Baseball is a game steeped in tradition, with rules and strategies that have been fine-tuned over more than a century. Among these, the intentional walk has long been a tool in the manager’s arsenal, used to bypass a dangerous hitter in favor of a more favorable matchup. Traditionally, this maneuver required the pitcher to throw four pitches well outside the strike zone, effectively giving the batter a free pass to first base. However, in 2017, MLB introduced a rule change allowing managers to signal for an intentional walk without requiring the four pitches, instantly sending the batter to first base.
At first glance, this rule change might seem like a minor tweak aimed at speeding up the game. However, by removing the need for those four pitches, MLB has inadvertently stripped the game of some of its unpredictability and nuance. The act of throwing four pitches, even with the intention of walking a batter, brings with it an array of possibilities—wild pitches, passed balls, and even potential injuries—all of which contribute to the rich tapestry of baseball. By eliminating these possibilities, the game loses a small but significant element of its charm.
One of the primary reasons for keeping the four-pitch intentional walk is the potential for wild pitches. Even the most skilled pitchers are not immune to mistakes, especially when they are deliberately trying to throw outside the strike zone. A wild pitch during an intentional walk can lead to chaos on the basepaths, with runners advancing and sometimes even scoring. This unexpected twist can shift the momentum of a game in an instant.
Consider the scenario: a pitcher, perhaps trying to be overly cautious, throws a pitch too far outside, and the catcher can’t handle it. The ball skips past him, and the runners advance, putting the defense on its heels. This kind of play can electrify the crowd and inject a dose of unpredictability into the game. Without the requirement to throw four pitches, these moments of spontaneity are lost, and the game becomes a little more predictable.
In addition to wild pitches, passed balls are another reason why the four-pitch walk should be maintained. While a wild pitch is typically the fault of the pitcher, a passed ball is charged to the catcher when a pitch that should have been handled cleanly gets away. During an intentional walk, catchers are often in an awkward position, preparing to catch pitches that are far from the strike zone. This can lead to passed balls, which again can allow runners to advance.
The relationship between a pitcher and catcher is a delicate one, built on trust and communication. When a pitcher intentionally throws outside the strike zone, the catcher must be ready to react to a ball that might not follow the usual trajectory. This dance between pitcher and catcher is a subtle but essential part of the game. By removing the need to throw four pitches during an intentional walk, we lose another opportunity to see how well these two players work together under pressure.
Beyond the wild pitches and passed balls, there is also the matter of potential injuries during an intentional walk. While it might seem counterintuitive to argue that the risk of injury is a reason to keep the four-pitch walk, the reality is that baseball is a sport where the unexpected happens, and injuries are an unfortunate part of the game. When pitchers throw outside the strike zone, they are not using their typical mechanics. This can lead to awkward throws, putting strain on their arms, shoulders, and backs. The act of intentionally walking a batter requires the pitcher to remain focused and maintain proper mechanics, even when throwing outside the strike zone. By forcing the pitcher to execute these throws, the game ensures that they stay engaged and attentive, reducing the likelihood of a lapse in form that could lead to injury.
Moreover, the four-pitch intentional walk keeps the batter engaged as well. While the outcome might seem inevitable, the batter still has to stay alert, knowing that a wild pitch or passed ball could give them an opportunity to advance or even score. Also, there is the remote possibility of a pitcher making a mistake and allowing the batter to get a hit adds a layer of tension to the at-bat. An example of this would be Miguel Cabrera’s at bat back in 2006 against the Baltimore Orioles (source: FanBuzz.com) got a hit when the pitcher was trying to intentionally walk him. This tension is part of what makes baseball so compelling—the knowledge that anything can happen at any time.
Additionally, there’s the impact on the strategy of the game. Baseball is a game of inches, where the smallest detail can influence the outcome. By requiring four pitches, managers and pitchers are forced to consider the potential consequences of every action. Do they risk an intentional walk knowing that a wild pitch could allow the runner to advance? Do they trust their catcher to block a tough pitch, or do they pitch more conservatively? These are the kinds of decisions that add depth and complexity to the game.
When MLB introduced the automatic intentional walk, they cited the need to speed up the game and reduce injuries as their primary reasons for changing the rule. While it’s true that baseball games have become longer in recent years, the time saved by eliminating the four-pitch walk is minimal—perhaps a minute or two per game at most. In the grand scheme of things, this is a negligible amount of time, especially when weighed against the potential excitement and drama that a traditional intentional walk can bring.
Baseball is a sport that thrives on its traditions. The intentional walk, with its four wide pitches, is one of those traditions that connects the modern game to its past. It’s a reminder that baseball is a game of skill, strategy, and, yes, sometimes a little bit of luck. By requiring pitchers to throw those four pitches, the game retains an element of uncertainty and excitement that is otherwise lost.
The automatic intentional walk, while well-intentioned, is ultimately a solution in search of a problem. The time saved is minimal, and the cost to the game’s drama and unpredictability is significant. Wild pitches, passed balls, and the potential for injury are all part of what makes baseball the sport it is—beautiful in its complexity and thrilling in its unpredictability.
Reinstating the four-pitch intentional walk would be a small but meaningful step towards preserving the game’s integrity. It would bring back the possibility of the unexpected, the thrill of knowing that even a routine play can turn into something extraordinary. In a sport where every pitch, every play, can change the course of a game, the four-pitch walk is a tradition worth keeping.
Here’s the thing folks… baseball’s beauty lies in its unpredictability, where every pitch carries the potential for something extraordinary. The four-pitch intentional walk, with all its quirks and risks, embodies that spirit. It’s a tradition that honors the complexity of the game, the skill of its players, and the thrill of the unexpected. By keeping this rule intact, baseball remains a sport where anything can happen, where the smallest details can lead to the most memorable moments. And in a game as rich in history and tradition as baseball, that’s something worth preserving.
With that… it does not look like the intentional walk will ever require pitchers to throw four pitches again and as a fan this has made me care less about watching games.
If you cannot play with them, then root for them.