Yeah, intentional walks can get sorta boring and frustrating. To be sure, any changes to the rules of a 100-plus-year-old game should be done cautiously (and intentional walks are definitely a part of modern strategy). If one wanted to eliminate intentional walks without disrupting the rest of the game, however, I think I have an idea for a rule that would have that effect. Note that I'm not advocating actually implenting this rule, but I'm curious what the effects would be.
A batter who gets four balls (or hit-by-pitch) has the option of either accepting the walk or declining it. If the batter declines the walk, he starts again from a 0-0 count; the declined walk would have no effect unless the batter got four balls (or HP) again. In that case, he could either accept a double-walk or decline it; if he declines and gets yet another four balls (or HP), he'd have the option of either accepting a triple-walk or declining yet again. If he declines a triple-walk and gets yet another four balls (or HP), the batter would be awarded an automatic home-run.While it would be extremely boring to actually watch a pitcher throw 16 consecutive balls, I doubt that would ever happen even with this rule in place. Indeed, I would think that the only times a batter would want to decline a walk would be times that--under the current rules--a pitcher would have thrown an intentional walk. Since under the proposed rule, however, a pitcher would gain nothing from an intentional walk, I would expect walks in such circumstances to be very rare.
What do others here think would happen if such a rule were in effect?