You make the call: Is it good baseball strategy or a weak attempt to win?

Sports Illustrated (SI.com) ^ | 8-8-2006 | Rick Reilly

[BaBaStooey]

This actually happened. Your job is to decide whether it should have.

In a nine- and 10-year-old PONY league championship game in Bountiful, Utah, the Yankees lead the Red Sox by one run. The Sox are up in the bottom of the last inning, two outs, a runner on third. At the plate is the Sox' best hitter, a kid named Jordan. On deck is the Sox' worst hitter, a kid named Romney. He's a scrawny cancer survivor who has to take human growth hormone and has a shunt in his brain.

So, you're the coach: Do you intentionally walk the star hitter so you can face the kid who can barely swing?

[MikefromOhio]

If it were little kids, like 6 7 8 year olds, then no you don't.

Since the kids are a bit older, you start to introduce that winning IS important.

Generally though, I'm NOT a big fan of just walking a bit who is under the age of 13. I don't like intentional walks in Bronco or Little League.

[Pukin Dog]

Cutting a kid with Cancer slack, is pushing him towards a life of excuse-making victimization.

The kid has a better attitude; he says he will just have to improve his hitting. Good for him. He isn't whining that others should have gone easy on him.

It is a sport, not a socialization experiment.

So no, I feel just fine.

[Ron in Acreage]

Very tue. My sons league, ages 6 through 8, uses a pitching machine controlled by the umpire. 5 pitches and your done. Still 3 strikes though and no walks. Umps discretion on additional pitches if machine throws unhitable pitch.

[texan75010]

You do neither. You beam the slugger, just to let him know who is boss, then you strike out the next kid. I don't care who was up next, you simply would not let the game be decided by the other team's best hitter. I would have walked him if the 2nd best hitter was up next. It is good baseball. That is how the game is played.

As a parent, I would want my cancer surviving kid to face all of life's challenges. My perspective would be, what could make you more of a winner than overcoming death? After facing that, striking out wouldn't mean a whole lot.

But I think I would take the time and make the effort to put my son in a sport where he could succeed and be the best in it. Lance Armstrong comes to mind. I would want to put my son in the position of being the slugger that kids had to walk. No one gave Lance Armstrong a yellow jersey for coming in the slowest did they? They didnt give him extra time because he conquered cancer did they? Would it be fair for the rest of the riders if that happened?

My son was on a baseball team where one of the players was physically challenged. There was an agreement with the other coaches that even if he made an out that it would not count as an out. He played outfield and we were allowed an extra player in the outfield with him. He was allowed to run the bases and score, but his score did not count. There was accommodations made. He was not placed in an environment or situation where he would be blamed for a loss so he never had to bear that burden.

By the same token, he was never the reason we won either. If you cannot stomach being the cause of a loss then you cannot savor the sweetness of a victory, especially if that victory has no cost or was given to you.

If there is anyone who is to blame for this kids tears, it is his parents who placed him in an environment where he would continually fail.

[BlueNgold]

They are 9 and 10 - at that age there is no such thing as high stakes baseball.

Until the kids graduate to 90ft you play with what you have. Once they get onto the big boys diamond, can take leads on the pitcher, and have 300'+ fences you can think about playing strategy. At this age the coach should be stressing fundamentals, not gamesmanship.

[cripplecreek]

When I was a kid there were no intentional walks in baseball. Evereybody got a chance at bat. Some of us got hits and some of us got hit some of us walked and some of us struck out.

At the end of every game we were told that it was a good game and that we were all equal players on the team. Then we went and got ice cream.

[kevkrom]

At this age the coach should be stressing fundamentals, not gamesmanship.

"Playing the percentages" is a baseball fundamental.

[r9etb]

Hmmmm..... I've seen a few win-at-all-costs coaches in little league baseball and elsewhere, and typically they're jerks. I suspect Farley probably falls into that category.

OTOH, if the kid, Romney, is going to play baseball then he should expect to play baseball. If he strikes out, then Mighty Casey has a new pal.

Of course, there's also the option of a pinch-hitter.

[MikefromOhio]

the coach should be stressing fundamentals, not gamesmanship.

Exactly.....answers like the ones I've seen on this thread are why I REFUSE to coach little league anymore, but I still umpire and I ENJOY throwing parents out when they get out of line. FR is probably FULL of Little League dad.

[Ron in Acreage]

My son has a heart murmur and I would never expect him to have some kind of advantage over the other players because of it. If he can't play up to the standards of the game then we will find something else for him to do. It's not fair to lower the standards for everyone else just to make us feel better.

[WhiteGuy]

So, you're the coach: Do you intentionally walk the star hitter so you can face the kid who can barely swing?


Every time, no question.

[BaBaStooey]

The Red Sox coach placed "not being a prick" higher than winning the game.

If he had pinch-hit for Romney, it would have been shrewd strategy, but it would have also made him look like a prick (perhaps a bigger one than the Yankees coach).

[Pukin Dog]

As a parent, I would want my cancer surviving kid to face all of life's challenges. My perspective would be, what could make you more of a winner than overcoming death? After facing that, striking out wouldn't mean a whole lot.

A -effin- MEN!

[San Jacinto]

If you want to do the right thing in your life, you pitch to him.

Why is pitching to him the "right" thing? Obviously, it's the "nice" thing and the "compassionate" thing (at least as to your opponent), but it's probably the "wrong" thing in terms of pure game strategy. What if the good hitter you pitch to hits the game winner and your kids lose the championship? Then your kids feel badly, but you spare hurt feelings on the other side.

The last sentence of the article reports the sick child's reaction the next day--"I'm going to work on my batting so maybe I'll be the one they walk."

When I was ten, we were taught "All's fair in love and in baseball." You play by the rules, but you play to win. Personally, I think it is more "fun" that way, if "fun" is object.

Having said that, I would not have a problem with a coach doing as you suggest, if that's the way he sees the game. I just don't think it is automatically the "right" thing. It might be just as right to pat the sick kid on the back and applaud his courage for standing in there and taking his cuts. He needn't think it's the end of the world.

[Pukin Dog]

Amen to you too.

[TruthWillWin]

The team at bat needs to get a new coach that understands the game. What moron (moran to you DU'ers) would have his worst hitter following the best hitter in the lineup? All opposing teams will pitch around the best to get to the worst. At least they will not intentionally give the best hitter anything good to hit.

[KC_Conspirator]

Not in this one!

As harsh as it sounds, I would walk the star and pitch to the other hitter. This is baseball, and there is no crying in baseball, even in little league.

This is a life lesson which is not commonly learned by playing sports.

[WhiteGuy]

Correct

[TankerKC]

And Romney? He sobbed himself to sleep that night.

There's no crying in baseball!

[KC_Conspirator]

When I was 9 and 10, it sure felt like high stakes when we played in the championship and playoffs.