Ok it's Monday morning, but I would like to see baseball make it a stiffer penalty concerning walks - why!

I am NY Giants Football Fan, and when LT ( Lawrence Taylor) played the game, the offense could double and sometimes triple team him, but LT still made the play.

Michael Jordan, Shak and many other great players were double / triple teamed, but yet they still made the play. In other words as a Fan you got your money's worth watching these athletes perform.

The defense could do many things but it was not a guarantee that they would work.

Now baseball- One of the few if not the only major sports in which the defense can LEGITIMALLY take away the other teams weapon - ie; pitch around or the Intentional Walk. Just look at Barry Bonds. Who wants to go to the park to see THEIR player walked 3-4 times a game.

Therefore, a base on balls should be at least a 2 base award, and maybe it would stop the nonsense. Typically in baseball, close game (team trailing by a run or 2), we have r2, 2 outs and Mr. Superstar at the plate. Here it comes Intentional base on balls, however, if B1 received a 2 base award, the defensive manger would think twice about it especially if game were tied or they were leading by one run.

It's really funny in that baseball over the years in trying to provide more offense has (1) juiced up the baseballs, (2) lowered the mound and (3) moved the fences in when all they had to do is look at their rules and make one simple change - A batter is awarded 2 BASES when he /she receives ball 4.

Pete Booth

[Edited by PeteBooth on Jul 1st, 2002 at 11:28 AM]

or just get rid of the IBB all together. I don't mind them walking the person on 4 pitchs out of the zone. Maybe one of those pitches the batter can just reach it and knock it out of the park. But the IBB burns me up.

No IBB is a good idea.
Maybe 2 bases if he walks on four straight? Of course, I'm not sure how that would change the batter's stategy at the plate.
Maybe a hitter's 2nd walk of the game is two bases. His 3rd is three bases...

umm... have you guys been drinking ALL weekend?? ;) just kidding.

That would be very interesting.

Since the IBB is a defensive move, let's counter that with not allowing sacrifice bunts, either.

Bob

At least with the SAC he is getting pitched to. But I do know what you are saying and mean. The rule won't change but you know when you go up to bat you wont get a cheap at bat if they didn't have the IBB. Its just real hard to swallow a man making millions of dollars to pitch and then can't because the coach say's give him 4. I would never give anyone 4...let the coach take me out, and it has happened...I'm here to challange the batter.

The batter that follows the star player should make em pay for the IBB ... thats why they make the BIG BUCKS! While we are changing rules lets do away with the Designated Hitter and American League managers would have to make decisions again!

uh . . . isn't that what an IBB is?

In a way yes...but if you throw a high fastball up in the zone but out of it..chances are the hitter might, and seen it alot a swing. There is still somewhat of a challenge there...In the IBB catcher stands puts arm out ball one...boring and to me it shows me the pitcher is not doing his job and shows the coach is a coward and has no faith in his pitcher. Do you go see a ball game to see Bonds hit? YES Do you go to a Ball game to see Johnson K everybody? YES How can you see Bonds hit when they are to scared to pitch to him? And I agree to take out the DH to. Make the pitchers earn the big bucks.