Popular MLB ARGUMENT: Best hitter on team should?

[Gyno]

Popular MLB argument:

Where should the best batter on team hit in lineup?


Some think he should leadoff because that means the most possible ABs. Some believe the best batter should hit 2nd. Most people believe having them hit 3rd.

What do you think?

 

[tipyerbartender1]

Lead off.

 

[dudleysdad]

Think this was discussed before on here. I think ur best hitter should lead off, get as many AB's as possible.
Plus I have experience with this when I used to make my teams beer league lineup lol. That's the way I did it

 

[BetCrimes1984]

Best hitter usually means power hitter, which usually means best HR threat. Since you want such a guy to ideally come up with runner/s on base, I'd have him bat at least 2nd. Ideally you've got 2 guys who aren't far behind your best/power hitter = also good chances of getting on base. If so, I'd have them before him, to have as many guys on base as poss. when the best HR chance comes to the plate (= bat him 3rd). Batting him 1st - esp. in the NL with the pitcher's spot last - means a poor batter was up for the previous AB = chance of him getting on base to cash in on a potentially HR hit next AB negligible.

If a team's best hitter isn't a real HR threat, then I can certainly see having him in front of whoever is the best HR threat (therefore batting 1st/2nd).

 

[tipyerbartender1]

You're not in control of who comes up when, other than the first inning. Give your best hitters the most chances. Little league, big leagues. Math.

 

[dudleysdad]

Best hitter usually means power hitter, which usually means best HR threat. Since you want such a guy to ideally come up with runner/s on base, I'd have him bat at least 2nd. Ideally you've got 2 guys who aren't far behind your best/power hitter = also good chances of getting on base. If so, I'd have them before him, to have as many guys on base as poss. when the best HR chance comes to the plate (= bat him 3rd). Batting him 1st - esp. in the NL with the pitcher's spot last - means a poor batter was up for the previous AB = chance of him getting on base to cash in on a potentially HR hit next AB negligible.

If a team's best hitter isn't a real HR threat, then I can certainly see having him in front of whoever is the best HR threat (therefore batting 1st/2nd).

Is that a fact or opinion that best hitters are power hitters?
Most guys that hit for power strike out a ton too

 

[Schrute]

How do you define best hitter?

 

[tipyerbartender1]

Love Kip at lead-off. Tribe kind of stumbled into it, Bourn stunk, and Kip's going too good to move him. But they still try to shoehorn 2-hole hitters in there, Lindor lately. Just bat Brantley there.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

OPS isn't a bad measure.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

To take this to the extreme, yes, I would bat Babe Ruth at 1.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

This is one of my two axes to grind. The best hitters aren't placed in the right spot in the order.

#2. The best relief pitchers aren't used at the best times.

Another Tribe example. A rain delay spurred the idea. Cody Allen was recently brought into the game with traffic on the bases in the 5th or 6th inning, AFTER a 2-hour delay, he got the job done, Shaw ended up with a save. Tito's reasoning was that he was loose, situation was unique ... it's unique to be in hot water in a tight game in the middle of the game????

Use your best reliever when you need him. If the game's on the line in the 6th, you might not have the luxury of having much of a game in the 9th.

 

[Schrute]

This is one of my two axes to grind. The best hitters aren't placed in the right spot in the order.

#2. The best relief pitchers aren't used at the best times.

Another Tribe example. A rain delay spurred the idea. Cody Allen was recently brought into the game with traffic on the bases in the 5th or 6th inning, AFTER a 2-hour delay, he got the job done, Shaw ended up with a save. Tito's reasoning was that he was loose, situation was unique ... it's unique to be in hot water in a tight game in the middle of the game????

Use your best reliever when you need him. If the game's on the line in the 6th, you might not have the luxury of having much of a game in the 9th.

I'll admit you know a lot more about baseball than I do

However aren't closers historically nutjobs. Do you think it could screw them up if you break their routine and all of a sudden start throwing them somewhat randomly? Maybe not or maybe closers should just be abandoned all together and you should have BP guy #1, #2, #3, etc

 

[gmenftw]

I say 3. Leadoff should be a good OB% guy. Maybe not the best pure hitter but scrappy, fast, works counts for walks, gets wood on the ball more often than not. Hitters behind him to drive them in. What good is it to have your best hitter first? He hits a double and gets stranded, or he comes up with no one on base due to crap at the bottom of the order. Rather give him 4 ABs with runners on than 5 with no one on.

 

[BenchCoach]

I say 3. Leadoff should be a good OB% guy. Maybe not the best pure hitter but scrappy, fast, works counts for walks, gets wood on the ball more often than not. Hitters behind him to drive them in. What good is it to have your best hitter first? He hits a double and gets stranded, or he comes up with no one on base due to crap at the bottom of the order. Rather give him 4 ABs with runners on than 5 with no one on.

:shake:

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I'll admit you know a lot more about baseball than I do

However aren't closers historically nutjobs. Do you think it could screw them up if you break their routine and all of a sudden start throwing them somewhat randomly? Maybe not or maybe closers should just be abandoned all together and you should have BP guy #1, #2, #3, etc

Some closers don't pitch well in non-save situations. Some closers don't like inheriting runners. Fuck those guys, pitching is pitching.

The specialty of "closing" has made guys money and fueled the debate, but the teams can change that in a hurry. Pay a guy for his ability to sit batters down, not for when he sits batters down.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I say 3. Leadoff should be a good OB% guy. Maybe not the best pure hitter but scrappy, fast, works counts for walks, gets wood on the ball more often than not. Hitters behind him to drive them in. What good is it to have your best hitter first? He hits a double and gets stranded, or he comes up with no one on base due to crap at the bottom of the order. Rather give him 4 ABs with runners on than 5 with no one on.

If we reset the order every inning, you're on point.

 

[dudleysdad]

Where would u guys have Ryan Howard bat?

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I don't have a lot of use for Ryan Howard in my line-up. I need base runners. Base runners move the needle more than power.

 

[guaranteeed]

math says 2

 

[tipyerbartender1]

Math never really tried my way.

 

[hugh613]

Where would u guys have Ryan Howard bat?

Lehigh

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I want traffic on the bases, and I want to maximize the chance. I prefer a runner at first, maybe second, pressure on the defense. Over wishing for the Disney movie scenario of the best hitter coming up with the bases loaded.

 

[hugh613]

The one trend I hate is the pitcher batting 8th.

 

[hugh613]

I want traffic on the bases, and I want to maximize the chance. I prefer a runner at first, maybe second, pressure on the defense. Over wishing for the Disney movie scenario of the best hitter coming up with the bases loaded.

So you think your Indians lineup of the 90's would have been better off with Manny Ramirez or Joey Belle hitting leadoff? I can't even begin to imagine how many runs that would have cost you...

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I wouldn't do it, but I might do it if I batted my best hitter 1. Guy's gotta pitch a gem to bat 3X anyway.

 

[mrpickem]

How many games did Bonds leadoff? Never to my knowledge, Williams? Arod? Miggy? Never leadoff where on the other hand best batting avg/obp guys leadoff like Rose, Henderson, Carew. Yeah I know Bonds had highest OBP ever, but his number were just ridiculous with 75HR lol...in 2004 he had 230BB with 120 intentional. lol..Short answer isn't easy, depends on type hitter is your best, if he has power you gotta bat him 3-4 so he has guys on base.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

So you think your Indians lineup of the 90's would have been better off with Manny Ramirez or Joey Belle hitting leadoff? I can't even begin to imagine how many runs that would have cost you...

That line-up was loaded, fantasy land. Ramirez and Thome hit in the bottom 3rd of the order. Kenny Lofton had power. I would not have hit Vizquel at #2, but how can you quibble?

I'm talking most line-ups, now that pitchers are good again. Bryce Harper should lead off.

 

[hugh613]

How many games did Bonds leadoff? Never to my knowledge, Williams? Arod? Miggy? Never leadoff where on the other hand best batting avg/obp guys leadoff like Rose, Henderson, Carew. Yeah I know Bonds had highest OBP ever, but his number were just ridiculous with 75HR lol...in 2004 he had 230BB with 120 intentional. lol..Short answer isn't easy, depends on type hitter is your best, if he has power you gotta bat him 3-4 so he has guys on base.

Bonds hit leadoff when he first came up with the Pirates.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

How many games did Bonds leadoff? Never to my knowledge, Williams? Arod? Miggy? Never leadoff where on the other hand best batting avg/obp guys leadoff like Rose, Henderson, Carew. Yeah I know Bonds had highest OBP ever, but his number were just ridiculous with 75HR lol...in 2004 he had 230BB with 120 intentional. lol..Short answer isn't easy, depends on type hitter is your best, if he has power you gotta bat him 3-4 so he has guys on base.

I would lead off Miggy, Bonds ...

 

[tipyerbartender1]

Maybe not a super slow guy like Miggy. I'll give you that. But even that's overrated. I'd think long and hard about it in the AL.

 

[Gyno]

Let me ask this, where would you bat Trout?

 

[Gyno]

I agree it depends on the situation and who you have on roster.

 

[dudleysdad]

Let me ask this, where would you bat Trout?

First

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I'd lead him off. Trout is my ideal lead off hitter.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I'd consider not leading off with a slowpoke, but if the slowpoke hits a hard .300 … I want him up. Totally disagree with speculating about four at bats with guys on vs. 5 at bats without guys on. There is no forecast for this. Give me my best hitters, give me the most at bats, I'll take my chances. I don't want the game ending down one with Lindor at the plate, Brantley on deck.

 

[dudleysdad]

I'd lead him off. Trout is my ideal lead off hitter.

Agree

 

[guaranteeed]

Calhoun 1st
Trout 2nd

 

[tipyerbartender1]

Descending order of OBP. It's not rocket science. Base runners produce runs like geese produce poop.

 

[guaranteeed]

Trout hits too many extra base hits to have him bat 1st

leadoff hitter bats with no one on 44% of the time, next highest spot in the line is 36%

 

[guaranteeed]

a team's best hitter belongs in the No. 2 spot: It comes up about 2.5 percent more often over the course of a year, and generates more value with almost every way of reaching base due to who's typically on base and with how many outs. That is, a single or a double or a walk from the No. 2 hitter is worth more in run-scoring potential than the same event from a No. 3 hitter. The numbers are all very close, but the No. 2 hitter gets those extra 15 or so plate appearances a year, and the No. 3 hitter, on average, leads off the fewest number of innings, which is another reason not to put your highest OBP guy there.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

I want my leadoff hitter to hit extra base hits!! When's the last time you complained about your leadoff hitter hitting the ball hard? He leads off once a game.

 

[dudleysdad]

Trout hits too many extra base hits to have him bat 1st

leadoff hitter bats with no one on 44% of the time, next highest spot in the line is 36%

Too many extra base hits to lead off huh??

Can u ever go wrong with a double to start the inning?

 

[dudleysdad]

TiP its like to talking to a wall about this to some people

 

[tipyerbartender1]

a team's best hitter belongs in the No. 2 spot: It comes up about 2.5 percent more often over the course of a year, and generates more value with almost every way of reaching base due to who's typically on base and with how many outs. That is, a single or a double or a walk from the No. 2 hitter is worth more in run-scoring potential than the same event from a No. 3 hitter. The numbers are all very close, but the No. 2 hitter gets those extra 15 or so plate appearances a year, and the No. 3 hitter, on average, leads off the fewest number of innings, which is another reason not to put your highest OBP guy there.

This is hogwash. Baserunners and hard hit balls rattle a pitcher's cage.

 

[guaranteeed]

an extra base hit with a runner on = a run
extra base hit with no one on = nothing

if you bat Trout 2nd he has a runner on base for say 35-40% of his 1st at bat of the game depending on your leadoff hitter

he bats 1st the bases are empty every time

and as I put above the leadoff hitter has an 8% higher clip of at bats with no runners on base

its really simple math

2nd/3rd there's not a ton of difference although enough to make 2nd better, but 1st isnt an option for someone like Trout

perfect leadoff hitter is someone like Ichiro in his prime

 

[dudleysdad]

Simple math says teed
We are so dumb

 

[guaranteeed]

If you can get one more win a year from optimizing your lineup this way, with no downside whatsoever, shouldn't you do it? And shouldn't any manager who hits a guy with a career .283 OBP second (Cozart), ahead of a guy (Votto) with a career .417 OBP (.445 this year, .474 last year), be held accountable for that decision? Put your best hitter second, your next-best hitter fourth, your high-OBP/low-power guy first, and you get, in effect, free runs, maybe just a handful over the course of a season, but maybe that one marginal at-bat in the ninth inning turns into a very real, tangible win, the kind that teams are supposed to be pursuing anyway.
The conventional wisdom here is wrong, and all it took was a few guys to question it and look at the data to explain to us why.

 

[tipyerbartender1]

Ichiro was the best hitter. I want the best/scariest/most dangerous hitter to receive the most at bats, to pressure the pitcher and the defense. I don't want Hamilton striking out with a guy on 2nd, two outs, down one, and Votto on deck.

 

[guaranteeed]

the situation you are describing will happen with Votta at bat vs Hamilton at bat between 20-35x a year more if hes batting 2nd not 1st

 

[tipyerbartender1]

Votto is undoubtedly more likely to receive more plate appearances batting first than batting second, over the course of a game, week, season, career.