|
|
#12
12-15-2005, 01:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Who bats 9th?
Yeah, that was a smart move by the Red Sox.
Mueller's OPS declined by, roughly .140 the last two years. He'll be 35 next year and he'd probably want a couple yaers on the contract. He's a player past his prime and if you have a promising young rookie to step in, it makes the most sense. 
|
|
#13
12-15-2005, 01:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who bats 9th?
The logic is you put a guy with more OBP and speed in the 9th hole to act as a table setter for your teams better hitters, especially if you have some power in the 1 and 2 holes. In most cases, it would be between the guys batting 8th and 9th. Every now and then a team might drop a player from 7th to 9th to act as a table setter.
In the NL it doesn't work as well, because there are very few instances where the pitcher is not the worst hitter on the team. If it were ever close, the pitcher would most likely have more speed and be a better table setter. LaRussa used to bat the pitcher 8th on occasion when Mark McGwire was bopping 60+ HR's per year.
|
|
#15
12-15-2005, 02:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who bats 9th?
[ QUOTE ]
This thread is a joke. Dontrelle has a career OPS of under .600 [/ QUOTE ] True and true. But it might not look that bad compared to the rest of the Marlins lineup next year. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]
|
|
#16
12-15-2005, 02:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who bats 9th?
[ QUOTE ]
It's retarded. Bat your worst player 9th. [/ QUOTE ] you don't always bat your worst hitter 9th, saying this is naive. it depends on the makeup of your lineup and what you have as far as power and speed. the OP has a point and it is very effective if the team has the correct perssonnel to do so though that its not always the case as well.
|
|
#17
12-15-2005, 07:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who bats 9th?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It's retarded. Bat your worst player 9th. [/ QUOTE ] you don't always bat your worst hitter 9th, saying this is naive. it depends on the makeup of your lineup and what you have as far as power and speed. the OP has a point and it is very effective if the team has the correct perssonnel to do so though that its not always the case as well. [/ QUOTE ] Obviously if you want to alternate L/R better or something, you might move him up a spot, but having a second "table-setter" is not an optimal strategy. Lineup construction has more or less been solved. "Optimal Lineups" are essentially: #1. Traditional Leadoff Hitter is usually oka here, you want to stick your best hitter that doesn't hti a ton of homers. You can sacrifice some OBP for speed. 2-9 order your best hitters by 1.8OBP+SLG Doesn't do much, of course. Maybe 15 runs over a season. Still, that's about $2 million...
|
|
#18
12-15-2005, 07:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who bats 9th?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It's retarded. Bat your worst player 9th. [/ QUOTE ] you don't always bat your worst hitter 9th, saying this is naive. it depends on the makeup of your lineup and what you have as far as power and speed. the OP has a point and it is very effective if the team has the correct perssonnel to do so though that its not always the case as well. [/ QUOTE ] Obviously if you want to alternate L/R better or something, you might move him up a spot, but having a second "table-setter" is not an optimal strategy. Lineup construction has more or less been solved. "Optimal Lineups" are essentially: #1. Traditional Leadoff Hitter is usually oka here, you want to stick your best hitter that doesn't hti a ton of homers. You can sacrifice some OBP for speed. 2-9 order your best hitters by 1.8OBP+SLG Doesn't do much, of course. Maybe 15 runs over a season. Still, that's about $2 million... [/ QUOTE ] Let me get this straight. You want David Ortiz to bat #2 for the 2005 Red Sox?
|
|
#19
12-15-2005, 07:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who bats 9th?
Yes. He will get approximately 20 more PA, and when he comes to bat at the beginning of the game he'll always be batting with 0 or no outs. Unless you have two great hitters in front of him, you'll rarely have two men on for him anyway, and you're pretty much assured that his at-bats will come with less expectancy because there will be 1 ot 2 out.
|
|
#20
12-15-2005, 10:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who bats 9th?
[ QUOTE ]
Yes. He will get approximately 20 more PA, and when he comes to bat at the beginning of the game he'll always be batting with 0 or no outs. Unless you have two great hitters in front of him, you'll rarely have two men on for him anyway, and you're pretty much assured that his at-bats will come with less expectancy because there will be 1 ot 2 out. [/ QUOTE ] If all things were equal, including the OBA/SLG relationship, this would be a great way to optimize your lineup. But if you have a player with a 350/585 hitting right in front of a player with a 400/450, you will be costing yourself runs. Also, the EV of a basepath clogger like David Ortiz being on base and a speed deamon like Johnny Damon or even a normal slow guy like Bill Mueller is not the same, no matter how many outs. So you set your lineup so Ortiz is more likely to come up with runners on and less likely to be starting rallys. That would be #3 or #4, with two or three of your better batters are hitting right in front of him, not #2, where two of your worst hitters will be hitting in front of him.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
