Designated Lineup Thread - Kendall Batting 9th?; Lack of Left-Handed Hitters SOLVDD (#203); Hall To Bat 5th, Hart 6th (#216)

[sbrylski]

put the book away! there is no way this stat analysis can predict the effect on the line up that this pitcher batting 9th will have on a bunch of players who have been stars at every level and are not used to it.

 

the effect of 2-3 runs per year and the UNKNOWN effect of the pitcher in the 8th spot is not worth the risk for this team. let's focus on the in game managing decisions and the pitching staff first.

Ya, but we can come up with a most likely prediction.

 

[rluzinski]

there is no way this stat analysis can predict the effect on the line up that this pitcher batting 9th will have on a bunch of players who have been stars at every level and are not used to it.

 

It is correct that all these simulations assume that the players involved are professionals that won't purposely tank because they are unhappy with their role. I think that is generally a safe assumption. If we do that and assume that each position is filled by a league average #1 hitter, # 2 hitter, etc... we save 2 runs a year on average. There are other factors to consider, depending on the particular players in question. When Sheets is pitching for instance, since he's such a bad hitter, it probably makes even more sense to bat him 8th. Also, since Kendell does hit into so many double plays, there's an added benefit to batting him after the pitcher. Where that 25-30 runs saved estimate comes from, I have no idea, however. An average avoided DP is worth about a third of a run, so it would take a lot of them to bridge the difference between 2 runs and 25. I just don't see it.

[TerraceReserved]

rluz, I'm confused. Why is it that the lineup tool is limited to only using league average hitters? What reason is there that it wouldn't work with an actual lineup I've plugged in?

[lukevan]

Wouldn't the extra runs come from more runners being on base for the top of the lineup, ie not just from eliminating double plays?

[1992casey]

If we do that and assume that each position is filled by a league average #1 hitter, # 2 hitter, etc... we save 2 runs a year on average.

I think The Book came up with that number by using a pitcher and 8 equal average hitters rather than an average #1, an average #2, etc. As I mentioned, though, my copy of The Book is 200 miles away right now.

 

Wouldn't the extra runs come from more runners being on base for the top of the lineup, ie not just from eliminating double plays?

For sure. The problem is coming up with 25 to 30 extra runs that way, though. That simply seems to be too much of a stretch considering the statistical work that's been done in recent years.

[rluzinski]

The tool is based on a study by Cyril Morong:

 

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/story/2006/2/12/133645/296

 

It's regression analysis based on data from the 1989-2002 seasons. So, all he really did was find the run value of OBP and SLG in an average lineup over that period. It's certainly interesting and useful to see how valuable a particular player in an average lineup would be in each lineup position. Where a tool based on that approach falls apart is when you use it to test nontraditional lineups. For instance, a significant part of why the value of SLG in the leadoff spot is so low is because the pitcher proceeds the leadoff hitter in the NL. That's why that lineup tool is not a good way to test unique lineups.

 

The Book used a markov chain to look at dual leadoff hitter theory. As mentioned, it resulted in a 2 run improvement over 162 games. A simulator should yield the same results. It used an average #1 hitter, #2, hitter, etc... as a starting point. Using unique players like Kendell will certainly change those results but I can't see it going from 2 runs to 25.

[Fatter than Joey]

I honestly have no idea how our stat's guy came up with those numbers.

 

I do not exude confidence in Yost's stat guy -- It's probably Dale Sveum

 

What that equates to in runs...?

 

Roughly 10 runs equals 1 win. --

 

I tend to agree with Russ as well... It seems to defy logic if we assume that a manager's impact on a season is around 2-3 games, yet a simple lineup adjustment could net 3 wins all by itself. I am all for getting every run we can, but I think there is no purpose in artificially ramping up our expectation in production.

 

Although I do take issue with Russ's "Yost is crazy" statement -- I find him to be more stubborn and surly.

[TooLiveBrew]

The team's assistant scouting director, Tony Blengino, and statistical analyst Dave Lawson suggested that such an arrangement could help the club score 25 to 30 more runs.

 

FtJ, I know you were likely kidding and all, but I don't think it's really fair to make light of this situation without actually acknowledging that this is not "Yost's stat guy", instead someone more likely hired by Ash or Melvin. I think the wording from the above excerpt indicates that the 25-30 number is a high-end estimate, which seems to fit the discussion here (that it'd take a ton to get to 25+ extra runs). The 'real' number is probably closer to 10-15. In other words, roughly one win. If the lineup tinkering is worth one win or more over the course of a season, it's no wonder Yost is down.

[Fatter than Joey]

The 'real' number is probably closer to 10-15.

 

I doubt that the real number is over 5. I think any study that shows 25-30 run to be anywhere near the projected production has fundamental flaws in it.

 

I think the wording from the above excerpt indicates that the 25-30 number is a high-end estimate

 

I disagree. I see nowhere it indicates that 25-30 runs is a "high-end" estimate -- In fact when a person presents me a range like 25-30 -- I take that to mean 25 is the low and 30 is the high.

 

but I don't think it's really fair to make light of this situation without actually acknowledging that this is not "Yost's stat guy"

 

Ultimately my skepticism lies in Yost's (in)ability to process any sort of information, but I am not willing to assume that Dave Lawson is entirely objective about this, or pretend to know how his information came around.

 

If the lineup tinkering is worth one win or more over the course of a season, it's no wonder Yost is down.

 

But then we come back to Russ's point of why bat the pitcher 9th when you are going to turn around and bat Cameron 2nd. That makes no sense to me, and ultimately I think any advantage gained by batting the pitcher 8th is washed out by batting your 6th best hitter 2nd.

 

Honestly, I think the less tinkering, managing, talking, or interacting Ned does the better the Brewers will be -- and I am not trying to be cute about this. Whenever Ned delves into stats we have Mench batting against RHP or pitching changes made because of fielding pct.

[rluzinski]

Brewcrewball interviewed Dave Lawson a few years ago:

 

http://www.brewcrewball.com/story/2006/4/14/1151/39437

 

He was recently mentioned here for inventing a stat that's basically been independently invented over a dozen times:

 

http://walksaber.blogspot.com/2008/02/beating-dead-horse-pt-4.html

 

An average avoided DP saves about a third of a run. Perhaps, avoiding a double play with the top of the order coming up is worth more. But even if we inflate it to half a run, is Kendell going to avoid 20+ double plays by batting 9th ? He's never had more than 26 GIDPs in a year so I find that basically impossible.. Hell, a third of the time it's going to be a pinch hitter batting before him anyway.

 

Are we missing some other significant advantage? I don't think Lawson is wrong; I'm skeptical that the 25-30 run estimate even came from him. The latest Hardball Times Annual came with an access to a decent lineup analyzer. If I get some free time tonight, I'll play around with it and see what it spits out.

[TooLiveBrew]

such an arrangement could help the club score 25 to 30 more runs.

 

IThere's the verbiage... "could" is why I see it as an upper limit estimate. [in terms of the quoted statement] It could help that much, but likely will be less. Just so I can clarify where I was coming from.

 

 

But then we come back to Russ's point of why bat the pitcher 9th when you are going to turn around and bat Cameron 2nd. That makes no sense to me, and ultimately I think any advantage gained by batting the pitcher 8th is washed out by batting your 6th best hitter 2nd.

 

Honestly, I think the less tinkering, managing, talking, or interacting Ned does the better the Brewers will be -- and I am not trying to be cute about this. Whenever Ned delves into stats we have Mench batting against RHP or pitching changes made because of fielding pct.

You can only do so much in the face of Yosting. I have no way to understand or explain. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

 

EDIT: I doubt that the real number is over 5. I think any study that shows 25-30 run to be anywhere near the projected production has fundamental flaws in it.

 

I really don't doubt that it's over 5. With the lineup the Brewers have, moving Kendall's OBP from in front of the pitcher to in front of Rickie should easily produce an extra 5+ runs over the course of a season.

 

I understand that for analyzing, you might have to utilize the '8 avg. hitters' model, but I don't know if the point of what's evidenced by such a study necessitates following the determinations as strictly as is being discussed. Please correct me if I'm way off base with that. In other words, it appears more important to have your strongest OBP guys strung together (for the most part), than to determine precisely which hitter 'goes' where. Is having Cameron at #2 (who carries a strong BB rate, and whose BA/OBP should increase slightly being out of PetCo) enough different from him hitting #3 to worry about it? Honest question.

 

It seems to me (a non-skilled-with-stats guy) that what's most important is stringing together the high OBPs - to create as many opportunities with runners on for your best hitters - hence batting a better OBP in front of Weeks, batting Kendall + Weeks + Cameron ahead of Prince, Braun, & Hart, etc. Once the best hitters have had their shot, the OBP becomes less important (albeit marginally), thus the lineup going to Hall/Hardy at #6 & 7. I readily admit that I don't have nearly the grasp on these lineup permutations that others here do, but I don't know if it's as important to keep Cameron out of the #2 spot as it is to group high OBPs together.

 

EDIT 2: As a follow-up, Cameron would be best utilized in the 6-hole if the pitcher is batted 8th, since he carries the lowest OBP from Weeks/Prince/Braun/Hart/Cameron?

[rluzinski]

If it isn't clear, the books' study of dual leadoff hitter doesn't use 8 identical players but rather 8 average players for their lineup position. You can use ESPN's splits to find out what the average NL leadoff hitter did for 2007, for instance:

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/aggregate?sort=runs&split=109&group=8&season=2007&seasonType=2&statType=batting&type=reg

 

The Book basically found out the average for each lineup spot and then flopped the average #8 and #9 hitter around.

[logan82]

TooLiveBrew wrote:

Is having Cameron at #2 (who carries a strong BB rate, and whose BA/OBP should increase slightly being out of PetCo) enough different from him hitting #3 to worry about it? Honest question.

From what I have read(admittedly little) optimizing a lineup compared to a traditional lineup would add very little over the course of an entire season. Maybe one win.

[TooLiveBrew]

If it isn't clear, the books' study of dual leadoff hitter doesn't use 8 identical players but rather 8 average players for their lineup position.

 

Right - sorry for being vague back there.

[logan82]

Here is something I did a while back. Not to terribly useful when figuring out runs over the course of a season as that is very dependant on context, but it gives you some idea of what the difference in production would be between 2 players. For example giving 80 more PA(or moving a guy 4 spots in the lineup) to Hall would mean 16.46 more hits, Hardy/18.5, Cameron/15.26. This is based off of last years numbers.

 

 

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pKN8HdBGjC9LVeUzB9o8vNg

[vacin8r]

well it looks like ned has at least decided on the middle of the order:

http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080310&content_id=2417751&vkey=spt2008news&fext=.jsp&c_id=mil

im sure its just because neds stat guy has said that putting prince in the 3 hole should cost him stats thereby making it easier to resign in a few years.

-don

[RU Rah Rah]

It will interesting to see if Ned really sticks with batting the catcher ninth for 162 games, particularly if it works out poorly a couple of times early in the year.

[brewjihad]

It will interesting to see if Ned really sticks with batting the catcher ninth

 

That's part of the reason I'm surprised this has gone this far. "Casual" fans who don't fully understand the math behind the decision are going to be upset when there are two on, two out and the pitcher comes up batting eighth. On the positive side, it could turn a few of them against Ned... http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

Wasn't the main original purpose of the Kendall batting ninth idea to move Braun up to the 2 hole and hit Fielder 3rd, followed by Hart or Cameron? That would add plate appearances for the two best hitters and keep their RBI opportunities intact. If they're actually committed to trying to tinker and add runs over the course of the season, why are they getting rid of that idea now?

[brewjihad]

Here's the quote to confirm my previous post:

 

"Yost's reasoning is that he wants Braun to have more plate apperances, but still be able to have guys on in front of him. So with Kendall's ability to see pitches and get on base, it would essentially translate to Braun still batting third while racking up about 40 more plate appearances, as stats show. In this lineup, Prince Fielder would bat third in the order, but it would be like having him in the clean-up slot."

 

Not even a mention of the Double-Play factor.

[1992casey]

By the time you hit Braun #2 and Fielder #3, it's like turning Kendall into a leadoff hitter in any inning other than the first. Leaving one of these guys at #4 and putting a Cameron/Hall/Hardy/whatever would accomplish the extra AB thing and still allow for a leadoff/cleanup combo at #4.

 

I can't say I'm disappointed with Fielder/Braun #3/#4 (or vice versa) because I wouldn't have expected Nedly or any other manager to catch on to the #3 research. I'd have been bummed at Braun/Fielder at #2/#3 (or vice versa). But I'd have been thrilled at trying the concept of Braun/Fielder at #2/#4 (or vice versa).

 

Anyway, it appears that the concern at this point is #2. I don't want to see a weak bat there while Cameron is out.

[brewjihad]

I wasn't necessarilly advocating the 2/3 lineup, just wondering why the reasoning changed.

 

I agree, the Braun 2, Fielder 4 combo would probably be the way to go- with Cameron inbetween, probably.

[1992casey]

I could tell that you weren't advocating the 2/3 lineup, so I wasn't challenging your post. I was reacting to the stuff you quoted. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[jaybird2001wi]

I am not sure if this could fall under the designated lineup thread, but given the status of this years' team and the great debate of where to bat Prince and Braun in the lineup, here are my thoughts.

 

My line of thinking believes Fielder would be better served as our No. 3 hitter due to Braun's more diverse offensive arsenal (he has speed). If Braun were to bat third with Fielder fourth, Braun's base stealing potential greatly diminishes because Fielder is a home run hitter and will not see as many pitches. And when someone is a base stealer, the following batter must take a strike in order to allow the base runner to take second or third, which greatly reduces Fielder's chances of hitting a home run.

However, if Braun does bat third and gets on base, there is a better chance of Fielder seeing fastballs because pitchers and catchers want every chance they can get to pick off Braun, etc. Braun could apply greater pressure to pitchers with more pitchouts, etc. further possibly increasing Fielder's walk totals.

 

Despite all of this, I think the general concensus is that teams with this situation would rather have a guy who has a more diverse offensive arsenal such as Braun, would have him bat fourth because he will essentially protect himself in the lineup through his baserunning skills.

If a player like Corey Hart were to bat behind Braun, fifth, these are two hitters that can help themselves when they get on base.

 

What are your theories on this subject? Would a team be better served having a higher OBP guy bat third or fourth? The argument would be double-sided given a proper perspective, some people prefer a higher OBP guy bat third to assure the inning to be continued if the third hitter were to be in the batters box with two out. But then again, a person with a higher OBP as the fourth hitter, could be much more valuable the following inning because they will essentially be the leadoff man in the second inning if there was a 1-2-3 inning in the first.

And in my opinion, Fielder needs more protection than Braun in the batting order because Fielder is more of a one-tool hitter (home runs) than Braun, who can hit doubles and does have solid all around speed. But the one setback to Braun is he needs to walk more. With this in mind, he could, in theory, be a better fourth hitter because Corey Hart will likely bat behind him and it will likely be a "pick your poison" type of situation for opposing pitchers.

Maybe I am thinking too much of this, but is there any stat out there that proves or disproves of these theories?

 

But would teams be better served having a guy with more offensive tools bat third and a person with less offensive tools bat fourth? Or vice versa?

[rluzinski]

Anything I could say on this topic, I've probably already said in the designated lineup thread. Makes me think that this should be there as well. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

[endaround]

Right now the Opening Day lineup looks to be:

 

2B Weeks

SS Counsell

LF Braun

1B Fielder

RF Hart

3B Hall

CF Gwynn

P Sheets

C Kendall

 

Not exactly the offensive powerhouse that was being envisioned in the offseason...