premium blogad:
blogads:
advertisement:
sitemeter:
|
|
|
February 27, 2006
Fun with Lineup Construction
Much was made last season of some of Willie Randolph’s questionable methods in lineup construction, particularly concerning the placement of David Wright, Carlos Beltran, and Jose Reyes. Expect more of the same this year if Willie bats Paul Lo Duca second and Wright lower in the batting order as many assume. But what should the lineup look like? Over at Beyond the Boxscore, Cyril Morong wrote a two part column last week detailing the value of on-base average and slugging percentage at each lineup position. The results are very interesting and have been widely discussed recently. There are several findings which can be very counterintuitive at first, as Dan Scotto mentioned on Sunday. Perhaps the aspect that will grate on baseball traditionalists the most is that the number three slot should not be the most hallowed slot in the lineup, reserved for the “best hitter.” Instead, it’s a spot where you might want to stick one of your weaker hitters in the lineup, or at least a guy who doesn’t quite fit anywhere else. The number two hitter really becomes the prototypical third hitter, as Dan writes: “The 2-hitter should be the lineup’s most balanced hitter, a good combination of OBP and SLG. David Wright fits the bill here, as does the player I chose, Chase Utley.” Oddly enough, Wright doesn’t make it as the Mets best OBP/SLG combo, as you’ll see below. Even though these ideas might not be accepted by traditionalists, they won’t necessarily be embraced by statheads either; much of this is new to the sabermetrically oriented also. Many of them, myself included, have always believed it best to concentrate those who make the fewest outs (those with the highest OBP’s) in one spot, in an effort not to isolate the team’s best hitters. Instead, this analysis suggests the opposite; spreading the outs around will be most conducive to scoring runs. This irritated me a lot at first too, but eventually I was able to reconcile the thought. While placing the best hitters in a knot will give you a very good chance of scoring in the first and maybe the second inning, it gives you a terrible chance of scoring in the third inning, and may cause difficulty as the lineup starts to make more “awkward” breaks (getting the 8,9,1 hitters instead of the 1, 2, 3). Basically, instead of throwing away an inning, you give yourself a slightly higher chance throughout the game. It also works out a little better on the occasions that your better players fail to get on base. Really, I think that is what makes this sort of lineup construction work the best: by spreading things out a little more, you’re not as reliant on the best case scenario. You have a better chance even if the optimal trio of hitters doesn’t get it done. Luckily Ken Arneson and David Pinto have made it easier to see specifics. Pinto has provided a tool on his website that allows readers to insert any nine players with their OBA’s and SLG’s, and then provides the number of runs per game that lineup will score. It also gives the best and worst lineups that can be constructed from those nine players. Using this tool, I supplied the ZiPS projections (Note: I really wanted to use PECOTA projections, but due to a computer disaster wasn’t able to; all I had on my other computer was ZiPS. Apparently, commentor JZach used PECOTA projections for his own experiment.) for the nine Mets most likely to play in the Mets lineup, alternately using Xavier Nady and Victor Diaz in right. Here’s the lineup I think Randolph is most likely to use, alongside the lineup I think most others would somewhat realistically like to see: Willie’s Other Jose Reyes Jose Reyes Paul LoDuca Carlos Beltran Carlos Beltran David Wright Carlos Delgado Carlos Delgado David Wright Cliff Floyd Cliff Floyd Nady/Diaz Nady/Diaz Paul LoDuca Kaz Matsui Kaz Matsui Pedro Martinez Pedro Martinez Willie’s lineup will score eight runs or so less than the other lineup over the course of a season, regardless of whether Nady or Diaz gets all the playing time. It’s not a huge difference, but every run counts. Here’s what the optimal lineup would look like: David Wright Carlos Delgado Nady/Diaz Carlos Beltran Cliff Floyd Paul LoDuca Kaz Matsui Jose Reyes Pedro Martinez A couple of items of note. First of all, there are two models available with Pinto’s tool, which give different lineups for the Mets. One uses a 1959-2004 sample size, and the other uses just 1998-2002 data. I used the 1959-2004 model for three reasons: it used the larger sample size, produced a more “traditional” lineup, and predicted a smaller difference in how many runs individual lineups would score. The smaller sampled model had a disparity of fifty or so runs between Willie’s lineup and the optimized lineup, which seemed a little too effective considering the players involved weren’t changing at all. I think the other model is just a “safer” choice. This lineup scored 13 more runs than the “Other” lineup and 21 more than “Willie’s.” Also, Matsui’s projections predicted a .339 OBP, but if he repeats last year’s numbers, he and LoDuca swap spots. The best hitters are hitting one-two, and third is something of a falloff, if not as severe as the other model. It picks up in the four-five spots, but six represents the second worst hitter in the lineup. Seven generally does a little better in the on-base department while eight a little better in power. The worst hitter still hits ninth (the more drastic model bats the pitcher eighth). It’s not too different from the usual sabermetric argument; the better hitters generally hit first, but they don’t strictly. Either way, it’s going to take a very progressive manager to use a lineup like the one above, and it won’t be Willie. Though, it would be fun to see what would happen if someone tried. 74 Responses to “Fun with Lineup Construction”Leave a ReplyYou must be logged in to post a comment. «« Friday Notes |
|
Looks like you just randomly picked names out of a hat, despite the lengthy explanation.
very cool alex, it actually makes so much sense but would be so awakward and untradtional, willie wouldnt be able 2 handle it, but maybe billy beane could get hsi manager 2 try it.
Alex I agree with you almost completetly. As a baseball fan this is something that i have always wondered. I never truely understood the virtue of stacking your best hitters together, while leaving the back end of the lineup wide open for outs. Also, the idea of a lead-off man is only guaranteed once in a game. However, i do understand that you protect your best hitters by surrounding them by each other, and that you are more likely to produce runs in bunches this way. I would love to see somebody finally go out on a limb and try this other method of arranging a batting order, it would be really interesting to see what happens. If the Mets for some reason fall out of the playoff race come mid tolate September (knock on wood), i wouldn’t complain if Willie tried this.
first thing I thought too.
I’m kinda sick of the lineup talk. We’ve been talking about it for a month and a half every thread, everyday. LEts just see what “mr. Wonderful” Willie randolph does.
great to see someone pick up on this topic (i.e. lineups from a statistical perspective). I’ll probably have more to say later, but the only (small) point I wanted to address was the comment above. Perhaps the reason Scotto (and my lineups from Friday) differed is that PECOTA projects this for 2006:
Wright: .299/.385/.530
Delgado: .279/.378/.525
Pretty shocking, huh? I could see OBP, but the SLG projection is really something.
I posted a comment in the previous thread about this, but since there’s a whole new thread on lineups, I’ll reiterate what I said before. The simulations before Morong pointed out that you want players with higher OBP’s to bat higher in the order so that they get more at-bats. A pretty simple idea. Morong’s simulation weighs the comparative benefits of OBP and SP in different positions in the lineup. Very cool idea, but not that much less simplistic than previous simulations.
A traditional lineup is made with so many more considerations that just OBP and SP. Speed (i.e. how many bases a guy can move over on a single), lefty-righty combos, etc. are all important variables that obviously have an impact on how many runs are scored but which aren’t taken into account by the models. If sabermatricians want to be taken seriously on this, they’ll need to take into account a whole lot more variables that OBP and SP.
Plus, there’s another serious problem with Morong’s simulation — it only works if it uses a random sample of hitters in the lineup. But the stats relied on were actual batting lineups from the past which weren’t constructed randomly. It could just be that there’s less of a variance for batters in the third hole, since that’s where managers generally put their best hitters. For example, if every batter in the third hole used in constructing the model had similar stats, then their contribution would be undervalued.
Makes sense.
I’ve always thought that the best lineups were the ones with no easy outs. I guess if you can’t eliminate the easy outs, you can at least do your best to eliminate those “dead spots” in the lineup.
Does anyone agree with that? People sick of seeing 8-9-1? People who have played?
It still doesn’t sit well with me to bat your best guy #2, and your worst #3, but the rest of the theory makes a certain amount of sense, regardless of whether or not it would actually work in practice.
Not really. Wright is second to Cabrera in his age group and Delgado, although still extremely productive, is no longer in his prime.
Yeah this analysis model is insufficient.
The effect on defense (incl. pitching) is not taken into account from what I can see. Also, total runs scored per year is a terrible predictor of winning a particular game.
When you’re up against an ace pitcher, you want to play for your best case scenario in just a couple of innings out of nine. Because that’s all you’re likely to get.
And with your best case scenario coming true, you can knock out that pitcher and clean up mightily in the pen.
Nice idea though, I was musing on similar lines this week without knowing about any of this. Thanks for the report.
To the post right above, there’s absolutely nothing that’s a good predictor of winning a particular game. Baseball’s most dominant team generally loses more than a third of the time. That’s just the way the game bounces. That said, total runs scored per year is a pretty good demonstrator that one lineup is, in some way, more effective than the other. Even though lineup use does not predict victory, you’d presumably want to have every advantage you can give your team, so figuring out a model for your lineup to score the most amount of runs seems like someone one would want to do.
Anyway I have a question about the models you used for this exercise. They don’t predict pitcher reaction to the lineup, right? Like that someone would be pitched around more often in a certain lineup than another, thereby thinning out their SLG.
I hate willie more than most, but something struck me with peeder’s comment, and it made me look back at Alex’s article (which I loved, btw, Alex, I saw this posted a couple of other places, and I think your synopsis of the tool is great), anyway, one thing the tool doesn’t consider is leftie/rightie matchups. Bear with me, because this may take a few sentences to explain why Willie might be doing something right. Certainly you’d want to tailor your lineup to the starting pitcher you’re facing, based on whether he’s a leftie or a rightie. So, by alternating players in the mets lineup, having leftie-rightie-leftie-rightie, this gives the lineup a more balanced look throughout, making the outs less clustered in specific spots. A batter’s splits are usually significant, there’s a .135 split between David Wright’s leftie OPS and rightie OPS, and I don’t want to go through the whole team’s splits, but you can see what I’m getting at. If one of the things the tool focuses on is distributing outs, like Alex pointed out, then Willie’s approach to filling out the lineup card (at least in-so-far as it distributes the outs well by alternating leftie-rightie, given the splits are different for the arm of the pitcher), so my guess is Willie’s lineup card beats the tools’ projections for it.
Now what would be interesting is if somebody isolated the splits of each player on the mets, and found the best lineup vs. righties, and the best lineup vs. lefties, and see how different each are. I may do the grunt work later and post it here, I think the results would be at least interesting. I’ll run willie’s lineup, compare it to the best lineup the tool lists, then I’ll compare it to the non leftie/rightie adjusted projections.
sorry, pulled an all-nighter, didn’t proofread that, the last sentence of the first paragraph isn’t even a sentence. What I meant to say is that Willie’s lineup card should beat the tool’s projections for it because if one accounts for a players splits, the lineup will be more balanced throughout, and more conducive to scoring.
perfect storm
1 Jose Reyes 2. Kaz Matsui 3.Carlos Beltran 4. Carlos Delgado 5.David
Wright. 6. Cliff Floyd 7.Diaz/Nady 8.Paul Loduca 9. Pedrto Martinez
I believe Kaz will have his breakout year providing he stays healthy.
^Only thing i dont like about that is if u have kaz batting 2nd, you are pushing floyd down to 6th. Id rather move kaz down to 7th or 8th and move everyone up a spot. Im not as convinced as you are about kaz.
Is it just me, or has everybody missed one important real baseball factor here. The intentional walk? The best hitters are grouped 3-4-5-6 to give them an opportunity to see good strikes. With this new-age line-up how many strikes are Delgado or Floyd gonna see? With Reyes’ propensity to swing at everything, why throw him a strike with Pedro on deck? The “book” is used bacause it’s worked for 100+ years. If there was a better way don’t you think someone would have tried it?
“Looks like you just randomly picked names out of a hat, despite the lengthy explanation”
Um, it seems to me the article speaks for itself.
“Tradition is the albatross on the neck of progress.”
Speaking of the book, MGL and TangoTiger sent me an email about their new book which ironically enough is about “The Book.” If you like to discuss baseball strategies using numbers or if you just wanted to know whether or not following the rules of “the book” is the best decision, this is a must read. You can read more about it here.
I was not implying that nobody should ever change. I was referring to the part of the book that says “why pitch to Carlos Delgado with Nagy on deck?” We not talking about the same game Tris Speaker played, but some things don’t change.
Static regression analysis isn’t a good way to construct a lineup. You need to use something much more dynamic, like a simulator or Markov chains. Even Cyril has said he didn’t intend his analysis to be turned into guidelines for constructing a lineup.
Speaking of the book, MGL and TangoTiger sent me an email about their new book which ironically enough is about “The Book.” If you like to discuss baseball strategies using numbers or if you just wanted to know whether or not following the rules of “the book” is the best decision, this is a must read. You can read more about it here.
The current “book” is not the one that’s always been used.
The current “book” largely came about in the 50s- and lead to a decrease NOT an increase in run scoring- which makes you wonder what on earth people were doing-
Some prominant teams put speedy base stealing middle infielders at leadoff (Whitsox with Aparicio- Dodgers with Maury Wills)- and those teams won, or sometimes not basestealing but still perceived as speedy middle infielders (like Bobby Richardson on the Yankees) batting first- those teams were successful- so that became the ideal model to many people (even though looking at those teams on BBref it’s pretty clear they won despite batting someone leadoff who while they were good overall players, had no business batting leadoff).
Of course sometimes a speedy middle infielder really is a good leadoff man (ie: Joe Morgan- who usually hit 2nd but you get the idea, or Alomar before he aged overnight and joined the Mets)
Personally I think a lot of lineup schemes, roster construction schemes can work- if done well and with good players. I think the quality of the players is more important than lineup contruction, bullpen usage, etc. (Though an extreme example like Wille R. may be an exception to that).
This idea was also advanced year’s ago by Bill James- he noted that teams arrange their lineup to maximize the # of runs scored when their leadoff man bats first- also known as the first inning. The result he claimed was that the 2nd inning was often the least productive- and the 1st & 2nd innings combined averaged less than the average inning- meaning traditional roster construction was “wrong”.
Of course it could just be that starting pitchers are most effective their 1st time through the lineup- especially going through the weaker 2nd half of the line up- usually in the second inning- when they might have developed whatever rythmn they are going to have for that start.
Ive also noticed the opposite tho with some really good pitchers…..either u get them early, or u dont get them at all. I guess it really just depends on the pitcher.
Here’s a link to an outstanding article on lineup construction:
http://www.retrosheet.org/Research/RuaneT/lineup_art.htm
In it, Tom finds that lineup construction just doesn’t matter a whole lot. But, in keeping with the theme here, he does find that the most optimal lineup would switch the typical #2 and #3 batters, as well as the #4 and #5 batters.
I think the lineup should be:
Reyes
Beltran
Delgado
Wright
Floyd
Boone (I am assuming he will win the job. If not drop to 8)
Diaz/Nady
LoDuca
studes has it going in the right direction.
For an in depth study of what’s involved, read “The Compleat Strategist” by Williams. This is an early work on “Game Theory”. In a few words, if you have a .500 hitter and a .250 hitter, you do not bat the .500 hitter all the time for the best result. You bat him twice as often as the .250 hitter. Sounds counterintuitive, but read the book and do the math. The only way to do the correct lineup job is to run the simulations. The optimal lineup should, in general, be different for each pitcher faced, but hitters are humans, not machines. They might not take well to being shifted around the lineup.
You’d think that after a hundred years of playing professional baseball, that “the Book” would be right way more often than it is wrong. I realize doing something simply because “that’s how its always been done” is a horrible way of doing things, but baseball isn’t like most business or social organizations.
In business, there are lots of companies that do well enough, or tread water, and persist despite not being optimal. In baseball, though, wouldn’t it stand to reason that there is only one team per season that truly succeeds? And since your record is on such public display, that winning might take precedence over “the Book”? That some manager, desperate to win, wouldn’t have tried something similar to this already?
Its an interesting debate… too bad we’ll never really know. Like someone mentioned earlier, this type of strictly mathemetical analysis can’t truly get to the bottom of it.
it is- but what is the “book”
It used to be that rotations were 4 man- now it’s 5.
It used to be that you never ever attempted to steal with a lead more than 3 runs.
What if someone does something different and it fails? In baseball, unless you have a solid and recognized record of success you are doomed-you will be canned so fast your head spins- but if you slavishly follow the “book” you can hang around for years even if you are a failure (See Jeff Torborg).
Some 20 years ago, the Angels were looking for a lead-off hitter. Their manager (a veteran manager Gene Mauch) decided to try something radical- Brian Downing a converted catcher palying in the OF- who ran like you’d expecta catcher to run.- But he got on base and had extra base power- he scored 109 runs the Angels won 93 games and the division. Genius right? Well the media thought Mauch was getting eccentric in his old age and that the Angels had won the division in spite of “not having a lead off man”
MacNamara took over for Mauch and Downing no longer lead off- after going 81-81 in 1984- MacNamara was canned and replaced with Mauch (again) the Angels won 84 games in 1985 with Downing leading off- and having and year too, then in 1986 Downing scored 90 runs batting 2nd then 110 runs in 1987 (at which time he was a DH).
So veteran well respected manager sticks a leadfooted ex-catcher in the leadoff spot- and it works- the result? He’s regarded as eccentric, and no one copies him.
Teams toyed with the idea of a closer/relief ace for decades- it seems like a good idea to us- but it took decades to catch on.
Baseball is a slow sport. When an idea sticks, it sticks for a long time- when an idea fails to catch on? Well that generally doesn’t prove it’s a bad idea.
jpwf dropping the knowledge. I love it. I happen to agree, which helps, but its a good example anyway.
Um, thanks for your insight, look up ‘despite’. Suddenly the king of all nerds chimes in (respectfully), and all gets quiet.
Thanks for the article, studes. And I agree that the method isn’t great for figuring out what’s the optimal lineup, as it does fail to capture many of the dynamics of the game. But, I do think that the lesson it serves (spreading around the outs) is a useful thing to highlight, even if it is only useful to a lesser degree.
Don’t forget Wade Boggs - lead-off batter for the mid-late 80’s Red Sox.
While I agree with the proposition that line-up construction might be in for some tweaking, there are definite things that this model cannot take into play:
1) Protection in the line-up. Someone touched on it before, but no one will pitch to Delgado if Wright is on second and super high strikeout machine Diaz is on deck.
2) Who are Wright and Delgado going to drive in? The “optimal” line-up has Wright hitting behind the four worst OBP hitters in the line-up. So, while you maximize his ABs by having him hit first, wouldn’t you want someone on base for your best hitter to drive in?
3) The importance of scoring first. It’s not nearly as important as football, but there is something to be said for plating 2 runs in the first inning — especially if your ace is on the mound. How does the opposing team feel to be behind 2-0 and know it is facing Pedro? The reason you “front load” the line-up is score early. (Although this argues for the “optimal” line up.
I actually do like the idea of Reyes hitting 8th. Hell, if he isn’t going to see any strikes, tell him to keep the bat on his shoulder. I have no problem with him walking infront of the pitcher — that should get him to third in three pitches!
all i really want to see at this point is Kaz Matsui in the opening Day lineup so he can hit his annual first at-bat home run.
The problem with Reyes batting 8th (or any speed demon for that matter) is that it limits his chances to steal.
While in the short term, I think it would be good for him. He would be forced to be more selective because 8th place hitters see less strikes (While Victor Diaz’s overall OBP was .329, it was .404 in the 8 hole!) it takes away his ability to steal.
With 2 outs an 8th place hitter will not attempt to steal. If an 8th place hitter is thrown out trying to steal with 2 outs, the pitcher leads off the next inning. Also a pitcher will be more likely to pitch out since he will not be concerned about running a deep count against a pitcher.
Randymachoman, you’re right; the other variables need to be taken into account, but this offers a good (if not different) perspective on where to start. (Sorry to all for the long post…got a little carried away here.)
I’m going to pick up on your “speed” issue for a moment, since I think it gets to the core of the issue on whether Reyes should be batting 1st or 8th (it makes sense that these are basically the ONLY two possibilities people are throwing out there, highlighting the arguments for and against having speed vs. OBP at the top of a lineup…especially since he is the best basestealer in the league and among the worst OBP guys in the league. How perfectly devisive a batter!)
It seems to me there are two compenents to “speed”: what you do on the bases before the ball is hit (i.e. Stolen Bases, Caught Stealing, Picked Off) and what you do on the bases after the ball is hit (i.e. 1st to 3rd on a single, 2nd to home on a single, 1st to home on a double, getting thrown out on the bases). How do we quantify this? Well, both have precident in various articles.
POST-HIT SPEED:
In the Hardball Times Baseball Annual and also here, there is an excellent article by Dan Fox on expected bases advanced versus actual bases advanced. Using league averages on people going from first-to-third or second-to-home on a single, and first-to-home on a double, Dan figures out who the “best” baserunners were in 2004 and 2005 and how many additional runs they contributed.
Four things jumped out at me from the Hardball Times book:
1) The Mets had two of the top three baserunners IN THE ENTIRE LEAGUE in 2005.
2) NEITHER of those baserunners was Jose Reyes. (Can you guess who they were?)
3) Carlos Delgado is one of the “more conservative” (read: worst) baserunners in the game.
4) Even having one of the best baserunning teams in 2005, the Mets probably only got 1 extra win TOTAL from their prowess on the bases, and certainly no more than 1/3 of a win from any given player.
The verdict: while it is probably a good idea to put a good baserunner before a bad baserunner, all other stats being equal (perhaps Wright before Delgado since in most other ways they are very similar offensive players), it doesn’t make much of a difference in the long haul and even the guys who “clog the basepaths” and the ones who “take the extra base” don’t make a big difference.
PRE-HIT SPEED:
Okay, so that leaves stolen bases which do make a difference and where Jose Reyes is among the Mets both in total number AND steal percentage, a rare duo since most people that steal more bases also get thrown out at a higher rate. Quantifying this is more difficult.
There is a good article here that discusses the principle of measuring the value of a stolen base (an ex-Met makes an appearance!). But I think that when you consider a single player, you can’t just disregard his ability to steal 3rd vs. 2nd, thus you can’t say that he needs a 75% success rate to be successful (as the article does). How about we basically take the actual total value of his steals? I’m sure there is a way to establish a “replacement level” value for the event, but unlike most offensive categories, I’m not so sure the replacement level is anything more than “don’t do anything.”
I don’t have time right now to go figure out what that number is for Reyes, but I did find a few interesting things about situational stealing using the most recent Baseball Prospectus run matrix (note: there are all sorts of strategic issues that come into play, but assume that we don’t mind “killing a rally” and that the batter at the plate is league average).
Stolen base notes (with values to follow):
1) The best situations to attempt a steal - or at least the ones where you are allowed a lower success rate - are “steal 3rd with one out” and “steal 2nd with 2 outs.” In both of these situations, players only need to be successful at around a 2-to-1 rate to add value.
2) NEVER steal third with 2 outs. A player would need 17 successes to cancel out the one time he is caught.
3) Stealing third with 0 outs is a high risk, high reward situation (obviously), with a swing of over one expected run depending on success/failure. Successes gain you .37 of an expected run, but failures erase .86 expected runs. That said, a 70% success rate in those situations will lead to a overall positive effect (though the 3 out of 10 failures will likely be remembered by the fan base more).
4) Presuming that you are okay with “killing a rally” (which basestealing generally risks anyway) double steals only need to be successful 3 out of 5 times - 60% success rate - to add value, less if they try to get the trailing runner. (SIDE NOTE: This could be a strong argument to having your 7-8 hitters be bad hitters but good basestealers because you might not really killing any rallies with a double steal attempt. You count on the top six guys to bat each other in, while the bottom two and the pitcher manufacture a run at a time.)
5) Don’t try to steal a base on Yadir Molina. As one example of many in the league, Reyes was 1 for 5 (20%) against YMolina and 59 for 70 (84%) against everyone else.
Okay, enough for now, but this could make a really good MetsGeek discussion since it seems to lie at the core of “The Lineup Debate.” I’ll try to see if I can compile Reyes’s total value added on Stolen Bases to see if it counteracts his terrible OBP (I suspect not, but randymachoman is right that we should try).
Outs, Base Aimed For — SB% Needed — Exp. Runs Added
0 out, 2nd — 71.9% — .24
1 out, 2nd — 75.6% — .14
2 out, 2nd — 67.7% — .11
0 out, 3rd — 69.7% — .37
1 out, 3rd — 66.9% — .29
2 out, 3rd — 94.2% — .02
Success Rate Needed if they throw to Third on a Double Steal
0 out — 57.9% — .57
1 out — 53.0% — .50
2 out — 73.0% — .16
Success Rate Needed if they throw to Second on a Double Steal
0 out — 46.3% — .57
1 out — 52.0% — .50
2 out — 73.0% — .16
I say Cammy b/c is a great base runner (if he had enough ABs last year) and Beltran, even though his steals were down, he still was great at taking the extra base.
My fall back picks are Cairo (the only thing he could do well was run the bases, but he was never on them!) and Wright.
I agree with your description of Jose, but I disagree that he hits 1st or 8th. If you really want to see him manufacture runs with his speed, put him at the 7th spot with a could contact hitter (Lo Duca) behind him. Think this way, if he gets on with 0 outs. He can steal second. Now he scores on any hit or advances to third on almost all outs (could be bunted to 3rd late in the game). Say he advances to third on ground out to second, so he is at 3rd with 1 out. Time for a squeeze bunt. Reyes scores, no hits.
Putting him in the 8th spot takes too much away from his most potent weapon — his speed. Plus, Reyes hits better with RISP; so maybe moving him to 7th will help him improve his plate discipline.
Reyes Career:
.277 / .303 / .395
Reyes Career RISP:
.296 / .324 / .446
Reyes Career Runners on:
.287 / .323 /.415
I like putting Lo Duca behind Reyes, only at the bottom of the line-up, not the top!
i still like Reyes #1. But if you have to move him down I agree to put him in front of LoDuca. Problem is if someone is on ahead of him…he’ll be stuck. Plus he’ll never be on with Wright up unless Wright is 1 or 2.
anyone see this?
Willis for Milledge? In a heartbeat. The only player in baseball I take that risk…
So the pitcher hits 3rd? Thats really thinking out of the box. I’m sure Cox would love to manage v you.
Um, it would take MUCH more than Lastings Milledge to get Willis or Cabrera. Try Milledge and Reyes… realize Cabrera is a better player than David Wright, for funk’s sake!
Yeah, no. Not until Cabrera can prove he can play 3rd base for a full season. If he does, we can talk. Until then, Wright is much more valuable than Cabrera, even considering the fact Cabrera has a bit more power than Wright.
I’d like to make a quick side note about the #1 spot in the batting order and why you want a leadoff hitter there. I continually hear the line “Having the leadoff hitter in the #1 spot is so overrated because he’s only quaranteed to leadoff a hitter once a game” and it really annoys me.
Look, the idea of the leadoff hitter is NOT necessarily that he will lead off an inning. The idea of a leadoff hitter is that he’s a guy that will get on base in front of your big hitters and possibly steal a base or two so that your big hitters don’t necessarily need to hit an extra base hit to drive in a run. Regardless of whether this happens with none out or with two outs, you’re still getting a runner on in front of a guy that might hit a towering two run homer that changes a game as opposed to a solo shot that doesn’t really mean anything.
I know this sounds elementary but people seem to miss this fact a lot.
PLEASE.
Cabrera is marginally better than Wright right now, except for the fact that Cabrera can’t play a lick of defense at any position. Reportedly his third base defense is better than his outfield defense, but I’m not convinced. They’re the same age, and they’re both fantastic hitters.
Besides, if they would be forced to trade Cabrera because of salary constraints, thats another restriction on his trade value. If I had the choice today to take one of them, I’d take David, and I wouldn’t feel bad about it.
To qualify that last statement:
Cabrera 2004-2005, BA/OBP/SLG
.294/.366/.512
.323/.385/.561
Wright 2004-2005, BA/OBP/SLG
.293/.332/.525
.306/.388/.523
Cabrera has the leg up, but they’ve had similar career paths. It’s going to be a blessing watching the two of them (most likely) dominate the NL for the next ten years, but if I had my choice, I’d take Wright simply because of his defensive advantage and superior work ethic.
Thank you, that’s exactly right.
According to WARP/VORP, Cabrera was the second best LF in the majors behind Jason Bay. So any defensive misgivings were overshadowed by his monstrous offensive talent.
Miggy’s only playing third because Jeremy Hermida, another young stud, is playing left.
On the Mets, he’d play left.
Until the Dodgers and Angels decide they want him… along with any other team with good sense.
I happen to agree with you, for a variety of reasons:
1. Defense
2. Speed (Baserunning)
3. Alleged steroid use (In Cabrera’s case, HGH .)
4. Attitude (Wright has tremendous makeup and has proven he can play in NYC.)
From Mets.com:
“Though he was throwing in the mid-90’s, touching 100 mph now and again, Lindstrom felt numbing pain in his pitching arm that made his control erratic . . . Healthy and pain-free, Lindstrom is ready to get back on track as one of the Mets’ top relief prospects.”
From the Daily News:
“He had 74 strikeouts in 54-1/3 innings last season at Single-A St. Lucie while occasionally hitting 100 mph. GM Omar Minaya brought up Owens‘ name yesterday when asked which player in camp merited watching among the less publicized players. Manager Willie Randolph added that Owens has a legitimate shot to make the bullpen.”
Two more reasons to doubt the value of acquiring Julio, whose main claim of worth is velocity. Let’s cross our fingers on Maine…
Every ST they hype kids and say they have a shot, when they have none. Lindstrom and Owens, will not make the team and esp w WR will be lucky to ever break in during his (brief?!) tenure as manager. Don’t get too pumped. every manager gives the kids hopes but seldom deliver.
Don’t worry, I’m not counting on Lindstrom and Owens saving our ‘06 bullpen or anything. I hear ya on the false “opportunities” and ST hype. Just grumbling about Julio, really. I don’t expect him to provide much more than a minor-leaguer with comparable velocity likely would.
I agree that Lindstrom has no chance at all to make the club, but I think Owens will get a look. They have soured on Heath Bell so he could take his spot on the team. From what I read alot of the other guys are saying his delievery is like coming out of his neck so they might give him a long look so he could have a chance at making it over a few of the other guys.
Nails reporting from port st lucie
Kaz was smacking the ball and fielding grounders well.
I don’t think boone has a chance
He looks a lot smaller.
Milledge is smaller than you think in person.
Delgado was very talkative during infield practice. seems like a really cool guy and leader.
what makes me worried?
watching Zambrano throw.
sorry fellas he just don’t look good at all.
Hey nails thanks for the report. Any pitchers stand out to you at all that maybe we would not be thinking about? Also how did Matsuis’ throwing look?
hey rich…
kaz looked flawless in fielding today.
I saw julio throw off the mound
jorge throws heat but his fielding off the mound was the worse I saw maybe he will be better in a couple days.
I only saw a few pitchers throw. Lima looked better than Zamb. I saw Pelfreys pickoff move but i didn’t see him throw.
Julio Franco also was talkative and feels like a leader too. I saw francos BP he was doing well.
Reyes seem to have trouble laying down a bunt in BP.
Good to hear about Kaz, maybe his personal trainer from Japan is helping him alot with everything. Not good to hear that Lima looked better than Zambrano. How long will you be at the camp and how many more reports can we look forward too?
Falling down drunk I’d be better than VZ, and I’m at best a weak hitting mid inf. Thanks Nails, soak up some rays man. You see Straw? He sports the same shades as me. He looks like he’d beat out Diaz/Nady still.
FireWillie, thanx for making me laugh my ass off with that line, the sad part is, you are probably telling the truth lol.
Anytime, what else are we here for if not for that?
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/story/395513p-335299c.html
Emad wakes up early for synth org and read this:
*sigh* FW’s gonna be pissed.
The man is too stupid to get pissed about it anymore, I’m numb to the fact already. I wish Julio Franco would just punch him in the head already and jiggle whatever brain he has left and hope he makes sense after a while. The guy is way too inflexible, fir the idiot now. They’ve got all the minor coaches in camp now, pick one and lets roll.
How pathetic thought that he does that fat cook’s “bam” in talking about DW?
The key questions EMad: were you pissed? And when did Emad refer to Emad in the same way Rickey refers to Rickey? Always? Fire Willie likes.
You see where he justifies CB in the 3 for us by saying his 2 experience w HOU was w Bagwell and Berkman protecting him??!! Uh dude, Bagwell and Berkamn have nothing on Wright and Delgado! WTF!
before last year, i wondered why randolph was turned down from getting hired as manager by so
many clubs. clubs that would have loved to improve their image, and pick up a Black manager who has been around baseball all his life.
i have no doubt anymore why he was rejected. randolph is a complete idiot, moron and someone with a
baseball IQ of less then 80.
he is a disgrace and should be banned from baseball.
Clearly!
Willie seems to think Wright would crumble under the pressure of batting #3/#4. Nothing i’ve seen supports this supposition. When you are one of the best players in baseball under age 25 and hit .306 your first full season, brother, a mere change in lineup position will only result in more AB’s and consequently, a higher RBI total.
Just to rub more salt in the wound:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4409
*shrugs* It’s my changeup.
Interesting to see this lineup theory come up again. Back in the early days of sabermetrics there was a theory that you should start a lineup with 3-4, take the guys who would traditionally bat 1-2 and put them at the bottom and bat your weakest hitter 7th. The idea being:
- Your two best hitters get the most at bats.
- You can always pinch hit for your weakest hitter with the game on the line.
I still think that works best in a DH situation, where you’re not putting a .111 hitter in the 7 hole. But here’s how it would look:
Sorry about that - looks like I had some serious block-quote issues there. Must have left in an extra command somewhere…
The article said DW batted 40 times in the 7 hole. Anyone have the stat of lineup spot for BOTH last yr vs the yr before. I want to compare Howe’s usage of DW v WR’s. I recall Howe batting DW cleanup on occasion, something I think took guts and it paid off. Those who bash Howe, he got more out of DW than WR pussy-ass has.
Oberkfell wouldn’t be so cautious either, he knows what he can do
For what it is worth:
Thanks Marty. I was meaning 3rd when I said cleanup, that impressed me about Howe that he didn’t shy away from DW’s talent. Listen to WR try to justify is pathetic.
I know it was only 4 games, but how the hell do you justify bringing him out of the 3 slot last yr ~~ oh thats right, he wanted ‘his guy’ in the 3 hole bc he is an ahole.
While we are on it, if we (WR) are so intent on Beltran batting 3rd, why don’t we bat David Wright 2nd.
He is selective and patient at the plate, so Reyes will have oportunities to steal;
Has a high OBP;
Runs well so he won’t clog up the bases;
Likes to hit to RF;
And if he sees a lot more fastballs, will do significant damage (as opposed to Lo Duca’s singles);
And finally, I would rather Wright get an extra AB a game as opposed to Lo Duca
randolph reminds me of the old peter sellers movie “Being There”.
has randolph ever made a comment that doesn’t make one cringe.
his rationale on making decisions is most of the time idiotic.
its funny how randolph wants credit for batting wright 7th for half the season. is randolph
out of his mind. i truly believe randolph is out of touch with reality.
like peter sellers in Being There, i believe that randolph is really a moron with a 50 IQ trying to
manage major league baseball. he is beyond pathetic.
if anything is going to hold back the Mets this year from making the playoffs, it going to be Randolph.
he hurts the team more then if the team were on autopilot, without a manager at all.
he is cutoff from reality. he probably doesn’t know how to read. doesn’t know anything about
statistics. its a complete travesty having randolph as manager of the NY Mets.
I’m glad someone else sees it too, I’m not that insane (although I hear sound effects when he moves his head from side to side; that could be an indication). It seems that alot of people don’t think its that bad, and I have come to agree. Its worse. Nice movie contrast, I thought watching that movie was akin to pulling teeth, exactly what its like hearing/dealing w Wilie.
Could not agree anymore. The guy is a complete moron, has no sense of todays players and what is best for the team. I wish the yankees would just call up and want him back and watch him ruin that team. I really wish he could be replaced and soon.
Basically, WR is going to use Wright, Beltran, and Lo Duca in the wrong spots no matter what happens
My ideal lineup:
Reyes - hes too fast not to
Beltran - All good stats batting 2nd, plus extreme speed at 1 & 2
Wright - I just love him
Delgado - Obviously
Floyd - Obviously
Nady/Diaz/Lastings - 33% chance of greatness
Kaz - Im feeling a nice year now that he has absolutely no pressure
Pitcher
Another big question is who gets the DH? Do you add either Nady/Diaz, or put Julio at 1B and let Delgado DH, or maybe let a Floyd DH and put Nady/Diaz?
Guess i forgot Lo Duca. Man he is going to be horrible. My ideal lineup he will be batting 7th after Nady/Diaz/Lastings
Got a question for you crazy kids with your crazy lineup construction/runs predictor tool things. In the situation where we would have Reyes at leadoff and Beltran second, what is the effective difference between Wright at 3 and Delgado at 4, or vice versa (with Floyd-RF-LoDuca-2B-pitcher to follow)? I like the idea of Wright at cleanup to break up the lefties, and while I don’t actually think this would ever happen, I’m curious.