PDA

View Full Version : How about a lineup shakeup



brm7675
04-20-2011, 12:54 PM
Our offense just doesn't seem to be clicking right now, so how about thinking outside of the box and going with something like this:

Phillips
Hanigan
Bruce
Votto
Stubbs
Rolen
Gomes
Janish
Pitcher

BigJohn
04-20-2011, 12:59 PM
Stubbs
Bruce
Votto
Rolen
Gomes
Phillips
Hanigan
Janish
Pitcher

Shawn_RedsFan
04-20-2011, 01:34 PM
Not attacking either of you guys but why move Phillips?? He is hitting good in the 2 hole and he is comfortable there and has even said he likes batting in the 2 spot.

If we were changing the lineup I would go something on the lines of this

Stubbs
Phillips
Votto
Rolen
Gomes
Bruce
Hanigan/Hernandez
Janish
Pitcher

Personally I don't think there is a big problem with the lineup the way it is now..

Maker_84
04-20-2011, 01:36 PM
it would make no difference

Parliament
04-20-2011, 02:48 PM
it would make no difference

Not true. Moving BP from 4th to leadoff helped the reds a lot last year.
How about

BP
Heisey
Votto
Rolen
Gomes
Stubbs
H/H
Janish
Pitcher

BPhillips4
04-20-2011, 02:58 PM
Offense hasn't been the problem thus far. #1 in the NL in RS by a full 10 runs

The pitching staff simply needs to step things up and that is all there really is to it.

DirtyBaker
04-20-2011, 03:00 PM
- With 99 runs the reds lead all of baseball with 9 more than the second place teams. Starting pitching is this team's need to address, not the line up.

- Stubbs is hitting well above his career BA OBP and SLG this year leading off and he's stolen 5 of 6. Not sure why some people think batting him lower in the lineup is going to produce even more runs.

brm7675
04-20-2011, 03:06 PM
Remove 3-4 high scoring games and how is our offense doing? Lets review the Pirate series, remove the Sat 11 run output and how did the offense look to you? How did they look last night or on the West coast trip. yes pitching needs to come around, but we need to get hitters seeing different pitches and get some out of their funk...

DirtyBaker
04-20-2011, 03:27 PM
Remove 3-4 high scoring games and how is our offense doing?
That argument can't be made if you watch baseball with any regularity. Take last night, just a random night. 7 teams scored 1 run or less, 4 teams scored more than 10. Teams don't consistently score 5 runs night in-night out.

brm7675
04-20-2011, 04:26 PM
That argument can't be made if you watch baseball with any regularity. Take last night, just a random night. 7 teams scored 1 run or less, 4 teams scored more than 10. Teams don't consistently score 5 runs night in-night out.

You are right, but right now this offense is in a funk, we are not hitting on any kind of consistant basis over the past 10+ games, what is wrong with shaking things up a bit and allowing players to see some different pitches...

DaytonFlyer
04-20-2011, 04:49 PM
Maybe we should think about hitting the pitcher 8th...

bshall2105
04-20-2011, 05:57 PM
Our offense just doesn't seem to be clicking right now, so how about thinking outside of the box and going with something like this:

Phillips
Hanigan
Bruce
Votto
Stubbs
Rolen
Gomes
Janish
Pitcher

You give way too much love to Hanigan. You loved him last year too so I don't know what the deal is there. He's been dreadful aside from the first series of the season. Hernandez has out performed him on the field and at the plate. Also, hitting Bruce 3rd is crazy right now.

Oxblood
04-20-2011, 06:08 PM
Move Janish up in the order..

Hondo
04-20-2011, 06:11 PM
Offense hasn't been the problem thus far. #1 in the NL in RS by a full 10 runs

The pitching staff simply needs to step things up and that is all there really is to it.

Correct.

Hence; Need a Number 1 Starter.

brm7675
04-20-2011, 06:55 PM
You give way too much love to Hanigan. You loved him last year too so I don't know what the deal is there. He's been dreadful aside from the first series of the season. Hernandez has out performed him on the field and at the plate. Also, hitting Bruce 3rd is crazy right now.

Hanigan is a contact hitter, which is what you want in the 2 spot. You bat Jay 3rd and Votto 4th, which means the odds of Jay seeing better pitches occur because Votto is hitting behind him.

brm7675
04-20-2011, 06:56 PM
Correct.

Hence; Need a Number 1 Starter.

No, hence we just need our starters up to their ability and as was proven last year ( you know when we won the division) we will be fine...

bshall2105
04-20-2011, 07:18 PM
Hanigan is a contact hitter, which is what you want in the 2 spot. You bat Jay 3rd and Votto 4th, which means the odds of Jay seeing better pitches occur because Votto is hitting behind him.

First you never move Joey out of the three hole, but that's another issue. Second Jay isn't ever going to see good pitches if he's chasing the high fastball and the low/away breaking ball.

brm7675
04-20-2011, 07:39 PM
First you never move Joey out of the three hole, but that's another issue. Second Jay isn't ever going to see good pitches if he's chasing the high fastball and the low/away breaking ball.

Why? Where is it written that Votto always has to hit 3rd?

bshall2105
04-20-2011, 08:01 PM
Why? Where is it written that Votto always has to hit 3rd?

I think it was the Books of Bokonon but I'm not sure

signalhome
04-20-2011, 08:43 PM
I think it was the Books of Bokonon but I'm not sure

The Book (no, really, that's its name) says that your best hitters should hit 1st, 2nd, and 4th, with the best power hitter of the three hitting fourth. That's Joey Votto. The guy hitting third is actually less important than whoever is hitting 5th.

Source: http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/3/17/795946/optimizing-your-lineup-by

brm7675
04-20-2011, 08:59 PM
The Book (no, really, that's its name) says that your best hitters should hit 1st, 2nd, and 4th, with the best power hitter of the three hitting fourth. That's Joey Votto. The guy hitting third is actually less important than whoever is hitting 5th.

Source: http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/3/17/795946/optimizing-your-lineup-by

And yet if you look around Albert hits 3rd, Votto hit's 3rd, Bonds hit 3rd and so on, so you ahve to wonder either who wrote that book or why ML managers disagree with it...

signalhome
04-20-2011, 09:05 PM
And yet if you look around Albert hits 3rd, Votto hit's 3rd, Bonds hit 3rd and so on, so you ahve to wonder either who wrote that book or why ML managers disagree with it...

Just because teams employ it doesn't mean it's right. Managers also regularly sacrifice bunt (like last night), even when it decreases a team's win probability. Plenty of managers still hit a low OBP guy leadoff just because he's fast. Managers constantly do things that aren't based on any kind of evidence other than that's how it was done when they were brought up playing baseball.

bshall2105
04-20-2011, 09:21 PM
The Book (no, really, that's its name) says that your best hitters should hit 1st, 2nd, and 4th, with the best power hitter of the three hitting fourth. That's Joey Votto. The guy hitting third is actually less important than whoever is hitting 5th.

Source: http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/3/17/795946/optimizing-your-lineup-by

I want Votto hitting in the first inning of every game, I also want him to have runners on in the 1st inning when he hits. That's why I would hit him third.

signalhome
04-20-2011, 09:31 PM
I want Votto hitting in the first inning of every game, I also want him to have runners on in the 1st inning when he hits. That's why I would hit him third.

If you want him hitting with runners on base, you should want him hitting fourth.


The Book says the #3 hitter comes to the plate with, on average, fewer runners on base than the #4 or #5 hitters. So why focus on putting a guy who can knock in runs in the #3 spot, when the two spots after him can benefit from it more? Surprisingly, because he comes to bat so often with two outs and no runners on base, the #3 hitter isn't nearly as important as we think. This is a spot to fill after more important spots are taken care of.

Hondo
04-20-2011, 09:51 PM
If you want him hitting with runners on base, you should want him hitting fourth.

If this team had a legit Lead Off Hitter and a Great 2 Hole hitter I would say yes bat Votto 4th but this team doesnt have a bonafide .370-.400 OBP guy in the #1 or #2 hole so Votto needs to get to At Bat as many times as possible in each game. So as the team sits, 3rd is Best position in the Batting Order for him.

Votto4MVP
04-20-2011, 09:52 PM
If you want him hitting with runners on base, you should want him hitting fourth.

Have you ever thought, or has the book ever thought, that maybeeeee the reason that the number 4 hitter hits more often with guys on base then the number 3 guy, because the number 3 guy bats before the number 4 guy? IE Votto is our best player and gets on base the most, therefore the guy after him (rolen in this case) bats the most with guys on base because votto is on base the most.

The best hitter on the team often bats 3rd which is why the 4th batter often bats with a guy on base because the best batter is batting right ahead of him.

No offense but that doesnt take a genius.

signalhome
04-20-2011, 10:39 PM
Have you ever thought, or has the book ever thought, that maybeeeee the reason that the number 4 hitter hits more often with guys on base then the number 3 guy, because the number 3 guy bats before the number 4 guy? IE Votto is our best player and gets on base the most, therefore the guy after him (rolen in this case) bats the most with guys on base because votto is on base the most.

The best hitter on the team often bats 3rd which is why the 4th batter often bats with a guy on base because the best batter is batting right ahead of him.

No offense but that doesnt take a genius.

I haven't had a chance to read it yet thanks to school, but the guys who wrote it are a lot smarter than I am. I'm sure they have accounted for that factor in some way. From the first inning's perspective, it makes perfect sense. For the #3 hitter to have runners on base in his first plate appearance, either the #1 or #2 guy must get on. Bear with me, a lot of numbers are following. If we assume a .340 OBP for every player, that means there is a 56.4% chance the #3 hitter comes to the plate with a runner on (1 - 0.34 = 0.66 chance of batter making an out, 0.66 * 0.66 = 0.4356 chance of both batters making an out, 1 - 0.4356 = 0.5644 chance of at least one batter reaching base safely). For the #4 hitter to have runners on base in his first plate appearance, the #1, #2, or #3 guy must get on. That means there is a 71.3% chance the #4 hitter's first plate appearance is with runners on base (0.66 * 0.66 * 0.66 = 0.2875 chance of all three runners recording an out, 1 - 0.2875 = 0.7125 chance at least one runner reaches safely).

signalhome
04-20-2011, 10:55 PM
Also, assuming no extra base hits or steals, there is an 11.6% chance the #3 hitter's first plate appearance is with RISP (0.34 * 0.34 = 0.1156 chance of both batters reaching base). For the #4 hitter, the numbers are a little trickier. First we have to assume at least one batter reached base, which is 0.7125 chance. Then we need one of the other two hitters to reach base. It has already been determined that the chance of one of two batters reaching base is 0.5644 (1 - [0.66 * 0.66]). Since these are independent events (a runner reaching base has no effect on subsequent runners reaching base), I believe we can then multiply those two odds together to determine the odds that two of the three reach base. 0.7125 * 0.5644 = 0.4021, so there is a 40.21% chance that the #4 hitter's first plate appearance is with RISP. I'm uncertain of that last figure, mostly because of how much higher it is than for the #3 hitter, so I'd appreciate it if someone with more probability knowledge could check me on that (I haven't had Statistics since my freshman year of college, so it has been a while).

dubc47834
04-21-2011, 09:01 AM
Offense hasn't been the problem thus far. #1 in the NL in RS by a full 10 runs

The pitching staff simply needs to step things up and that is all there really is to it.

That stat is misleading right now. Most of those runs came from 3 games where we scored a ton of runs. I think we need a little shake-up. I say try switching Bruce and Stubbs. Stubbs did really well last year when he wasn't in the leadoff and maybe Bruce will tighten up his swing if he hit lead off. I doubt it happens, but sounds good to me.

BigJohn
04-21-2011, 09:25 AM
Interesting diatribe here.
http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~mbodell/battingOrder2001.html

BigJohn
04-21-2011, 09:28 AM
http://bill37mccurdy.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/whats-in-a-batting-order/

swaisuc
04-21-2011, 11:33 AM
Also, assuming no extra base hits or steals, there is an 11.6% chance the #3 hitter's first plate appearance is with RISP (0.34 * 0.34 = 0.1156 chance of both batters reaching base). For the #4 hitter, the numbers are a little trickier. First we have to assume at least one batter reached base, which is 0.7125 chance. Then we need one of the other two hitters to reach base. It has already been determined that the chance of one of two batters reaching base is 0.5644 (1 - [0.66 * 0.66]). Since these are independent events (a runner reaching base has no effect on subsequent runners reaching base), I believe we can then multiply those two odds together to determine the odds that two of the three reach base. 0.7125 * 0.5644 = 0.4021, so there is a 40.21% chance that the #4 hitter's first plate appearance is with RISP. I'm uncertain of that last figure, mostly because of how much higher it is than for the #3 hitter, so I'd appreciate it if someone with more probability knowledge could check me on that (I haven't had Statistics since my freshman year of college, so it has been a while).


If you want to talk statistics, the biggest argument for putting Votto 4th is avoiding situations where he bats with nobody on and 2 outs. I've seen different takes on whether you will bat in more or less "runners on base/RISP" situations batting 3rd vs 4th, but I'm convinced they're very similar in that regard. What is not similar is a 3rd batter hitting with nobody on and the 4th batter hitting with nobody on. In the case of nobody on, whatever production is given with 0 outs is significantly more valuable than production given with 2 outs.

However, I'm ok with keeping Votto at 3rd based on 2 more abstract (and although certainly not unique, nearly impossible to prove) ideas. First, as crazy as it might sound for a stat nerd, I'm not entirely convinced that a run in the 2nd inning is worth the same as a run in the 1st inning. Second, I think moving players around can have a drastic impact on their level of production (i.e. moving Votto's production to 4th does not automatically mean the 4 spot will now produce what the 3rd spot did).

swaisuc
04-21-2011, 11:41 AM
Also, for those who are interested in purely the statistical analysis. Take a look at the average leverage index. It shows who batted in the most high leverage situations in terms of impact on the game good or bad.

From 2010-2011 Scott Rolen was #7, Gomes was #8 in MLB

Votto was #77 behind Stubbs and Bruce among many others.

brm7675
04-21-2011, 12:03 PM
To me this is pretty simple, our offense right now is not clicking, and to continue to keep the same lineup out there is kinda well foolish. Move some folks around and see what happens, it sure as hell can't get any worse.

lonewolf371
04-21-2011, 12:09 PM
To me this is pretty simple, our offense right now is not clicking, and to continue to keep the same lineup out there is kinda well foolish. Move some folks around and see what happens, it sure as hell can't get any worse.
Yeah but you don't want to move anyone at the top of the order that's playing well right now. That means Stubbs and Votto need to stay put. Phillips is probably fine. I'd be in favor of moving Gomes into the 4 and putting Rolen back at 6, moving Bruce up to 5 to keep the L/R thing going. Leave everyone else.

brm7675
04-21-2011, 12:53 PM
Yeah but you don't want to move anyone at the top of the order that's playing well right now. That means Stubbs and Votto need to stay put. Phillips is probably fine. I'd be in favor of moving Gomes into the 4 and putting Rolen back at 6, moving Bruce up to 5 to keep the L/R thing going. Leave everyone else.

I would agree Votto is hitting, but no one else is...

lonewolf371
04-21-2011, 01:01 PM
I would agree Votto is hitting, but no one else is...
Did you even look at Stubbs' stat line before you made that post?

brm7675
04-21-2011, 01:21 PM
Did you even look at Stubbs' stat line before you made that post?

Yea and he is not playing today...

dubc47834
04-21-2011, 01:24 PM
Also, for those who are interested in purely the statistical analysis. Take a look at the average leverage index. It shows who batted in the most high leverage situations in terms of impact on the game good or bad.

From 2010-2011 Scott Rolen was #7, Gomes was #8 in MLB

Votto was #77 behind Stubbs and Bruce among many others.

I think those stats just proves we need a better #4 hitter. I think that is a classic which came 1st type deal. Is the #3 slot just not as impactful, or was it that Rolen and Gomes were in those spots because of Votto, I think it was because of Votto. If you put Votto 4th then I think that then the #5 and 6 spots impact would go up. If we had a clean up hitter then I think we would be good. Just my thoughts.

signalhome
04-21-2011, 01:35 PM
If you want to talk statistics, the biggest argument for putting Votto 4th is avoiding situations where he bats with nobody on and 2 outs. I've seen different takes on whether you will bat in more or less "runners on base/RISP" situations batting 3rd vs 4th, but I'm convinced they're very similar in that regard. What is not similar is a 3rd batter hitting with nobody on and the 4th batter hitting with nobody on. In the case of nobody on, whatever production is given with 0 outs is significantly more valuable than production given with 2 outs.

However, I'm ok with keeping Votto at 3rd based on 2 more abstract (and although certainly not unique, nearly impossible to prove) ideas. First, as crazy as it might sound for a stat nerd, I'm not entirely convinced that a run in the 2nd inning is worth the same as a run in the 1st inning. Second, I think moving players around can have a drastic impact on their level of production (i.e. moving Votto's production to 4th does not automatically mean the 4 spot will now produce what the 3rd spot did).

There was a great Fangraphs article on that a few weeks back, about how since everyone is raised with the best hitter hitting third, moving him to somewhere else could have negative consequences.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/player-attitudes-and-applied-sabermetrics/

signalhome
04-21-2011, 01:40 PM
If you want to talk statistics, the biggest argument for putting Votto 4th is avoiding situations where he bats with nobody on and 2 outs. I've seen different takes on whether you will bat in more or less "runners on base/RISP" situations batting 3rd vs 4th, but I'm convinced they're very similar in that regard. What is not similar is a 3rd batter hitting with nobody on and the 4th batter hitting with nobody on. In the case of nobody on, whatever production is given with 0 outs is significantly more valuable than production given with 2 outs.

However, I'm ok with keeping Votto at 3rd based on 2 more abstract (and although certainly not unique, nearly impossible to prove) ideas. First, as crazy as it might sound for a stat nerd, I'm not entirely convinced that a run in the 2nd inning is worth the same as a run in the 1st inning. Second, I think moving players around can have a drastic impact on their level of production (i.e. moving Votto's production to 4th does not automatically mean the 4 spot will now produce what the 3rd spot did).

And you're exactly right about not wanting your #3 hitter up with two outs and nobody on. I didn't touch on that in my post, but once you consider that and the fact that coming up with nobody on and no outs is better than nobody on and two outs, I think it's pretty clear that the #4 hitter is more important.