PDA

View Full Version : Batting Order: Does It Matter?



GAC
06-07-2008, 08:50 AM
I was talking with a fellow RZer this morning, and we got on the topic of lineup construction/batting order. And we start talking mainly about the sabermetrics position on this subject, and the conversation also included "The Book: Playing The Percentages in Baseball" by Tango.

I've heard this book referenced at times on here in various discussions; but personally have not read it. I'm correcting that and ordering a copy today.

But I'm going to post an insert from the book on batting order below.

And correct me if I am wrong; but it seems the sabermetrics position is that batting order, because it is a continuous loop, does not matter. You can't hide a batter.

So you can bat them wherever? It just doesn't matter?

Now if most who are into statistical analysis - and I'm asking this from an educational position, not confrontational - agree with this premise that batting order does not matter, then why, over these last many years on this forum, do we continuously hear many lament over where various players are batting, and that guys with a high OB% should be at the top of the order if lineups are a continuous loop, each player gets his turn, and you're never going to have, for the most part, the same guy leading off every inning?

Isn't that then a contradiction? Doesn't even Bill James state that batting order does not matter, the number of runs a team scored would be roughly the same over a course of the season.

So what about the thinking that involes the idea of alternating lefties and righties, batters offering "protection", speed at the top of the lineup with bat control in the number two spot, etc., etc., etc.?

One thing we do know is that the higher a player hits in the order, the more times they will come to the plate



Batting #1


750 PA


Batting #2


725 PA


Batting #3


710 PA


Batting #4


700 PA


Batting #5


680 PA


Batting #6


660 PA


Batting #7


640 PA


Batting #8


625 PA


Batting #9


580 PA


Chapter 5: Batting (Dis)Order


One of the running themes throughout this book is context. To understand the impact of your possible choices, you have to understand the environment in which you are working. Context. Whenever you are trying to figure out what to do, take a step back, and ask yourself, “What's the context?” Context, context, context. We can't repeat it enough.
In this chapter, we'll turn our attention to the batting order and how to construct an optimal lineup. What does conventional wisdom say about this? Some managers or fans think you want a fast guy at the top of the order, without too much regard for how often he gets on base; others think that OBP is the most important attribute for a leadoff hitter, and that speed is secondary. You want the #2 hitter to move the runner over into scoring position, even if it means getting an out; therefore he should be a proficient bunter with excellent bat control. Your #3 batter should be a very good hitter, maybe your best—unless you want your best hitter batting cleanup. Then, maybe set up a lefty-righty situation down the order, trying to end with your worst batters at the bottom of the lineup. There, easy, end of chapter.
But why. Why? Why must the order follow such a pattern? Let's take a step back and understand the context of the batting order.
Loop
The most important context of the batting order is that it is a continuous loop. You get to set your batting order 1 through 9, and each player takes his turn. Once the inning completes, the next batter leads off the next inning. So the term leadoff batter is a bit of a misnomer. He's the leadoff batter of the game, but he won't often lead off an inning.
What if the rules were set so that the batting order is restored at the start of each inning. Tim Raines would lead off the first, second, third, and all the way through the ninth, innings. If those were the rules—if that were the context—you'd need a new strategy in place to determine the optimal lineup. One-quarter of the time, you'd end up having a 1–2–3 inning, leaving your cleanup batter on deck. In the current rules of baseball, the benefit of that huge cost is that he gets to bat in the following inning. In this fictitious league, it's the #1 hitter who will lead off the second inning. You will realize rather quickly that you can't have your best hitter in the cleanup spot if he will have 25% fewer PA than your top three hitters.
If we go back to the real world of baseball, we realize that you can't hide a batter. The best you can do is to defer him to the bottom of the batting order. But even batting ninth, he will eventually come up. How often will he come up?

KittyDuran
06-07-2008, 10:10 AM
OK MISTER... how did you get GAC's password? ;)

oneupper
06-07-2008, 10:13 AM
For one, I think the order is VERY important. Not only do you want your better hitters getting more PAs (which is obvious), but you want to generate a favorable game "dynamic" (momentum...or "script") if you will.

I subscribe to the "hitting is contagious" theory (very hard to prove).
Basically, good hitters make their teammates better hitters.

A few reasons:
Tired pitchers are usually easier to hit.
Opposing managers will use their "B" bullpen guys when behind.
Three hits in a inning will usually net at least a run. Two...maybe not.


Give your best hitters lots of PAs...and bunch them together in the lineup rather than spreading them out.

Rounding Third
06-07-2008, 10:52 AM
I have had that book on order for a couple weeks now and they ran out or something. My parents bought it for me for my birthday but it still hasn't arrived.

I think its more important who is in the lineup rathere than where. But I think where also has importance. Protecting a players and how many more at bats somebody gets being the main reasons why.

GAC
06-07-2008, 11:09 AM
For one, I think the order is VERY important. Not only do you want your better hitters getting more PAs (which is obvious), but you want to generate a favorable game "dynamic" (momentum...or "script") if you will.

Give your best hitters lots of PAs...and bunch them together in the lineup rather than spreading them out.

This is what I have always subscribed to. And you mention a very key word IMO.... momentum (creating/maintaining it).

I've always been considered on here as "old school", though I consider myself a "hybrid" where I think there are viable and solid positions to be gleaned from both trains of thought.

I've always believed, regardless of the.... "a batting order is a continuous loop in which everyone is going to get a turn a bat regardless of where they are hitting".... you still want to group your solid hitters together, and not break them up, in order to create that momentum and give you that 1-2-3 punch. And I'm referring, within the confines of this discussion, of the 1-5 spots. Some may say 1-6, and that's fine.

For instance - if I'm breaking up my good hitters and inserting a "weak" hitter in there somewhere, then doesn't that give an advantage to that opposing pitcher who then sees he doesn't have to give so-and-so quality pitches because "Juan Castro" is on deck.

I understand those scenarios are still going to present themselves during a game depending on how an inning ends; but don't you try to minimize those situations and come at that opposing pitcher with a succession of your best hitters and not break them up?

It's not some newly discovered thinking, because even as one who is considered old school, I have always believed in the importance of OB%. Where I may differ with saber thought is the idea of what should BUOY (drive) that OB% - primarily walks. I could care less what is driving that player's OB%. Whether it's batting average and/or walks, as long as there is consistency in performance there. Guys like Pete Rose and Tony Gywnn had a career OB% of .375 and .388 respectively. Yet they were primarily BA-driven with a 162 game average when it came to BBs of 71 and 52 respectively.

And in those top 5 slots, it's not ONLY about OB% either IMO. One has to factor in SLG%.

westofyou
06-07-2008, 11:16 AM
Deja Vu

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57325

BCubb2003
06-07-2008, 11:44 AM
I think it matters to the pitcher, who is usually not a sabermetrician.

Spring~Fields
06-07-2008, 12:20 PM
I was talking with a fellow RZer this morning, and we got on the topic of lineup construction/batting order. And we start talking mainly about the sabermetrics position on this subject, and the conversation also included "The Book: Playing The Percentages in Baseball" by Tango.

I've heard this book referenced at times on here in various discussions; but personally have not read it. I'm correcting that and ordering a copy today.

But I'm going to post an insert from the book on batting order below.

And correct me if I am wrong; but it seems the sabermetrics position is that batting order, because it is a continuous loop, does not matter. You can't hide a batter.

So you can bat them wherever? It just doesn't matter?

Now if most who are into statistical analysis - and I'm asking this from an educational position, not confrontational - agree with this premise that batting order does not matter, then why, over these last many years on this forum, do we continuously hear many lament over where various players are batting, and that guys with a high OB% should be at the top of the order if lineups are a continuous loop, each player gets his turn, and you're never going to have, for the most part, the same guy leading off every inning?

Isn't that then a contradiction? Doesn't even Bill James state that batting order does not matter, the number of runs a team scored would be roughly the same over a course of the season.

So what about the thinking that involes the idea of alternating lefties and righties, batters offering "protection", speed at the top of the lineup with bat control in the number two spot, etc., etc., etc.?

One thing we do know is that the higher a player hits in the order, the more times they will come to the plate



Batting #1


750 PA


Batting #2


725 PA


Batting #3


710 PA


Batting #4


700 PA


Batting #5


680 PA


Batting #6


660 PA


Batting #7


640 PA


Batting #8


625 PA


Batting #9


580 PA


Chapter 5: Batting (Dis)Order


One of the running themes throughout this book is context. To understand the impact of your possible choices, you have to understand the environment in which you are working. Context. Whenever you are trying to figure out what to do, take a step back, and ask yourself, “What's the context?” Context, context, context. We can't repeat it enough.
In this chapter, we'll turn our attention to the batting order and how to construct an optimal lineup. What does conventional wisdom say about this? Some managers or fans think you want a fast guy at the top of the order, without too much regard for how often he gets on base; others think that OBP is the most important attribute for a leadoff hitter, and that speed is secondary. You want the #2 hitter to move the runner over into scoring position, even if it means getting an out; therefore he should be a proficient bunter with excellent bat control. Your #3 batter should be a very good hitter, maybe your best—unless you want your best hitter batting cleanup. Then, maybe set up a lefty-righty situation down the order, trying to end with your worst batters at the bottom of the lineup. There, easy, end of chapter.
But why. Why? Why must the order follow such a pattern? Let's take a step back and understand the context of the batting order.
Loop
The most important context of the batting order is that it is a continuous loop. You get to set your batting order 1 through 9, and each player takes his turn. Once the inning completes, the next batter leads off the next inning. So the term leadoff batter is a bit of a misnomer. He's the leadoff batter of the game, but he won't often lead off an inning.
What if the rules were set so that the batting order is restored at the start of each inning. Tim Raines would lead off the first, second, third, and all the way through the ninth, innings. If those were the rules—if that were the context—you'd need a new strategy in place to determine the optimal lineup. One-quarter of the time, you'd end up having a 1–2–3 inning, leaving your cleanup batter on deck. In the current rules of baseball, the benefit of that huge cost is that he gets to bat in the following inning. In this fictitious league, it's the #1 hitter who will lead off the second inning. You will realize rather quickly that you can't have your best hitter in the cleanup spot if he will have 25% fewer PA than your top three hitters.
If we go back to the real world of baseball, we realize that you can't hide a batter. The best you can do is to defer him to the bottom of the batting order. But even batting ninth, he will eventually come up. How often will he come up?


I am not sure that I have the correct understanding to begin with, what it means, when one says that the lineup order implying that the lineup construction does not matter.

Anymore than I use to understand that strikeouts don’t matter.
Until I grasped that they are speaking statistically, and that in stats one strikeout is just one out in data points, just like any other out is just one data point. So what does it literally mean to a statistician that lineup order don’t matter? I don’t really know. I would have to ask a series of questions and to use examples such as below to understand if it is true or not that lineup orders don’t matter.

Do we have the right understanding when they say that the lineup doesn’t matter ?

The statement that lineup orders do no matter alone would imply that it doesn’t matter because it would not effect a teams chance to score runs and amount of runs scored if the teams worst batters were given the most plate appearances over a given season, which would not seem to be true, but is it true?

Does the statement mean for example that a players on base percentage doesn’t matter and that OBP is to be dismissed? Or that their slugging percentage doesn’t matter or that either or both OBP and SLG do not effect a given teams ability to score more or less runs if the players in a given lineup with the highest batting percentages were given less plate appearances over the season versus the worst batters in the lineup on a constant over a given season?

Can the managers make out the lineup by giving their poorest batters the most PA, plate appearances? would that increase or reduce the teams probability in scorning runs and effect the RS/RA differentiations in a positive or negative manner statistically?

If taken literally to mean that lineup orders do not matter, then it is true that it would not matter if the manager made his order out to be in the following below.

If constant, if the lineup below was the managers lineup every day for the entire season or that batters with comparable stats were placed in such an order it wouldn’t matter, wouldn’t matter meaning that the lineup order cannot effect the teams scoring chances positively or negatively. But can it ?

Cincinnati Team A plays Cincinnati Team B everyday for an entire season.

Left Handed pitcher starting today, and here’s your lineup, just using their season stats.


Cincinnati Team A
Bako C .314 .385 .699 Groundball: 41.5% | Strikeout: 35.6% | GIDP: 1.7%
Griffey RF .356 .408 .764 Groundball: 39.4% | Strikeout: 18.9% | GIDP: 2.9%
Phillips 2B .330 .506 .836 Groundball: 44.0% | Strikeout: 20.8% | GIDP: 4.3%
Cueto P .174 .050 .224
Dunn LF .409 .530 .940 Groundball: 28.4% | Strikeout: 35.2% | GIDP: 1.2%
Encarncion .318 .439 .757 Groundball: 33.0% | Strikeout: 22.0% | GIDP: 2.6%
Votto 1B .358 .505 .864 Groundball: 45.0% | Strikeout: 23.8% | GIDP: 2.0%
Bruce CF .569 .756 1.325 Groundball: 55.6% | Strikeout: 14.8% | GIDP: 3.7%
Hairston SS .370 .470 .840 Groundball: 34.9% | Strikeout: 22.9% | GIDP: 0.0%

Vs.
Left handed pitcher starting today, and here’s your lineup, just using their season stats vs LH
Cincinnati Team B
Phillips 2B .400 .726 1.126 Groundball: 44.0% | Strikeout: 20.8% | GIDP: 4.3%
Hairston SS .465 .568 1.033 Groundball: 34.9% | Strikeout: 22.9% | GIDP: 0.0%
Dunn LF .431 .423 .854 Groundball: 28.4% | Strikeout: 35.2% | GIDP: 1.2%
Bruce CF .500 .429 .929 Groundball: 55.6% | Strikeout: 14.8% | GIDP: 3.7%
Votto 1B .405 .578 .983 Groundball: 45.0% | Strikeout: 23.8% | GIDP: 2.0%
Encarncion 3B .366 .377 .743 Groundball: 33.0% | Strikeout: 22.0% | GIDP: 2.6%
Griffey RF .282 .309 .591 Groundball: 39.4% | Strikeout: 18.9% | GIDP: 2.9%
Cueto P .174 .050 .224
Bako C .226 .373 .599 Groundball: 41.5% | Strikeout: 35.6% | GIDP: 1.7%


Would Team A score the same amount of runs as Team B today?
Would Team A score more runs than Team B today?
Would Team B score more runs than Team A today
Would Team A or Team B score more runs in a four game series?
On the season would Team A score the same amount of runs as Team B
On the season would Team A or Team B score more runs?
Which team wins more one or two runs games, Team A or Team B, or would it matter?

Or is the statement that lineups don’t matter isolated in the use of stats?

Is that similar to saying that strikeouts don’t matter, that they are just another out?
When statistically speaking it is true that a strikeout is just one out, just another out in statistics, it simply doesn’t matter how a player makes their outs, though they are saying it doesn’t matter how a player makes an out, they are not saying that it doesn‘t matter if a player makes outs though.

If one adds in that a given batter walks a greater number of times while striking out a lot, we can find instances where this player still might get on base many more times than another batter, reducing the meaning to a strikeout because the player still maintains a high on base percentage.

While another batter who doesn’t walk a lot and does strikeout a lot the meaning of a strikeout does mean something, but not in statistics, an out is still an out, one numeric data point, yet this batter can have a very poor on base percentage and the strikeouts would appear more significant.

Do strikeouts become more of a factor to the batter who doesn’t walk much versus a batter that does walk a lot? Suppose player A strikeouts 170 times and he walks 128 times = Adam Dunn 2002 OBP of .400 vs batting average of .249 where .400 would indicate that he gets on base many more times than .249 batting average would indicate. Suppose player B, Brandon Phillips who doesn’t walk much, and he strikeout 170 times, would a strikeout have more meaning? Not in stats, an out is still just one out. Seems to mean that it matters how many outs they make, not how they make the out.

KronoRed
06-07-2008, 01:46 PM
Your better players should lead your team in appearances at the plate.

Spring~Fields
06-07-2008, 01:54 PM
Your better players should lead your team in appearances at the plate.

Then batting order or lineup construction would matter.

jojo
06-07-2008, 02:07 PM
I think there are a couple points that can sum the current saber view on batting order:

1. The optimal batting order does make a difference, it's just not as dramatic as one might think (somewhere on the order of 30 runs over the course of the season which translates into roughly 3 wins).

Here's a post summarizing what "The Book" says about the ideal lineup:
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1527171&postcount=224

2. Each drop in the order is associated with roughly 18 to 20 fewer PA's over the course of the season. In other words, batting Dunn 5th instead of 2nd would mean he'd get roughly 60 fewer PA's over a season.

3. Platoon splits are real. Batting four lefties in a row for instance could lead to LOOGY kryptonite late in games though the impact of this is debatable and obviously dependent upon the lefties.

I'm sure others will post anything I've forgotten to bring up or raise objections where appropriate.

edabbs44
06-07-2008, 02:16 PM
Your better players should lead your team in appearances at the plate.

If your better hitters lead your team in plate appearances (top of the order), that means that they will probably get less ABs with people on base since your worst hitters will be hitting in front of them.

RedsManRick
06-07-2008, 02:16 PM
Jojo, what are your thoughts when it comes to handedness and platoon splits. Does stringing together lefties to beat up on the right starter offset the cost of potential "LOOGY" kryptonite?

And to clarify, the 30 run difference you've cited is against a "reasonable" but not optimal lineup. That is, it's not versus a lineup that starts off: pitcher, catcher, banjo hitting SS...

RedsManRick
06-07-2008, 02:17 PM
If your better hitters lead your team in plate appearances (top of the order), that means that they will probably get less ABs with people on base since your worst hitters will be hitting in front of them.

And if they're in the middle or at the bottom of the order, they still have the worst guys ahead of them, they just get fewer plate appearances. I don't follow your point.

Spring~Fields
06-07-2008, 02:54 PM
Jojo, what are your thoughts when it comes to handedness and platoon splits. Does stringing together lefties to beat up on the right starter offset the cost of potential "LOOGY" kryptonite?

And to clarify, the 30 run difference you've cited is against a "reasonable" but not optimal lineup. That is, it's not versus a lineup that starts off: pitcher, catcher, banjo hitting SS...

So when they say, “lineups don’t matter”, they don’t mean to just toss out any old lineup arbitrarily as if it will have the same effect regardless, as if you have attempted to optimize your lineup to give your best batters in the lineup order the most chances to get the highest probability of getting on base and potentially scoring runs?
Especially with any given game having the potential to be a one or two run game?

bucksfan2
06-07-2008, 03:00 PM
I think in thoery the batting order is very significant. I think when you get down to a game by game basis the batting order doesn't matter as much as who is hitting and when. In theory you would want your high obp guys in the first few slots and then your high slugging and ops guys to follow. But when you look at a game you can't submit a lineup that assures that your best guy is going to be up in the most crucial situation.

I think if you attempt to design a lineup "by the book" which ever book you use you still are unable to dictate when the important at bats occur. I wonder if you designed a lineup by the book vs a lineup that had Patterson leading off what the actual run difference would be over the course of a season. I think the falacy of the batting order occurs when you have the most important at bat of the game be in the hands of your worst hitter. For example the reds and phillies game a couple of days ago saw the reds score one run and load the bases for the pitchers spot. The reds weren't going to take Cordero out of the game but at the same time you may want a better hitter at the plate to break the game open.

I think the batting order does matter but to what extent is a better question. Does a perfectly set lineup lead to one more run scored a week? Does it lead to one more run scored every other game?

jojo
06-07-2008, 03:03 PM
Jojo, what are your thoughts when it comes to handedness and platoon splits. Does stringing together lefties to beat up on the right starter offset the cost of potential "LOOGY" kryptonite?

I guess it's pretty caveat-heavy. It depends upon the magnitude of the splits, the pitcher etc. Also, it depends who is "splitting" the lefties.

On a related note, I think a lot of the research-heavy stat guys like Tango and MGL (two of the authors of "The Book") advocate simply having two lineups-one optimized for facing right-handed pitchers and a second optimized for facing lefties. In other words, after the initial "strategizing" it's basically plug and play barring injuries etc.

The last thing a stat guy would advocate is "going with the hot hand" or sitting a guy simply because he's got a cold hand etc. Basically they'd argue that you determine who gives you the best chance to win a given game by determining who has the highest "true talent level".

Spring~Fields
06-07-2008, 03:11 PM
On a related note, I think a lot of the research-heavy stat guys like Tango and MGL (two of the authors of "The Book") advocate simply having two lineups-one optimized for facing right-handed pitchers and a second optimized for facing lefties. In other words, after the initial "strategizing" it's basically plug and play barring injuries etc.

The last thing a stat guy would advocate is "going with the hot hand" or sitting a guy simply because he's got a cold hand etc. Basically they'd argue that you determine who gives you the best chance to win a given game by determining who has the highest "true talent level".

Those make good sense and have consistency/continuity.

Far East
06-07-2008, 03:44 PM
For what it's worth, Baseball musings, which facors in only SLG and OBP and ignores all other stats, lists the following lineup as best, scoring 5.944 runs per game:

Bruce
Dunn
Bako
Votto
Hairston
Phillips
Encarnacion
Cueto
Griffey

It lists the worst as scoring only 4.884 runs per game:

Encarnacion
Cueto
Votto
Griffey
Bako
Dunn
Hairston
Bruce
Phillips

That's a difference of 1.06 runs per game or 171.72 runs per season.

jojo
06-07-2008, 03:47 PM
For what it's worth, Baseball musings, which facors in only SLG and OBP and ignores all other stats, lists the following lineup as best, scoring 5.944 runs per game:

Bruce
Dunn
Bako
Votto
Hairston
Phillips
Encarnacion
Cueto
Griffey


I like that lineup.

RFS62
06-07-2008, 04:02 PM
The last thing a stat guy would advocate is "going with the hot hand" or sitting a guy simply because he's got a cold hand etc. Basically they'd argue that you determine who gives you the best chance to win a given game by determining who has the highest "true talent level".



The last thing a good manager would ignore is who has the hot hand or the cold hand. That's why teams sent out advance scouts. That's why people make adjustments to their approach.

Injuries, short and long term.... personal problems.... the inevitable loss of timing and regaining your stroke from the hard work the manager observes every single day.....

A myriad of factors we'll never see go into these decisions.

jojo
06-07-2008, 04:42 PM
The last thing a good manager would ignore is who has the hot hand or the cold hand. That's why teams sent out advance scouts. That's why people make adjustments to their approach.

I disagree.


Injuries, short and long term.... personal problems....

A myriad of factors we'll never see go into these decisions.

Obviously something that effected a players "true talent" level (such as an injury) wouldn't be ignored.

redsrule2500
06-07-2008, 04:42 PM
This is correct! However, batting order DOES matter for the first inning of the game AT LEAST! This needs to be taken into account, at least somewhat. You are given a known group of 3 that will start the game, in that order, so you should at least fill them accordingly IMO.

Spring~Fields
06-07-2008, 06:49 PM
Baseball Musings Lineup Analysis
Based on work by Cyril Morong, Ken Arneson and Ryan Armbrust
http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/LineupAnalysis.py?Player0=Hairston&OBA0=.370&Slug0=.470&Player1=Bruce&OBA1=+.569&Slug1=+.756&Player2=Griffey&OBA2=+0.356&Slug2=+0.408&Player3=Phillips&OBA3=+0.330&Slug3=+0.506&Player4=Dunn&OBA4=+0.409&Slug4=+0.530&Player5=Encanrcion&OBA5=+0.318&Slug5=+0.439&Player6=Votto&OBA6=+0.358&Slug6=+0.505&Player7=Ross&OBA7=+.369&Slug7=.333&Player8=Cueto&OBA8=+0.174&Slug8=+0.050&Model=0


A team, B team example: Just using any old lineup worst batters at the top etc.
Cincinnati A Team: Season stats
Runs per game for above lineup: 5.033. x 162 815.346 runs for the season
Cincinnati B Team: Using stats vs Left handed pitching
Runs per game for above lineup: 5.515. x 162 893.43 runs for the season

Cincinnati using their season stats:
Best 10 5.944 x 162 963 runs for the season
5.944 Bruce Dunn Bako Votto Hairston Phillips Encarncion Cueto Griffey
5.944 Bruce Dunn Bako Votto Hairston Phillips Encarncion Cueto Griffey
5.943 Bruce Dunn Hairston Phillips Votto Encarncion Bako Cueto Griffey
5.941 Bruce Dunn Bako Votto Hairston Encarncion Phillips Cueto Griffey
5.940 Bruce Votto Hairston Phillips Dunn Encarncion Bako Cueto Griffey
5.940 Bruce Dunn Hairston Phillips Votto Bako Encarncion Cueto Griffey
5.938 Bruce Dunn Bako Phillips Hairston Encarncion Votto Cueto Griffey
5.937 Bruce Hairston Bako Votto Dunn Phillips Encarncion Cueto Griffey
5.937 Bruce Dunn Votto Phillips Hairston Encarncion Bako Cueto Griffey
5.937 Bruce Votto Hairston Phillips Dunn Bako Encarncion Cueto Griffey
5.936 Bruce Dunn Griffey Votto Hairston Phillips Encarncion Cueto Bako
Worst:
4.884 Encarncion Cueto Votto Griffey Bako Dunn Hairston Bruce Phillips

Cincinnati using their stats vs left handed pitching
Using their stats vs left handed pitching:
Best 10: 5.996 x 162 971.3 runs for the season
5.996 Bruce Votto Encarncion Phillips Hairston Bako Griffey Cueto Dunn
5.995 Bruce Hairston Encarncion Phillips Votto Bako Griffey Cueto Dunn
5.992 Bruce Votto Dunn Phillips Hairston Bako Griffey Cueto Encarncion
5.991 Bruce Hairston Dunn Phillips Votto Bako Griffey Cueto Encarncion
5.981 Bruce Votto Encarncion Phillips Hairston Griffey Bako Cueto Dunn
5.980 Bruce Hairston Encarncion Phillips Votto Griffey Bako Cueto Dunn
5.977 Bruce Votto Dunn Phillips Hairston Griffey Bako Cueto Encarncion
5.976 Bruce Hairston Dunn Phillips Votto Griffey Bako Cueto Encarncion
5.963 Dunn Votto Encarncion Phillips Hairston Bako Griffey Cueto Bruce
5.962 Dunn Hairston Encarncion Phillips Votto Bako Griffey Cueto Bruce
Worst:
4.565 Bako Cueto Votto Encarncion Griffey Bruce Dunn Hairston Phillips

Baker Lineup: Using Season Stats -
runs per game for below lineup: 4.402. x 162 = 713.124 runs for the season
Patterson .231 .338
Keppinger .373 .446
Griffey .356 .408
Phillips .330 .506
Dunn .409 .530
Encarncion .318 .439
Votto .358 .505
Bako .314 .385
Cuteo .174 .050

Best 10:
4.700 Dunn Votto Bako Phillips Keppinger Patterson Encarncion Cueto Griffey
4.695 Keppinger Dunn Bako Phillips Votto Patterson Encarncion Cueto Griffey
4.693 Dunn Keppinger Bako Phillips Votto Patterson Encarncion Cueto Griffey
4.692 Dunn Votto Griffey Phillips Keppinger Patterson Encarncion Cueto Bako
4.692 Dunn Votto Bako Phillips Keppinger Encarncion Patterson Cueto Griffey
4.692 Keppinger Votto Bako Phillips Dunn Patterson Encarncion Cueto Griffey
4.690 Dunn Votto Encarncion Phillips Keppinger Patterson Bako Cueto Griffey
4.687 Keppinger Dunn Griffey Phillips Votto Patterson Encarncion Cueto Bako
4.686 Keppinger Dunn Bako Phillips Votto Encarncion Patterson Cueto Griffey
4.685 Dunn Keppinger Griffey Phillips Votto Patterson Encarncion Cueto Bako
Worst:
3.872 Patterson Cueto Votto Bako Encarncion Keppinger Griffey Dunn Phillips

Baker Lineup: Using Season Stats -
runs per game for below lineup: 5.797. x 162 = 939.114 runs for the season
Hairston .370 .470
Bruce .569 .756
Griffey .356 .408
Phillips .330 .506
Dunn .409 .530
Encarcion .318 .439
Votto .358 .505
Ross .369 .333
Cueto .174 .050

Best 10:
6.048 Bruce Dunn Griffey Votto Hairston Phillips Encanrcion Cueto Ross
6.045 Bruce Dunn Griffey Votto Hairston Encanrcion Phillips Cueto Ross
6.042 Bruce Dunn Griffey Phillips Hairston Encanrcion Votto Cueto Ross
6.041 Bruce Hairston Griffey Votto Dunn Phillips Encanrcion Cueto Ross
6.039 Bruce Dunn Griffey Phillips Hairston Votto Encanrcion Cueto Ross
6.038 Bruce Hairston Griffey Votto Dunn Encanrcion Phillips Cueto Ross
6.035 Bruce Hairston Griffey Phillips Dunn Encanrcion Votto Cueto Ross
6.033 Bruce Dunn Hairston Votto Griffey Phillips Encanrcion Cueto Ross
6.032 Bruce Dunn Griffey Phillips Votto Encanrcion Hairston Cueto Ross
6.032 Bruce Hairston Griffey Phillips Dunn Votto Encanrcion Cueto Ross
Worst:
4.913 Encanrcion Cueto Votto Ross Griffey Dunn Hairston Bruce Phillips

I tried to input two additional factors
1. Speed 2. Respect, the analysis was not interested and would not accept them.

Adding Bruce over Patterson created a change upward which makes me conclude that Bruce should have been with the team over Patterson from day one.

Lineup orders do matter and can affect one or two run ball games

Spring~Fields
06-07-2008, 08:01 PM
Additional input at the request of RMR to make Jay Bruces more realistic.

Comparison New Baker Lineup Example:
Using Season Stats with outlier adjustment for Bruce
Runs per game for above lineup: 5.124. x 162 = 830.088

Hairston .370 .470
Bruce .380 .560 * reduced to more realistic data for outlier from .569 .756
Griffey .356 .408
Phillips .330 .506
Dunn .409 .530
Encarcion .318 .439
Votto .358 .505
Ross .369 .333
Cueto .174 .050

Newer Baker Lineup:
Runs per game for above lineup: 5.124. x 162 = 830.088

* outlier - a statistical value that is outside other values in a set of data

Using Bruce at .380/.560.

Comparison Old Baker Lineup:
Using Season Stats -
runs per game for below lineup: 4.402. x 162 = 713.124

Patterson .231 .338
Keppinger .373 .446
Griffey .356 .408
Phillips .330 .506
Dunn .409 .530
Encarncion .318 .439
Votto .358 .505
Bako .314 .385
Cuteo .174 .050

Old Baker Lineup Example:
Runs per game for below lineup: 4.402. x 162 = 713.124 runs for the season

Newer Baker Lineup:
Runs per game for above lineup: 5.124. x 162 = 830.088

Analysis By Baseball Musings
Runs per game using 5.331 lineup 5.331 x 162 = 863.622

Top 5 lineups per analysis by Baseball Musings

5.331 Dunn Votto Griffey Bruce Hairston Phillips Ecarncion Cueto Ross
5.331 Dunn Bruce Griffey Votto Hairston Phillips Ecarncion Cueto Ross
5.328 Dunn Votto Griffey Bruce Hairston Ecarncion Phillips Cueto Ross
5.328 Dunn Bruce Griffey Votto Hairston Ecarncion Phillips Cueto Ross
5.327 Dunn Hairston Griffey Bruce Votto Phillips Ecarncion Cueto Ross

RedsManRick
06-07-2008, 10:38 PM
The last thing a good manager would ignore is who has the hot hand or the cold hand. That's why teams sent out advance scouts. That's why people make adjustments to their approach.

Yes, but I think this is overrated. Sure, sometimes guys struggle or surge, but advanced scouting is more of a scouting thing so that the players know what adjustments to make.

I believe it was in Tango's book, guys on who have been hot/cold see a change in their future performance on the order of 20 points of OPS... that's it. Hot/Cold steaks in baseball, save for some external factor which truly affect a player's skill level (injuries, etc.), are simply a classic case of the gambler's falacy. Three straight heads doesn't make a tails any more, or less, likely on the next flip.

Managers do a lot of things based on the assumption that they can get significantly more production from their team through smart micromanagement. But what history has shown us is that guys produce at a level commensurate to their skill pretty much all the time. Platoon splits are the only significant situational affect which deserve micromanagement. Beyond that, managers are best off figuring out 2 good lineups (vR and vL) and running them out there as often as possible.

Spring~Fields
06-08-2008, 12:17 AM
RedsManRick

It looks like you were telling me, that there is not much significant difference on the small sample of per game and the gap widens over the season. Since the batting orders don’t show significant differences per game, why doesn’t a manager just front load the highest OBP and SLG and just let it ride?

Old Baker Lineup Example:
Runs per game for below lineup: 4.402.
Newer Baker Lineup:
Runs per game for above lineup: 5.124.
Analysis By Baseball Musings
Runs per game using 5.331 lineup 5.331
Range 4.402-5.331 per game

These five that the system published, it is as you have said not much difference in them per game, they even have Dunn leading off, not that we here on RZ would advocate that, but.
5.331 Dunn Votto Griffey Bruce Hairston Phillips Encarncion Cueto Ross
5.331 Dunn Bruce Griffey Votto Hairston Phillips Encarncion Cueto Ross
5.328 Dunn Votto Griffey Bruce Hairston Encarncion Phillips Cueto Ross
5.328 Dunn Bruce Griffey Votto Hairston Encarncion Phillips Cueto Ross
5.327 Dunn Hairston Griffey Bruce Votto Phillips Encarncion Cueto Ross

Looks like that some of the players that we as Reds fans have thought highly of needs to be moved for upgrades, as that seems to be the only way to make the lineup produce more runs. The team has to inject higher OBP/SLG players into their team, mediocre or slightly below will need to apply elsewhere. What do you think ?

Can an alleged small market team that indicates that it wants to win actually afford poor performing castoffs from other teams? It seems like they can’t because they just won’t produce enough to make a major difference, to take a team to the competitive level let alone to champion status. Either that or one great group of starting and relief pitching.

Oh well since it doesn’t matter that much I want my lineup, Dusty can just scrap his. :D:D
Phillips, Hairston, Bruce, Dunn, Votto, Griffey, Encarncion, Ross, Pitcher