I'm not going to disagree about some of the bad approaches at the plate. However, this line of thinking has always bothered me. When people say, "If this then it would have been this..." it indicates that they believe that the next action would be exactly the same even though the situation would have been different. This is simply not the case. Each pitch is a new event in a new situation so you never know what the pitcher would have done if the count were different before that pitch. This argument is used all the time in sports for various situations and it just really bothers me... not trying to take it out on you specifically! You are taking it out on me specifically, but it's somewhat deserved. No, you're right, maybe he would have guided the ball over the plate on the next pitch or maybe he wouldn't have. I don't think that events are entirely independent though. If there have been a string of pitches where he's had control issues then it increases the likelihood it would have happened again. Regardless, you take all the way 2-0 in that situation, especially if you're Jonathan Lucroy. I love walks as much as the next guy but in this situation, already up 2, with a runner in scoring position, and two outs, I don't mind Lucroy trying to get a run in is he gets a pitch he thinks he can hit.