Why would Pujols bat 3rd?

[logan82]

So LaRussa is plannning on batitng his pitchers 8th all year, but it sounds as if he is going to bat Pujols 3rd. I think it is a little odd that he would go out of his way to take the time to look into lineups and decide to bat the pitcher 8th yet overlook batting your best hitter in either the #1, #2, or #4 spots in the lineup.

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7844154/La-Russa:-Pitchers-will-bat-eighth-in-spring-training

[sbrylski]

It sounds like more of the writer's assumption to me.

 

Though he hasn't hit anywhere other than 3rd to start a game since 2003. Maybe Albert says he feels the most comfortable there.

 

Pujols to #2 makes the most sense to me.

[RightFieldCoder]

Because all managers know the best player should hit 3rd. Just because the stats say otherwise doesn't make it true.

[Gopher74]

Because all managers know the best player should hit 3rd. Just because the stats say otherwise doesn't make it true.

Exactly what stats suggest otherwise?

[1992casey]

The biggie is that the #3 hitter comes to the plate more often than anyone else with two out and nobody on base.

 

Using an example, the best lineup with four Babe Ruths and five Sandy Koufaxes will have Babe hitting 1,2,4, & 5 with Sandy hitting 3, 6, 7, 8, & 9.

 

There are some more posts scattered around about this in the Brewers lineup thread.

[Big Reed]

I always thought your most disciplined hitter with a grea t average and some power hit third. Wade Boggs hit third. Didn't puckett bat third? Molitor hit third for a while later in his career for Toronto and Minn when he had more power and less speed. . Cooper hit third. Mattingly hit third. braun hit third. Canseco would hit third with McGuire hitting 4th. Frank Thomas hit third some times. Who hits third for boston? Manny? if you have two power hitters, I thought the obvious line-up would be to have the power hitter that could also bat over .300 hit third and the power hitter who is more of a home run guy hit 4th.

 

I thought the old brewers had cooper hitting third and Gorman thomas hitting 4th. Didn't Simmons bat third or 4th?

 

I would never put a guy like pujols batting second. that would be a total waste. Was that post made in jest so that the Cards would have a lousy lineup? You want your guy batting second to be able to bunt, and take pitches for steals, and be able to advance the runner, not somebody who can hit 40 homers. Jimmy Gantner bats second, not a guy like Pujols. With the Cards, you have pujols and Glaus as their power hitters. Pujols can also hit for average, glaus doesn't. it seems natural ala canseco and mc guire to bat Pujols third and Glaus fourth. after all that's what larussa did in Oakland with a lot of success.

 

As far as the brewers, it's a tough call who should bat third. A case could be made for braun, hart and/or fielder. Fielder seems a more natural to bat 4th. but he's a very disciplined hitter who would do well batting third. hart could bat third or 5th. braun could bat well in all three slots. I had thought most 30/30 guys and 40/40 guys batted third, so you would want your 3rd hitter to have some speed. but then again, Soriano has rarely batted third. Didn't bonds bat third for the majority of his career? and sheffield as well?

 

I thought you wanted your best overall hitter to bat third . I guess things have changed. maybe that's why we don't win. To me ted Williams should bat third. jim rice should bat third. George Brett should bat third. willie mays should bat third with McCovey batting 4th. AROD to bat third with a healthy Giambi batting 4th. Yount was a better hitter batting second when the brewers also had cooper batting third and thomas batting 4th. Was that the actual batting order in 82? or did Yount bat third, cooper bat 4th with thomas 5th?

[sbrylski]

Was that post made in jest so that the Cards would have a lousy lineup?

 

Reed, that's the point of this thread.

 

You are obviously a hard core traditionalist, at least when it comes to lineup construction. On the other hand, there's the new wave statistical model lineup construction that goes against some of your assumptions. Is one better than the other? Maybe, maybe not.

 

But the point is that LaRussa is hitting is pitcher 8th, which is part of the new wave lineup construction, while he's keeping Pujols in the #3 spot, which is part of the traditional lineup model. Its rare that someone would mix and match these theories. That was the observation.

 

You want your guy batting second to be able to bunt, and take pitches for steals, and be able to advance the runner, not somebody who can hit 40 homers.

 

Do you? Why? (Because its always been done like that doesn't make it right.)

• 1) Bunting sucks in nearly all situations. Sorry, but you can't convince me otherwise. It is mathematically proven and even observed to cost you runs, even a successful bunt. Basing a lineup around this skill doesn't make sense.
• 2) Who says Albert Pujols can't take pitches? He's the best hitter in that lineup, and he'd be the one I trust most to take pitches if needed. (Arguing the value of a SB attempt is for another thread.)
• 3) Albert Pujols, the best hitter in the lineup, is the best at advancing the runner, because he's the best hitter.
• 4) If you hit 40 HR in the #3 spot, you'll hit 42 in the #2 spot with the extra plate appearances.

Bringing this post full circle, moving your best hitter to #2 is complimented by moving you're #8 hitter to #9, to get him that possible extra baserunner while still getting him the extra AB's. And that's why its odd that LaRussa would do one but not the other.

[1992casey]

Bringing this post full circle, moving your best hitter to #2 is complimented by moving you're #8 hitter to #9, to get him that possible extra baserunner while still getting him the extra AB's.

New lineup study also suggests that moving your best or second best hitter to #2 is likely to be a good move even without moving the pitcher to #8.

[olliegjw]

The biggie is that the #3 hitter comes to the plate more often than anyone else with two out and nobody on base.

 

Using an example, the best lineup with four Babe Ruths and five Sandy Koufaxes will have Babe hitting 1,2,4, & 5 with Sandy hitting 3, 6, 7, 8, & 9.

 

There are some more posts scattered around about this in the Brewers lineup thread.

I believe this line of thinking is a bit flawed. For a team of 4 Ruths and 5 Koufax's that may very well be the best lineup. However, the Brewers aren't made up of 4 Ruth's and 5 Koufax's (more like 8 Ruth's and one Koufax). The point being, every team is not made of the average lineup.

 

If the arguement is that the #3 hitter comes up most with 2 outs, nobody on, couldn't an arguement then be made to put your pitcher in that spot? Of course, no manager would ever do that.

 

My personal preference it to get your best hitters as many AB's as possible. I would probably have the top 3 be Weeks, Braun, Fielder. I would also have the pitcher bat 9th for the same reasoning. Anything else is overthinking, and opens the manager up to too much second guessing.

[sbrylski]

If the arguement is that the #3 hitter comes up most with 2 outs, nobody on, couldn't an arguement then be made to put your pitcher in that spot? Of course, no manager would ever do that.

 

These models take expected PA into account too, you don't want you're pitcher getting all those PA right in the heart of the lineup. The number 3 spot is still more valuable than 6-9, it just takes a hit relative to 1,2,4,5 because of the situations it hits in, like 0 on and 2 out.

[rluzinski]

Why is it that in every other sport, managers/coaches who come up with new and innovative strategies are praised but in baseball they are almost automatically labeled fools? Even if we pretend that all baseball strategies were perfected 90 years ago (which is pretty much an impossibility), why should we assume that they are still optimal in today's game?

[Oldcity]

It doesn't make much sense for them to hit the pitcher eighth unless Pujols hits second. Similarly, I wouldn't mind the Brewers hitting Kendall ninth with either Braun or Fielder second.

[TooLiveBrew]

the Brewers aren't made up of 4 Ruth's and 5 Koufax's (more like 8 Ruth's and one Koufax)

 

 

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d15/iheartfamilyguy/037.gif

Ollie, any word on the Brewers' 2008 offensive forecast?

 

http://stewiesplayground.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/10/face1.png

 

They gon' score a lotta runs!

[Big Reed]

it still seems dumb to me. it seemed real dumb to bat Soriano in the lead- off spot as well. but there are many threads attesting to how stupid cubs managers are. I had thought kendall would make a very nice guy to bat second. batting 8th is just as good for him. I liked yesterday's batting order. but I liked yesterday's pitching even more. In the past we'd jump out to a big early lead only to lose it. so with la russa playing around with the pitcher's batting order, does this mean we'll see Ankiel pitch once more?

 

a serious question who would be better batting 3rd/4th for the brewers? Braun and then Fielder? or Fielder and then Braun? I think Fielder has more sheer power, but it seems like braun has a better HR pace. What advantages would braun have hitting in front of Fielder? and vice versa? hart looks like a great #5 hitter just like a younger palmerio without the juice once was.

[MJLiverock]

I was thinking a little about the Braun / Fielder 3 or 4 spot yesterday. It may or may not play into Yost's thought process but if Fielder bats 3rd and the opposing manager brings in a lefty to face him then the other manager pretty much has to pull the lefty pitcher after Fielder given how Braun destroys LH pitching. This may burn up the LHers in the bullpen or make a manager decide to gamble with the RH vs. Fielder since Fielder isn't terrible against LH pitchers and Braun is on deck and is known to crush LHers. With Fielder at 4 and Hart at 5 the team may leave the lefty in versus Hart and the bottom of the order (could be good or bad given all the RH's down there).

 

I was just trying to figure out a reason for the switch and this was the best I could come up with.

[logan82]

it still seems dumb to me. it seemed real dumb to bat Soriano in the lead- off spot as well. but there are many threads attesting to how stupid cubs managers are. I had thought kendall would make a very nice guy to bat second. batting 8th is just as good for him. I liked yesterday's batting order. but I liked yesterday's pitching even more. In the past we'd jump out to a big early lead only to lose it. so with la russa playing around with the pitcher's batting order, does this mean we'll see Ankiel pitch once more?

 

a serious question who would be better batting 3rd/4th for the brewers? Braun and then Fielder? or Fielder and then Braun? I think Fielder has more sheer power, but it seems like braun has a better HR pace. What advantages would braun have hitting in front of Fielder? and vice versa? hart looks like a great #5 hitter just like a younger palmerio without the juice once was.

I think many people chimed in on their opinions of where everybody should bat in the Brewers lineup in this thread.

 

http://forum.brewerfan.net/viewtopic.php?t=10982

[1992casey]

Yeah, we should do the Brewer lineup over in the designated lineup thread that logan3825 has linked to.

However, the Brewers aren't made up of 4 Ruth's and 5 Koufax's (more like 8 Ruth's and one Koufax). The point being, every team is not made of the average lineup.

Actually, no team is made up of 4 Ruths and 5 Koufaxes and most every team features a more or less average/typical lineup. The problem is that a typical lineup doesn't teach us much statistically. To learn about a particular lineup spot, you'll frequently see testing with 8 average or similar players while moving the ninth player around.

 

All the Koufax-Ruth illustration actually tells us is that #3 falls into the bottom 5/9 of the lineup in terms of importance. Other research tells us that the #3 guy should likely be a team's fifth best hitter... in other words, the best of the five Koufaxes.

 

If the argument is that the #3 hitter comes up most with 2 outs, nobody on, couldn't an argument then be made to put your pitcher in that spot?

It was touched on above: you have to consider number of plate appearances and leverage. As an example, the #5 hitter faces more 'important' ABs than the #3 hitter, enough so as to more than offset the extra plate appearances coming from #3. On the other hand, a hitter that's not very good shouldn't be getting the extra plate appearances you'd see a number 3 hitter getting.