Your Batting Order Formulas

[Stu]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

i'm not really buying this one...

he has rarely been used outside of the leadoff spot, so i do not think there is a sample size large enough to say one way or the other...

The point is by batting leadoff he gets more AB's than if he batted lower in the order. More AB's = more HR's.

[dkgojackets]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

I stand by the post I made in that thread.

still looks right to me

funny thing is that the "traditionalists" are always slamming on the pecota/sabremetric group for overthinking and overanalyzing and ignoring the basic aspects of the game, but in this situations the traditionalists feel that some formulaic batting order is optimal while the sabremetrics just say "obv get your best hitters the most at bats"

[dkgojackets]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

The point is by batting leadoff he gets more AB's than if he batted lower in the order. More AB's = more HR's.

not to mention that your approach to hitting changes and you are pitched to differently depending on lineup protection, number of outs, men on base, etc.

to give the specifics on soriano, Im pretty sure Zimmerman batted in a traditional good hitter/middle of the order spot (3rd or 4th) most of the season, and Soriano ended up with 40 more plate appearances.

[SidVish]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

1-Soriano
2-Soriano
3-Soriano
4-Soriano
5-Soriano
6-Soriano
7-Soriano
8-Soriano
9-Zambrano/Micah Owings (just to mix things up)

J/K...but seriously Soriano has been on a tear I havent seen since Sosa hit 20 HR in one month in 98

That lineup would be good when's he hot. When's he's in a funk that lineup might go scoreless for about a month.

[Blzer]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

still looks right to me

funny thing is that the "traditionalists" are always slamming on the pecota/sabremetric group for overthinking and overanalyzing and ignoring the basic aspects of the game, but in this situations the traditionalists feel that some formulaic batting order is optimal while the sabremetrics just say "obv get your best hitters the most at bats"

You're looking at it all wrong. There have only been two or three hitters ever in the history of major league baseball that have been so valuable to a ball club that them alone has granted a team so many wins and playoff appearances. I would say that Barry Bonds was certainly one of those players.

Normally (and by that we mean 99.9999% of the time), a team cannot rely on one offensive player to win a ball game, and it requires an overall team effort to do so. That's why my suggestions on constructing a lineup are the way they are, because you need to look at the whole team and how to manufacture runs throughout the lineup.

The first inning (or at least the early innings) are most certainly important to score runs. You set a tone, and you change the way the other team needs to play because they need to match up, not necessarily play however they want. If a team scores three runs in the first inning, you'll bet the other team is now not playing for one run anymore. They're not risking the stealing, bunting, etc. A pitcher now has more comfortability to miss and change up pitches when they're behind in counts. It makes everything for the other team that much more of a mystery as to how they need to manufacture runs. This is why setting the tone is so important, and doing it the best way possible as well. The Giants led the world in scoring at least one run in the first inning in 2002, and it really showed how they made it to the World Series. They weren't deep from 5 - 8, so they definitely needed to set the tone early.

The objective of the game is to score more runs than the other team. Leading off with a walk, stealing a base, getting moved over with a ground ball to the right side, and scoring on a sac fly is the same number of runs as getting your best hitter up to lead off an inning with a solo home run. If you're all about just getting that man up again, think about it... no matter which way you construct a lineup, the same men will always get out the same way. The question is how they affect other baserunners getting out or scoring, or how they can produce an out in a different scenario. So, let's look at it again:

1) Leadoff hitter. Draws a walk. Steals second base.
2) Grounds out to the right side. Leadoff runner gets to third. One out.
3) Pitched around with a runner on third. Draws a walk.
4) Gets under it a bit too much. Flies out to deep outfield. Run scores, runner on first.
5) Clutch specialist. Shoots one into the gap. #3 hitter attempted to score, but is out at the plate. 1 - 0.
6) Next inning, the batter leads off. Good at dropping balls in front of the outfield, and has adequate patience at the plate. Being a lefty, he flips one into left for a single.
7) Worst hitter, hoping for a hit. Ground ball in the 5.5 hole. Fielder's choice, he beats it out at first. One out.
8) His objective is to get the pitcher up in the inning. Strikes out. Not the best thing in the world, but it's not a double play. Two out.
9) Not expected to get a hit. Fails to do so. Three outs.


So, what did we do? In two innings, we managed to score one run on only two hits, and guess what else? We're in the third inning and we managed to make it to the top of our order. Our #3 hitter is guaranteed to bat again in that inning, with a chance to bat with runners on base as well. Maybe next inning our leadoff hitter beats out an infield single, our #2 hitter finds a hole up the middle getting the runner over to third, and our #3 hitter lines out to left but scores a run, and our #4 hitter hits a two run homer. But this might not have been the case had our #8 hitter grounded into a double play, or had we put an all-or-nothing #6 hitter at the plate only to strike out. Instead, our #3 batter would have lined out to end the inning, and our #4 hitter would have led off the next inning maybe with a home run, because now the pitcher is in the windup, and they can get more on their pitches. That's maybe two less runs and one less out to work with.

Obviously, this doesn't work every time. But that's why we have formulas... we're looking at "on paper" kind of stuff here. I gave you a rough scenario as to how a team can score a run in the first inning, and manage to only get two hits, but still get to the top of the order in the third inning. Everything recycles once again.



Again, it's partly about getting your best hitter up as much as possible, but there are other ways to do it as opposed to just trying to get them up as much as possible. You want them up in the best way possible, and meanwhile being able to manufacture runs up and down your lineup should you need it. A hitter can only produce as many as four runs in a single at bat, and that is, of course, only a bases loaded case. When down by five runs with nine outs to go, I think there are more important things than trying to get that #3 hitter up twice. I think it's more important to try and get five runs, and there are ways to do it through special needs in the lineup. Scoring that runner from third with less than two outs doesn't happen as it should in baseball, and that's normally because the wrong batter is up at the wrong time. If your "on paper" formula is correct, but still have the wrong hitter up, that's where the #10 hitter comes in... the pinch hitter.

[dkgojackets]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

The objective of the game is to score more runs than the other team. Leading off with a walk, stealing a base, getting moved over with a ground ball to the right side, and scoring on a sac fly is the same number of runs as getting your best hitter up to lead off an inning with a solo home run.

This is so erroneus. Yes its the same number of runs, except in your scenario IT TAKES TWO OUTS. Definitely not the same thing. I'll take the leadoff homerun thanks.

1) Leadoff hitter. Draws a walk. Steals second base.
2) Grounds out to the right side. Leadoff runner gets to third. One out.
3) Pitched around with a runner on third. Draws a walk.
4) Gets under it a bit too much. Flies out to deep outfield. Run scores, runner on first.
5) Clutch specialist. Shoots one into the gap. #3 hitter attempted to score, but is out at the plate. 1 - 0.
6) Next inning, the batter leads off. Good at dropping balls in front of the outfield, and has adequate patience at the plate. Being a lefty, he flips one into left for a single.
7) Worst hitter, hoping for a hit. Ground ball in the 5.5 hole. Fielder's choice, he beats it out at first. One out.
8) His objective is to get the pitcher up in the inning. Strikes out. Not the best thing in the world, but it's not a double play. Two out.
9) Not expected to get a hit. Fails to do so. Three outs.

And this is just utopian. It isn't about hoping for a specfic result like this, its about the expected value of production from each lineup spot and thus your expected run total for the game.

You would rather tell your #8 hitter to strike out with a man on in order to guarantee the pitcher makes the last out instead of swinging away and taking a ten percent chance or so of a GIDP? That is seriously -EV.

[Blzer]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

And this is just utopian. It isn't about hoping for a specfic result like this, its about the expected value of production from each lineup spot and thus your expected run total for the game.

Remember, I gave an example with small production. Two hits in nine batters isn't anything to brag about. If it were my hopeful situation when I first set up my scenario, they would have scored five runs in the inning, every inning. But it just doesn't always happen like that.

You would rather tell your #8 hitter to strike out with a man on in order to guarantee the pitcher makes the last out instead of swinging away and taking a ten percent chance or so of a GIDP? That is seriously -EV.

Would I tell him that? No. No way. Given the time and place, you would prefer contact, because you would prefer a hit over an out. However, in a situation as unproductive as a strikeout, you always want to look at a positive side. What was it? He didn't ground into a double play.

And you're really underestimating the probability of a double play, here. I can't tell you how many games Bonds would have been able to come up in an inning with runners on end up coming short because the #3 hitter (which would normally be Feliz, Alou, or Durham) would ground into a double play and end the inning. This would even happen to end a game, or to end the bottom of the eighth when they were ahead so he couldn't come up again. If only Bochy had batted him third, this wouldn't have been a problem. But I'm really talking about the double play, here. This happened far too many times just for this specific instance. Had the player just fouled out or even struck out, in the end, though it may not seem that way at first, it's for the better. Do we want them to fly out or strike out? No. But hey, it's better than a double play.


I only say the #7 hitter is the worst hitter because he does not have a designated role, because he is not fit to play a role in the lineup, other than to be in the lineup. If he gets a hit, an extra base hit even... that's phenomenal. That's something that helps the team out, because we have situational hitters all around him to bring him home. If he doesn't get on base, that's slightly okay, because his position in the lineup was not necessarily fit to be productive had he recorded an out anyway.

[fugazi]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

The point is by batting leadoff he gets more AB's than if he batted lower in the order. More AB's = more HR's.

first, there is no necessity of that being true...

second...more 2 or 3 runs HRs means more runs...

The difference in plate appearances isn't much, BUT the likelihood of less ABs with RISP would be much less, unless you were silly enough to put two of your best contact hitters at 8-9....

Your view is really shortsighted and doesn't really take into account much of what goes on in a baseball game...

I rarely concede to the status quo, but I do believe that if LaRussa and Lasorda and Stengel and Cox and the umpteen other great managers really thought they would get more our of Pujols or Gibson or Chipper in the 1 hole they would bat them there...

I know that if I were a manager, I would certainly love to see Chipper Jones batting first, that is just one less chance for him to be up with RISP...

ANother thing you are missing is that the great hitters like Chipper and Derek Lee and Bonds and ARod are great hitters because they dont have to go up every time trying to hit a HR every time in order to hit a lot of homers. For really good hitters (i.e. not Adam Dunn), it is about more than power. Rarely do such hitters come along, those with good average and good power...when I get ahold of one, you can bet he will be hitting behind some really good singles and doubles hitters.

[dkgojackets]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

Im not sure why this is even an argument. It's been analyzed many times and, assuming you bat the pitcher 9th, the difference between the best possible lineup and worst possible is just 6%, and to get the worst possible you had to do some really stupid stuff like pretty much go in reverse ops order.

If anyone has a BP subscription they can read about it, although I would guess anyone who is interested in the game enough to have a subscription already knows this basic stuff.

[Blzer]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

What does the percent mean? The percent difference between the number of average runs scored in a single season?

[dkgojackets]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

Yes. On average the optimal lineup scored 6% more runs over the course of the season than the worst possible (according to BP), with the pitcher staying in the ninth spot. Like I said, the worst ones were some really crazy stuff.

The difference between reasonable orders (such as a traditional leadoff then slugger at the heart of the order compared to a best to worst lineup) is just splitting hairs.

[Blzer]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

Yes. On average the optimal lineup scored 6% more runs over the course of the season than the worst possible (according to BP), with the pitcher staying in the ninth spot. Like I said, the worst ones were some really crazy stuff.

The difference between reasonable orders (such as a traditional leadoff then slugger at the heart of the order compared to a best to worst lineup) is just splitting hairs.

Well then, with that point, I wonder why we're contributing to this thread.

Actually, I'm wondering if the thread starter was asking how we should construct a lineup given some specific set of players, or how we should construct a team (with what kinds of abilities) and then where should they be placed.

[dkgojackets]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

how we should construct a team (with what kinds of abilities)

This is by far the most important aspect. Who you have in the order, not how you have them.

[Blzer]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

Yes, but realistically speaking, unless you're Steinbrenner, you simply can't afford a 1 through 8 All Star calibre lineup, so we sort of have to assume we can only get mediocre out of our team. Simply, a couple speedy guys, powerful guys, situational guys, and some scraps. So we're sorta going for a cliche lineup.

[BunnyHardaway]

Re: Your Batting Order Formulas

Fairly simple for me...

1. Player with best combo of speed and hitting ability
2 and 3. Best contact hitters
4, 5, and 6. Best power hitters
7, 8, and 9. Worst hitters