 787 runs in innings when Bonds steps to the plate.
When he walks, the Giants average 1.09 runs per inning.
When he doesn't walk, the Giants average 0.95 runs per inning.
And when he's intentionally walked, the Giants average 1.25 runs per inning.

What's your take on this? Is there such thing as an un-OBP, that would be as crucial for pitchers as OBP is for hitters?

AngelAstro

09-21-04, 05:51 PM

You can find OBP against for all pitchers at Baseball Prospectus:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/misc_pitching2004.html

I'm not sure if you have to be a member to see these stats.

As a pitcher, you must keep as many batters as possible off base.

Bonds is an interesting problem. One would have to try to figure out the run expectancy of Bonds getting a hit in a certain situation vs. being walked. This would be a tough project, one that I certainly won't tackle. I suppose it will end up coming down to situations.

So here's a hypothetical. It's 3-2 in the bottom of the 9th inning with a healthy Ray Durham on 1st and 2 out. Do you face Bonds or walk him and face JT Snow?

Bonds is batting .372 with a .827 slugging, which means that he gets a hit 37.2% of the time and averages 2.22 bases per hit (SLG * (1/AVG)). Snow is batting .333 with a .533 slugging, which means that he gets a git 33.3% of the time and averages 1.6 bases per hit (Wow, I didn't realize that Snow was having such a good year).

If Bonds gets a hit, then Durham scores for sure and the game is tied. Then Snow bats with one out and a runner on second. There is a 37.2% chance that the game is tied.

If Bonds is walked, and Snow gets a hit we'll assume that Bonds gets to third and the game is tied. There are runners on 1.6 base and third and one out. There is a 33.3% chance that the game is tied.

Seems that walking Bonds is the way to go.

You would also have to factor the next at bat.

If Bonds was pitched to, then Snow is up. There is a 33.3% that Snow gets a hit with a 100% chance that Bonds scores (assuming that Snow's hit notches 1.6 bases). Thus, the chances that Bonds scores, thus, you losing the game becomes 37.2% * 33.3% = 12.4% chance.

If Bonds was walked, and Snow got a hit (33.3% chance) then it will depend on the next batter. Since I don't know who that is, I'll just assume that he doesn't hit as well as Snow this year. In that case 33.3% * x<33.3% = y<12.4%.

This of course means that you would be better off not pitching to Bonds in this situation. Of course, this would also assume that you wouldn't be walking Snow or the next batter. In other words, the next batter would be putting the ball in play.

All in all, I probably wouldn't pitch to Bonds in any situation that I absolutely could not allow the Giants to score.

I don't know if this helps at all, but it was good procrastination from actual work.

Irony Of It All

09-22-04, 03:24 PM

I haven't had time to really look at these yet, but here's a couple of charts on this very subject by Tangotiger.

Home
http://www.tangotiger.net/walkbonds.html
http://www.tangotiger.net/walkbondschart.html

Road
http://www.tangotiger.net/walkbondschart.html

EDIT: Both of his charts say "Giants on the Road" so I'm not sure which is which. Anyways, here's the other link...

http://www.tangotiger.net/walkbondschart2.html

WiffleWOOD

09-22-04, 03:42 PM

this chart is confusing me a bit...

for instance, in the first inning with two outs, if there's a man on second the chart says it would be best to walk him.

yet with a man on third, you should just "go with your gut," which means either walk him or pitch to him.

how is it less dangerous to pitch to him with a man on third than with a man on second?

Little Big Sheff

09-22-04, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by WiffleWOOD
this chart is confusing me a bit...

for instance, in the first inning with two outs, if there's a man on second the chart says it would be best to walk him.

yet with a man on third, you should just "go with your gut," which means either walk him or pitch to him.

how is it less dangerous to pitch to him with a man on third than with a man on second?

Maybe because if he is walked with a man on second, that makes men on first and second, and the guy hitting behind Bonds still has to manage a hit to knock the runs in.

If you walk him with a man on third, a grounder or a sac fly gets the first baserunner in, a higher probability for the hitter behind Bonds.

So, the difference between Bonds and the-guy-behind-him for the probabilities of knocking the run in may be greater with a man on second (prob of Bonds singling or better - prob of TGBH singling or better) than with a man on third (prob of Bonds not K'ing - prob of TGBH not K'ing) hence, the decision to pitch to Bonds in the latter case, because TGBH has a chance to knock the run in anyway.

Don't know if this makes sense though.

WiffleWOOD

09-22-04, 05:31 PM

i understand all that, which is why i understand those circumstances with one out.

but in the situation that i wrote about above, there are TWO OUTS.

how does that make sense?

AngelAstro

09-23-04, 08:27 AM

Originally posted by WiffleWOOD
i understand all that, which is why i understand those circumstances with one out.

but in the situation that i wrote about above, there are TWO OUTS.

how does that make sense?

I believe that all of Tangotiger's Run Expectancy charts (I wish I knew that was posted before I went into my diatribe the other day, it would have saved me some time) are based on real play-by-play data. If that is the case, and he based when to walk Bonds on those stats, it may just be a statistical anomaly in those particular situations.

WiffleWOOD

09-23-04, 09:01 AM

ah. well that would make a little more sense. it's pretty interesting, though. i guess everything in the chart has to be taken with a slight grain of salt, then, because i can't believe that anyone would actually recommend pitching to Barry with a runner on third and two outs instead of a runner on second and two outs.

Yankeeah

09-27-04, 11:43 AM

If i was out of contention for a playoff spot, I would pitch to him. Get some balls, throw some strikes. Walking 5 times in one game, 3 intentional is insane.