Constructing an Optimal Lineup
Is it safe to come out? Is Beane done? Well, now that we (maybe?) have a complete set of batters, we need an order to bat them in. Sure, there's a well-established conventional wisdom to this, but is it accurate? Is it really what's best for scoring runs? The introduction of heavy statistics into baseball has reversed and shaped countless managerial decisions in the last decade or so. Can it find an optimal lineup that gives us the best chance at scoring more runs? I'm sure a lot of you already know what I'm going to say in this post, but I'm going to take a stab at bringing the less sabermetrically inclined of us up to speed, keeping it simple and easy to understand. All figures come from The Book, by Tango, Lichtman, and Dolphin.
Before I start, though, I have to address one thing. The batting order really doesn't make as much of a difference in a team's offense as you might think. Assuming that we stay in the realm of reality and throw out any obviously ridiculous lineups that will never happen (batting Holliday and Pujols 8th and 9th, for example), the difference between a bad lineup and a good lineup is only about a handful of runs over the course of the entire season. That being said, why not try and squeeze all of the runs we can get out of the players we have? Unlike most other tweaks to a team, changing a batting order doesn't cost a dime. So why not have it be the best that it can be?
Plate Appearances
The first item we have to consider is a relatively simple one. In our lineup, we'd want the best hitters to come up more often, and we'd want our poor hitters to come up less. If every game was a perfectly pitched game, all members of the lineup would get exactly three plate appearances per game, and every batter would come up to bat the same amount of times. Of course, that isn't the case, and most games end with a batter other than the ninth one making the final out, "robbing" some players of the chance to bat. Over the course of a season, the leadoff man tends to come up to bat 4.8 times per game, and the figures decline gradually by batter. The ninth batter comes up only 3.9 times per game. That's a big difference, and so of course, we'd want our better hitters clustered up at the top of the order, with our lesser hitters "hidden" near the bottom.
Men on Base
Let's imagine that it's three years in the future, and Chris Carter is everything we had hoped for and more. If baseball allowed us to move batters around whenever we felt like instead of sticking to a strict order, when would you put Carter in? The best thing to do would be to use him when we've got two or three guys on base, waiting for that big hit to come home. We can't change the batting order on the fly, unfortunately, but instead, we can try and put our best hitters in a slot that tends to come up when men happen to be on base. Well, it turns out that the slot that comes up with men on base most often is the fourth spot.
Lineup Slot |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
PA's with Men on Base |
36% |
44% |
48% |
51% |
48% |
46% |
47% |
46% |
45% |
Outs
Let's go back to our hypothetical Chris Carter and our fluid batting order. If men on base weren't an issue, what other factors would you take into consideration when choosing when to bring Carter up? To get the best production out of the guy, you'd want to put him in when there's no outs in the inning. Putting Carter in would be kind of a waste if you waited for a two out scenario. Of course, we can't actually put batters in whenever we wanted, but like before, we can see which slots tend to come up with no outs.
Lineup Slot |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
PA's with No Outs |
48% |
33% |
28% |
34% |
35% |
33% |
33% |
34% |
34% |
The Final Results
If we put everything together, we can find a set of run expectancy figures for each batting order. This next table is a summary of run expectancies for each slot in the lineup, including everything I mentioned previously. The total line sums up the potential damage a batter can do in that slot--the bigger, the better.
Lineup Slot |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Single |
0.515 |
0.515 |
0.493 |
0.517 |
0.513 |
0.482 |
0.464 |
0.451 |
0.436 |
Double |
0.806 |
0.799 |
0.779 |
0.822 |
0.809 |
0.763 |
0.738 |
0.714 |
0.689 |
Triple |
1.121 |
1.100 |
1.064 |
1.117 |
1.106 |
1.050 |
1.014 |
0.980 |
0.948 |
Home Run
|
1.421 |
1.450 |
1.453 |
1.472 |
1.438 |
1.376 |
1.336 |
1.293 |
1.249 |
Walk |
0.385 |
0.366 |
0.335 |
0.345 |
0.348 |
0.336 |
0.323 |
0.312 |
0.302 |
Total |
4.248 |
4.230 |
4.124 |
4.273 |
4.214 |
4.007
|
3.875
|
3.750
|
3.624
|
From this table, we can define a set of general guidelines that any manager should follow for an optimal lineup. The batters in slots 1, 2, and 4 have the highest chance of scoring runs. Conventional wisdom has the third hitter as the best--these numbers clearly disagree. If you were to rank your batters in order of quality, your top three hitters should be in slots 1, 2, and 4. The next two batters in quality should sit in slots 3 and 5, with the rest in the lower slots in descending order. Between the top three hitters on the team, ideally, the best home run threat would go in the fourth slot, and the most patient hitter would lead off. Between the guys slotted third and fifth, the player with a higher slugging percentage would bat third, with a higher contact guy in the fifth position.
With all of this in mind, I propose the following lineup, with 2010 CHONE projections following each name.
1B Barton (.261/.366/.413)
RF Sweeney (.286/.350/.409)
3B Kouzmanoff (.259/.304/.431)
DH Cust (.235/.370/.441)
C Suzuki (.275/.335/.405)
CF Davis (.270/.329/.375)
LF Crisp (.254/.330/.370)
2B Ellis (.248/.312/.386)
SS Pennington (.243/.325/.341)
Odds and Ends
- This article is long enough already, but I know I'm going to get questions about not having the prototypical speedy basestealer up at the top. I won't go into the details, but The Book comes to the conclusion that rather than stacking speed up at the top, you should put a basestealer in front of a singles hitter who doesn't strikeout a lot. But this rule should only be followed if you don't violate the higher priority rules above.
- Wow, those CHONE projections are sobering.
- Of the top ten CHONE-projected hitters under Oakland's control, only five are slated to be starters. In order (by wOBA): Jack Cust, Daric Barton, Ryan Sweeney, Travis Buck, Jake Fox, Michael Taylor, Kurt Suzuki, Gabe Gross, Kevin Kouzmanoff, and Chris Carter.
- Eric Sogard is projected to be a little under three runs better than Pennington over the course of a full season. In the major leagues.
3 recs |
203 comments
|
Comments
Projected Lineup
Against left-handed pitching, here’s my lineup:
1.) CF — Davis
2.) 1B — Barton
3.) 3B — Kouzmanoff
4.) DH — Cust
5.) C — Suzuki
6.) RF — Sweeney
7.) 2B — Ellis
8.) SS — Pennington
9.) LF — Crisp
Against right-handed pitching, I’d just swap Sweeney with Kouzmanoff.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Feb 2, 2010 7:09 AM PST reply actions
Why no mention of splitting up RHB/LHB?
To get the best production out of the guy, you’d want to put him in when there’s no outs in the inning. Putting Carter in would be kind of a waste if you waited for a two out scenario.
A HR has the same value whether there are 0 outs or 2 outs, so the number of outs in the inning matters less for guys who get a lot of their value from dingers.
True
But with 2 outs (and hopefully) risp, you would take away the sac fly option, which I asumw is a likely scenario for a power guy.
When its time to shoot, shoot... don't talk
by Charlie O the Mule on Feb 2, 2010 8:03 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
The RH/LH issue is a whole other can of worms
which I may talk about later.
And yes, HRs don’t change from 0 outs to 2 outs, but I was using Carter as a placeholder for (fill in the blank great hitter). If he hit nothing but HRs, then no, it wouldn’t matter.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
I know what PT is gonna say!!
"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." -Yogi Berra
You do?
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I know what brenario was thinking that you were gonna say
(That lineup protection means nothing.)
Maybe.
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Feb 2, 2010 9:36 AM PST up reply actions
Nothing in this post even mentions "protection"
Why would I bring in some irrelevant outside topic?
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Protection implies that you are constructing your lineup
to maximally benefit one player. Somewhat related.
I’m on crack.
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Feb 2, 2010 9:43 AM PST up reply actions
can I have some?
"Sniff some krazy glue, and start a religion!"- The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Feb 2, 2010 11:26 AM PST up reply actions
I owe Bloomie money and he said he'd take payment in crack...
"Sniff some krazy glue, and start a religion!"- The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Feb 2, 2010 11:26 AM PST up reply actions
All I can offer are crushed Claritins and Lactaid
Or, you could just pull the back of your pants down ever so slightly and show him
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Feb 2, 2010 12:06 PM PST up reply actions
It seems like only within the last 20 years or so
Has it been that the batter projected to do the most damage was batting 3rd instead of cleanup. I have this image of before then (when I was following Sesame Street instead of baseball), that the best hitter truly did bat cleanup.
Are my observations correct or just a figment of my imagination?
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
Mantle batted third pretty frequently
baseball-reference.com has batting orders under the team section, one could take a look through those. And by one I mean you, since I need to get dressed and go to work.
Ruth batted 3rd, Gehrig batted 4th
And though whichever way you put them it’s win-win, of course Ruth was the better hitter, and everyone knew it, so that idea goes back at least to the twenties.
"To tell the truth, I'm not excited to go to Cleveland, but we have to. If I ever saw myself saying I'm excited going to Cleveland, I'd punch myself in the face, because I'm lying" - Ichiro
by Philip Christy on Feb 2, 2010 9:09 AM PST up reply actions
I actually sort of agree with this
I remember being a kid in the early 90s and hearing announcers talk about how “The new thing was to bat your best hitter 3rd” or something like that. I’m sure it happened in the past (especially in a Ruth/Gehrig situation where you have two amazing hitters), but I have a feeling it’s only recently become conventional wisdom.
www.zekeishungry.com
my youthful baseball fan days were around then as well
Most of my memories are from ‘89, when the A’s had Canseco / McGwire hitting 3/4 and the Gnats had Clark / Mitchell.
This is one of those things that really should be taken out of the manager's hands
Seriously, you have equations to optimize your batting order each game. It should be the easiest thing about managing.
Thanks danmerqury. Good stuff.
don't pitcher/batter match ups need to be taken into account as well?
and I think this has been disputed but what about a player who is on a hot streak? Shouldn’t they be higher up in the order when said player is hot?
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
and the psychology of it all
I thought the reason that batting lineups matter (since the effect on runs is negligible) is to manage the feelings of the players.
by stormtown on Feb 2, 2010 12:28 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I have to admit, it screams of TL;DR
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
but I did read it and it's exactly what I was thinking
if my thoughts were coherent and copy-edited, which they ain’t.
and if you got a half hour less real work done this morning....
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Hot streaks don't exist
It does make sense to juggle lineups slightly based on platoon splits. Having a computer do it would still be wiser, since it can actually correctly regress observed platoon splits toward the mean easily.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Really PT?
I don’t know what’s more outstanding, that you think that or that nobody else dared reply.
Guys DO get into grooves where they’re simply more “on it” and confident, and “seeing the ball” etc. Confidence helps you in everything and that simply does ebb and flow as duality infused humans.
Different personality types struggle with lack of success (whether that success is due to luck, i.e. balls falling in etc, or not) and when you’re not feeling good up there ……
Hot streaks are a natural reflection of the psychology of human beings. Even in normal life, when you (whether you’re right to do so or not) feel good it feeds more feeling good and vice versa.
It simply cannot (no proof and i know i won’t change your mind) be that when player X has a great six week stretch, against a wide variety of pitchers, just as healthy or not as when he had an awful stretch, that his mental state doesn’t contribute to that success.
Wow. What say the rest of you? Just didn’t want to challenge Paul on this? Know from experience it’s no use? Help me out as a newbie here. I know from my extremely limited time playing very casual softball that sometimes i just felt it and the results certainly followed that. Not that that is my argument (see above.)
On another note, i agree with those that say one of the reasons, right or wrong, that MLB managers set their lineups is how it affects the players mind sets/egos. Veteran status. Getting guys you expect more out of eventually going by “giving them confidence” etc. I don’t often agree with it as i’d prefer who is performing regardless of all that seeing the placement they deserve. But, those, i believe are the reasons managers make their lineups, along with, in some cases, aged reasons of speed at the top etc.
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 2, 2010 2:06 PM PST up reply actions
I think hot streaks definately exist.
Predicting them, or their continuation is really not possible though.
Flip a coin ten times. You can hit heads ten times in a row and be on a hot streak. The chance of heads the next flip is still 50% though.
It's not that hot streaks "don't exist".
It’s that they have no predictive value. When I guy has been hot for seven days in a row, you can look back and say, “hey look, hot streak” but there is no more reason to expect him to extend seven days to eight than there is for an equivalent guy with a one-day hot streak to extend to two.
Speaking only for myself, I “didn’t want to challenge Paul on this” because I agree with him on the point. I would have avoided the “don’t exist” phrase, but basically I think he’s exactly right on hot streaks.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Meh
I guess I interpret “hot streak” as involving some assessment of the person’s actual skill being increased during the “streak.” If you want to call them “lucky streaks,” fine. I agree. Lucky streaks exist. But the name change almost self-evidently renders the idea of acting based on them ludicrous.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I've played a lot of cards...
and I can feel my lucky streaks rising and breaking like waves…
If that’s anything of an analogue to hitting hot streaks, maybe the player(s) can, knowing themselves, be a predictive factor, at least in the near short term, when they’re feeling “hot”
"Sniff some krazy glue, and start a religion!"- The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Feb 2, 2010 4:53 PM PST up reply actions
But then again maybe not.
If that were true, it should show up in the data. And it doesn’t.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
No offense, but I'm convinced this is nothing but post facto rationalization
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Some of that might be how you're playing the game that day.
Assuming, of course, that you’re not a robot, doing the same things every time.
I’ve had good nights, and bad nights, and usually the good nights are when I decide from the beginning to play in a more conservative way, waiting for the right moment to strike instead of trying to ‘get lucky.’
Man, if only I had that perspective in college, I’d have gotten laid more.
When I play in a more conservative way, fear creeps in and clouds my judgement.
I play a loose-aggressive tournament style, because it suits my nature, and against weaker fields, players give away so much information with their betting patterns and sizes that I can steal a lot of smaller pots, and use that equity to even out the times I have a lot of chips in the pot as an underdog.
I know that on the days I feel my best and my confidence is brimming that I play my best and get the luckiest at the same time. I feel unbeatable on those days, and do very very well. I keep track of my mood in my poker logfile, along with buyins, hours played, etc. The tourneys I played while feeling good and confident are by far the source of most of my winnings, and the times I played when emotionally, I didn’t have the right stuff, are 95% losing sessions.
Unfortunately, a baseball player has to go to work each day. He can’t just pull out of the game because he feels a little iffy, or not 100%. Yet, if I were managing a club, and player X came up to me and said “Hey, skip, put me in there, I’m on fire. I feel like a million bucks!” I would give it weight when deciding that day’s lineup.
"Sniff some krazy glue, and start a religion!"- The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Feb 4, 2010 1:17 AM PST up reply actions
He's right.
They’re essentially explained by random variation, much like LoneStranger’s coin example. Sure, you can bat .700 over a week’s stretch, but there’s no reason to expect that players have any real hand in creating that. Many studies have been done that found that players who are in the midst of, say, a five game hitting streak don’t hit any better than usual on the sixth day.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
I hear what you guys are saying
And sure, there’s no predictive value, per se.
But when a player has been torrid lately and is coming up in a situation with the game on the line, you not only feel better about your chances, you have every right TO feel better about your chances.
This isn’t Strat-O-Matic. (LOVE that game.)
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 2, 2010 2:27 PM PST up reply actions
The point of lineups is not to feel better about winning baseball games
It’s to actually win baseball games.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
And
Putting your guys who’ve been “hot” lately at more premium spots in the lineup help you win said ballgames because part of their “hotness,” (Cindi?) is due to them feeling confident, good, sure of their ABs etc.
And to respond to your semantics change above, Paul, from hot streak to luck streak… No. It’s not luck. It’s they actually are focusing better, which leads to hitting better, which leads to a better chance the ball is hit hard etc.
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 2, 2010 2:37 PM PST up reply actions
The problem with this is the same problem with the concept of "momentum"
We’ve been using streak (whether “lucky” or “hot”) here to describe a finite length of time where a player plays above their normal level. By definition it’s not predictive(which you seem to be acknowledging). So there’s no reason to suspect that just because they’ve been “hot,” that they’ll continue to be “hot.” In the next at-bat or 10 more at-bats.
Think about the flip side. Say you have Pujols on your team, and he’s 0 for his last 15. Do you bench him because he’s on a cold streak? It’s just not good practice to rely on streaks – either way.
Now, I don’t think anyone would argue that if someone has gotten legitimately better( via a new steroid, or a change to their swing, or something just clicking from practice) that you adjust their profile as a hitter to match.
If it were possible to write the lineup
after observing the game, that would work. Then you could make better use of the guys who were hot today by placing them higher in the lineup today.
But the whole going-back-in-time thing makes it impractical.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Not to be snarky but...
But when a player has been torrid lately and is coming up in a situation with the game on the line, you not only feel better about your chances, you have every right TO feel better about your chances.
Do you lose a lot of money gambling?
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
Bad analogy
Nobody (me) is saying you can predict it. Nobody doesn’t notice that even guys who are “hot” K on 3 bad pitches more often than many think they do.
There is a psychological thing going on in players’ minds that make them more likely to succeed in any given AB when they’re feeling confident, which naturally comes from times the results (not just hits etc, but hitting the ball hard, which is mainly all they can aim for) have been good lately.
Recap: No predictive value for individual ABs, check. Over long hauls things even out, check. But day to day, week to week, guys go through sections of time where they just, for whatever personal, professional reasons, guess right on pitches more often, see the ball better, execute their preferred swings better etc. They are in these cases more hot than the other times and when they come up in big moments when they’re feeling that way, they are more likely to do well than when they’re not.
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 2, 2010 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
confidence is sexy.
"Sniff some krazy glue, and start a religion!"- The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Feb 2, 2010 4:54 PM PST up reply actions
Again, if that were true, it would show in the data.
And it doesn’t.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Robots
PT is a (unconfirmed) robot. There are a lot of robot followers on this site. Unfortunately, robots don’t play the games. That is a good thing.
I am with you ssC.
Oooo
I’d play the “come up with insulting names for people I disagree with” game too, but there aren’t any terms for all-emotion no-analysis that aren’t CGV worthy.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
This is a failure of imagination on our part
How about “floating eyeballs”?
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
That just sounds cool.
Well, so does robot, but I build robots for a living so I might be a bit biased.
Well, the implication is that the eyeball is unconnected to any neural tissue
Maybe it’s too oblique to be suitably nasty, though.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Yeah.
Too much Futurama, too little dehumanization.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Well there's a robot in Futurama too
Perhaps that would answer our question. What Futurama character is the diametric opposite of Bender?
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
piece o' grit?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I suppose we feel better.
But it really does just come down to one of those gambler’s fallacies that casinos love so much.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
Cards and gambling
Simply aren’t good analogies folks.
Cards are random. Flipping a coin is 50/50 every time because it’s an emotionless object.
Human athletic performance involves all the psychological “oh the humanity” stuff that make us as humans oh so amazing and oh so human.
I don’t want to step on toes, break and rules here or have anyone take anything too personally, but I find individuals’ takes on this subject to likely, not for sure but likely, be a huge indicator as to their personal strengths and weaknesses. You know, right brain predominant types, left brain.
To think that human “flow,” emotion and the such don’t create stretches of time where human beings perform said tasks more effectively or not………to me says a lot about what peoples personalities and skills are like.
That’s the only reason i can see why we see these things soooooo differently.
I’m guessing (and i REALLY don’t want to put PT down or project onto him anything bad, and am open to being shot down on this) but to PT his take makes sense because his personality type/background/brain chemistry see his reality as consistently thinking/approaching ABs and the such every time.
Well, many other human types go up and down. Are more prone to mood swings. Are more sensitive. Etc.
There are such things as hot streaks.
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 2, 2010 5:07 PM PST up reply actions
Should've edited better on that last one
In other words, PTs personality would see him, if an athlete, be consistent in his approach no matter what the previous/past results were. Many other people (and most ballplayers) are affected by how things have been going, both in their profession and their personal life.
The very fact we’re human makes hot streaks real.
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 2, 2010 5:11 PM PST up reply actions
Ironically, Tom Tango AGREES
I’m not quite sure why the fans who tend to argue that “The Book”/data is king fail to realize this.
To quote directly:
“Hot and cold players hit around 5 wOBA better or worse than their norm, respectively, immediately following their 5 game streaks.”
“For 7 games…again some slight predictive value — 4 points for the hot hitters and 8 for the cold ones.”
“Looking at all of this data, there is evidence that a hot or cold streak has some predictive value.”
The point is that the predictive value is small enough that it doesn’t often outweigh the difference between better and worse hitters, so it’s still better to bat a cold “good hitter” than a hot “bad hitter.”
So hot and cold streaks ARE real, and they DO have predictive value according to The Book. Just not that much.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Hmm. I wasn't aware of this.
Interesting. Thanks, Nico.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
I take Tango's point,
but the possible range of skill change we’re talking about is so absurdly tiny that it’s a statistical nullity. Moving a guy up in the lineup one spot will get him about 1/9th of a plate appearance per game; a .005 wOBA change takes about 220 plate appearances to equate to 1 run. Hell, even moving him from 9th to leadoff is only 8/9 of a plate appearance per game, meaning that if you somehow nail every game of a 9-game hot streak, you’re gaining like 1/28th of a run out of it.
As long as we’re quoting chapter and verse:
Knowing that a hitter has been or is in the middle of a hot or cold streak has little predictive value. Always assume that a player will hit at his projected norm (adjusted for the park, weather and pitcher he is facing), regardless of how he has performed in the very recent past. A player’s recent history may be used as a tiebreaker.
Personally, I’d suspect that these observed effects are really just the impacts of micro-injuries (or, for hot streaks, the lack thereof). However, that’s obviously impossible to verify.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
"Frank Thomas 2006" Hot
9th Inning. Frank Thomas will get an AB if someone else gets on base before him (and no one hits into DP)… Opposing pitcher starts to mentally “grip”. These things (Hot Streaks) matter in the game of baseball. Statistically, you may not see it. But they exist.
... yeah ok
If you think that qualifies as “proof,” I have an ancient Roman bridge I’d like to sell you.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I will never prove anything to you
and I won’t try. Live and Learn…. Live and Learn.
by Colorado Fan on Feb 3, 2010 10:12 PM PST up reply actions
If you have no interest in the exchange of ideas
then do not reply to my posts. I have neither the time nor the patience to waste.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
He also goes onto say
That either in whole or in part can be explained due to weather and park effects.
"Loyal? I'm the most loyal player money can buy." - Don Sutton
You're missing the point though
If a streak isn’t predictive in any way, then it’s not worth acting on.
People are bringing up gambling and cards because of the famous Gambler’s Fallacy( in this case the reverse gambers fallacy). If you don’t think that hot streaks are predictive( or even don’t know how to express the predictive nature of them ), then it’s foolish to act on them.
See above
It’s like counting cards — it makes a difference but usually not a big enough one to make it all that worthwhile to worry about (e.g., multiple decks).
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
With everything else being equal though
And you have the choice (i.e. you’re making the lineup, pinch hitting a guy, other guys are “cold” etc) there is a slight advantage to going with the “hot” guy.
And Nico’s addition (Tango’s) even moreso defends my point that as fans we are RIGHT to get a BIT more excited when a guy in this state of hotness comes up in key spots, even if it’s only slightly helping things.
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 2, 2010 5:36 PM PST up reply actions
If he happens to come up, yes.
But don’t start him or pinch hit him for an objectively better hitter just because he’s hot.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Sure
I may be being out of line to say what i’m about to say, what with being new here and you guys being very bright, but i’d like to say something regarding this:
“Ironically, Tom Tango AGREES
I’m not quite sure why the fans who tend to argue that "The Book"/data is king fail to realize this.” Nico
I’m frankly amazed so many fail to see this. There are folks who have strength in numbers. Folks who bring more “feel” to things. Some attempt to meld them.
I respect both camps. I believe the numbers, the dry (oft criticized) stats oriented folks are closer to the truth. Too much “feel” makes you Joe Morgan, where subjectivity is king.
Where the perfect blend comes, in my opinion, is a team like the A’s blended with a sense of the humanity, the psychology of players to go with their objective standards.
I would just like those who were reading this and erring towards the “there’s no such thing as hot” camp to remember this when they’re bullying/being stubborn with people who not only are using “feel” in an argument, but who are open to and respectful of #s too. (not claiming that happened here and i can fend for myself.)
This Tango study shows what it did, and i know a legit study is all some will respect. But there are many more things, less provable, that are going on in this game played by humans with myriad personality types in a crazy world affected by all kinds of psychological factors.
Some of us sense those things better than others and feel because “our realm” isn’t provable we are pushed to the side/scoffed at. Not saying this for those who unjustly rip stats and “stats types.” Again, i think stats and this “dry side” DO get closer to the truth than much emotion based baseball thinking.
Just saying there is some stuff going on that can’t be quantified.
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 2, 2010 6:07 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I think I can safely say I agree with 100% of this comment
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Joe Morgan's problem is not that he is subjective
Joe Morgan’s problem is that he uses really stupid, worthless objective measurements instead of objective measurements that actually make logical sense.
No one really makes arguments from subjectivity, because they aren’t persuasive to anyone but that person. I mean, sure, sometimes people say “I don’t like so-and-so but I can’t quite put my finger on why,” but usually they’re using that as an explanation (of sorts) for their own thoughts (say, for why they’re not unhappy so-and-so was traded), not using it as evidence for some kind of proposition.
People arguing propositions basically use objective measures. Some of those people use bad measures and, in general, come to bad conclusions. Others use good measures and, in general, come to good conclusions. The use of hot streaks is a perfect example of this. The graphics guys in the truck at Fox don’t pop up with “We sorta think A-Rod is hitting pretty well right now” at the bottom of the screen; the pop-up says “10 for his last 20” or whatever the number is.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
by PaulThomas on Feb 2, 2010 7:12 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
amen dude
sugarcrisp, you said: “Just saying there is some stuff going on that can’t be quantified.” I completely agree. They’re called intangibles and they’re the only thing Billy Beane undervalues.
What's up Doc?
(Um, psst, can i get a few tabs?)
Deswho?
by supersugarCrisp on Feb 2, 2010 8:24 PM PST up reply actions
No he doesn't.
Beane routinely factors in things like “veteran presence” and “mental makeup” — where do you think the term “Put a Milo on him” comes from?
Ironically, those who pooh-pooh considerations or acknowledgement of “intangibles” are also criticizing Beane as a GM. He clearly values them.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Why is that ironic?
One of the very worst features of recent A’s teams has been the parade of worthless, useless veterans sucking up payroll, providing virtually nothing in production, and constantly bitching about not getting playing time at the expense of younger, better players.
I would think that, as they say in the legal world, the thing speaks for itself.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Lately, maybe. Not over 10 years.
And even last year, Springer likely paid dividends beyond what he could produce on the mound. Just as Kennedy likely did with young players like Gio.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
And...
Frank “Big Hurt” Thomas was worth every bad veteran pickup over the past 20 years. We friggin’ won a Playoff Series. I cried that day (sniff).
Signed,
Human
If there's one thing I love more than
Latin phrases, it’s indirect references!
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
But there is no way to know
wen a ot streak will end and a cold streak will begin. IF a player is on a hot streak it could last for 2 games or 2 innings or 2 pitches. Trying to adjust or rely on current performance is less optimal that ordering to best fit the law of averages. The goal should be to maximize the positive outcomes of each plate appearance.
This is true, and probably the best argument
against using “hot/cold” in forming strategies. It’s real, just hard to know how long a given real streak will last so it has little to no predictive value.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
... no, the best argument is that if they exist, they're so minor as to be completely unworth anyone's time
as noted by the very author on which you rely in claiming streaks to be real in the first place.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Stochasticity.
In your example, you’re actually slightly reducing your chances of winning for the sake of your feelings.
What's amazing is that people who play the game talk like this, too.
How can ANYBODY think this is true? I can’t tell you how many times I’ve felt awesome at the plate and was bad, or felt terrible and got hits. Or some combination of that.
If a hot streak exists, and a player knows it and controls it, WHY DO THEY EVER END?
www.zekeishungry.com
The Zone
Ever been in it? It’s hallucinogenic.
Basketball players get it more often than baseball players (or so it seems). But, there are times when Kobe, Jordan, Reggie Miller (to name a few) who talk about The Zone. Do you believe?
"If a hot streak exists, and a player knows it and controls it"
I don’t think those who say it exists also say a player controls it.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I dig the lineup although I would swith Raja and Barton
Thank you Al Davis for Michael Crabtree!!!!!
So, one thing I don't understand
In your final results table, you have a ‘total’ of the run scores of different (positive) outcomes of at-bats, by position.
What does this total actually mean? I don’t see how just adding the numbers up relates to the real world. Wouldn’t it make more sense to weight by likelihood of outcome? I’d imagine that it’d change the difference between 3 and 4 to even less than ~3%.
Actually, my main takeaway from this is that it really, Really is hard to screw this up as it pretty much doesn’t matter. I mean, no-one would put Orlando Cabrera in the two spot for large parts of the year, would they, eh?
oh.
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does.
The total is pretty much meaningless.
I just summed up the numbers so that it was easier to eyeball that yes, slot 4 has higher numbers than slot 3.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
right right, gotcha
I thought there might be some signifacance in the number I was missing
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does.
Great post, thanks !
But what about baserunning and more specifically, stolen bases ?
Do you want fast guys @ 1, 2 & 9 ?
Also, walks ? I guess they’re worth more @ 2&3 than 5
To the extent that the A's have anyone who fits the "singles hitter who doesn't strike out much" description
it’s either Ellis or Barton, and the basestealing threats are already sitting in front of those two in this lineup.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
What about Sweeney?
I’m now thinking he would go best in the #2 slot.
"To tell the truth, I'm not excited to go to Cleveland, but we have to. If I ever saw myself saying I'm excited going to Cleveland, I'd punch myself in the face, because I'm lying" - Ichiro
by Philip Christy on Feb 2, 2010 10:58 AM PST up reply actions
The more I look at this lineup
The more I realize that this looks like a total picnic for opposing pitchers
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
It'll be our marketing slogan -- "Ever seen a no-hitter?...."
But baseball! Fuck yeah! -- lynnzgal
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 2, 2010 9:19 AM PST up reply actions 5 recs
Interesting subject for further exploration...
what types of hitting teams are most likely to be no-hit.
"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." -Yogi Berra
There are more no hitters in September than any other month
See here. and I always heard that was because of September callups. Are there more games in September than August? I know sometimes you get more double-headers in September but it does only hath 30 days.
No, bad teams really ARE more likely to be no-hit
And yes, it certainly is handy if the opposing lineup isn’t very impressive. If you look it up, a wildly disproportionate number of no-hitters have come against terrible hitting teams. Well, duh. That stands to reason. Great hitting teams are the most difficult to shut down.
In fact, in baseball history only 10 no-hitters have come against teams that led the league in hits. And one of those was the Rockies playing on the road. Another was the 1971 Pirates—a great hitting club, but half the regulars rested on that particular day.
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/ten-most-impressive-no-hitters-of-all-time/
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Remember that promotion several years ago
Something about Clemens and if he throws a shutout or something, fans can return for a free game? I wanna say it around 2002 or so. Vague on the details, but it appeared pretty much like that — rooting for the opposition to pitch well in order for the promotion to take effect
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Feb 2, 2010 9:34 AM PST up reply actions
Yes...
There will be plenty of 3rd, 4th, and 5th place starters looking like Cy Youngs this year. However, there will be some bashing teams (Yanks, Red Sox, etc…) that look like weak hitting teams.
"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." -Yogi Berra
a picnic outside with sunshine and a blanket?
or inside a car because it’s raining outside?
unfortunately i know which one you mean….well maybe they are all taking batting practice everyday and getting better
It's currently overcast in LA
Take your pick
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Feb 2, 2010 10:41 AM PST up reply actions
I'd switch Suzuki and Davis, just because when Cust walks, Kurt doesn't hit into a DP
till Rajai’s had the chance to force Cust at 2B and get on base that way. I’m really glad Kouzmanoff isn’t hitting behind Cust.
But baseball! Fuck yeah! -- lynnzgal
There's no real evidence that speedy players hit into any fewer DPs than slower ones
Generally the defense sets itself at more or less the optimal point for turning double plays based on the hitter’s speed. I suppose Davis might be marginally more likely to get a hit with a guy on (because the defense has to play suboptimally close to the plate to have time to turn the DP), but that can’t possibly cancel out Suzuki’s significant edge as an actual hitter.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
So true
Some speed burners hit the ball hard and they hit into double plays. Davis hit into 12 DP which is not great so keep in mind Cust grounded into only 7 because he struck out more. Remember Dan Johnson he grounded out the same pace with the same amount of ABs but was so slow. You could bet that Dan would hit the ball down first baseline almost every AB.
Davis is also more likely to do something when he gets on base than Suzuki
You’re really saying if Kurt and Rajai hit the same ground ball, they’re equally likely to end up in DP?
But baseball! Fuck yeah! -- lynnzgal
by WaddellCanseco on Feb 2, 2010 10:08 AM PST up reply actions
No
The defense will field more balls that Suzuki hits, because they have more time to react. Obviously, the marginal grounders that they field against Suzuki will be much more likely to result in DPs. However, the average grounder fielded against Suzuki will be further from the plate and take longer to field than the average grounder from Davis, thus resulting in a lower percentage of them being plausible DP balls.
This effect is quite robust. Defenses really want double plays and set up pretty much at the optimal position to turn the maximum number of them, regardless of who the hitter is. Defensive positioning is one of the few areas in which managers and teams do seem to already have a very strong intuitive grasp on the right game-theoretical approach.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
That strikes me as incredibly implausible
citation needed… All I can find is stuff that just takes for granted that faster guys are less prone to DPs all else equal…
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
I don't remember where I read it
I think it was a THT article, but this was years ago now and it might not have controlled for GB rate. If there’s new research arguing otherwise, I’ll cheerfully yield the point.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Do you have evidence for this claim?
There’s no real evidence that speedy players hit into any fewer DPs than slower ones
Once one controls for GB rates and opportunities, do you have any evidence that speed makes no difference in GIDP rates?
This runs counter to Bill James’ old speed score and PECOTA’s new speed score. Both metrics see an avoidance of GIDP (once GB rate and opportunity are normalized) as an indicator of speed.
These projections are indeed sobering,
but without letting my homerism blind me completely, I expect some of these guys to have better seasons then what’s projected. Pennington and Davis both have better career numbers then what CHONE has them projected at for 2010 (Pennington .267/.341/.378 and Davis .280/.336/.387) and I don’t see much reason to actually expect them to regress at this point in their young careers. Barton’s projection may be dead on, but I really see him OPS’ing at or near .800 this season and don’t think thats out of reach at all for him. I also wouldn’t be suprised to see Sweeney put up a better line or have Cust return to more of the 08’ version. None of these situations are far-fetched and while it’s no guarantee by any means, these types of small improvements could go a long way considering the potential of our pitching staff.
Does "CHONE" rhyme with "phone" or with "fawn"?
Or is it just pronounced “figgy”?
There is no "i" in Teamocil. At least not where you'd think.
by GreenNGoldSooner on Feb 2, 2010 9:58 AM PST reply actions
I know he's not in Anaheim anymore.
I just still hate the Angels.
by Nate on Feb 2, 2010 12:26 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I say "CHONE" like phone, but "Chone [Figgins]" like
Khhhaaaaann!
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
I always pronounced it like "Choanie"
"Sniff some krazy glue, and start a religion!"- The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Feb 2, 2010 11:29 AM PST up reply actions
What a (Erin) Moran!
"Sniff some krazy glue, and start a religion!"- The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Feb 2, 2010 4:56 PM PST up reply actions
I've been pronouncing it in my head like phone.
I’m willing to give Figgins a little leeway, but pronouncing Chone like Sean is just too much.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
I actually say as if it's French*.
which sounds a lot like Sean, but not quite identical. No more different than genuinely foreign names when modified to anglophone phonetics.
*Actually, now that I think of it, I think it more like “chonne” in French. “Chone” doesn’t seem like a natural French spelling unless there’s a circumflex. (Is there any word in French ending in -one that isn’t really -ône? I can’t think of any.)
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
So, "shone"?
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Feb 2, 2010 10:42 AM PST up reply actions
And his teammates have told him that he could suffer an accute injury, just like Beltre
The situation is pretty grave.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
thanks dm
this was one of the more easy-to-digest discussions of this topic i’ve seen. much appreciated.
Wasnt Davis the best baserunner last year?
Not in terms of steals but in terms of taking an extra base on a single or just general non-SB baserunning situations? I seem to remember some article about this.
All I remember from last year was how Raj was trying his damnedest to do his best Rickey impersonation, and doing a not half-bad job of it. I think Raj hits leadoff until his OBP drops under .350.
Davis
Barton
Sweeney
Cust
Kouz
Suzuki
Crisp
Ellis
Pennington
I like Davis and Sweeney at the top of the order.
I could see it this way:
CF Davis
RF Sweeney
3B Kouzmanoff
C Suzuki
DH Cust
1B Barton
2B Ellis
LF Crisp (.254/.330/.370)
SS Pennington
Right now his OBP is .000
and there’s no reason to expect it to climb OVER .350, so…
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."

"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Feb 2, 2010 12:05 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
oh cmon dont get caught up in semantics, you know what Im sayin
obviously let him play there for a month or two, if he cant get on base then drop him down to 7th or so. From July 31 to Oct 4 it never dipped below .350, so I think youre downplaying him a bit.
Raj was really awesome last year, if he keeps up he deserves the leadoff role, as much as Pennington deserves the SS spot for 2-3 months.
And you know what I'M saying
which is that if the projections say his OBP will likely be under .350 (which they do), there is no reason to indulge the presumption that they are wrong simply out of misguided loyalty. That’s paying for past performance, albeit in the currency of at-bats rather than dollars.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Wow
Eric Sogard is projected to be a little under three runs better than Pennington over the course of a full season. In the major leagues.
Of course that doesn’t include defense (where Pennington is at least a win, but probably closer to 2 wins, better). This whole “Sogard is good at baseball” thing is really bugging me.
www.zekeishungry.com
No, I think it actually does include defense
It doesn’t include a positional adjustment. Adjusted for position, baseballprojection.com says Sogard is 1 run worse than Pennington.
Neither of them is any great shakes or anything. Actually, I’m pretty sure CHONE thinks Adam Rosales should be the A’s starting shortstop next season.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I was going by wOBA, without regard to defense.
For what it’s worth, CHONE has both Sogard and Pennington at a -2 defensively, albeit at different positions.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
I'm counting on UZR hating Sogard if he ever makes the majors
UZR tends to not like the “I have make few errors because I have no range” guys.
www.zekeishungry.com
If you subtract 5 from Rosales's defense to move him to SS, they both wind up at -14
It would seem to make sense to platoon them, although Rosales has a slight reverse split in the minors.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
I hope this CHONE guy is wrong because that team is projected to suck.
Is it too late to get Ethier and CarGon back?
1.Rajai
2.Sweeney
3.Ethier
4.Cust
5.CarGon
6.Suzuki
7.Daric
8.Kouz
9.Whoever
That’s money baby!
You do know you have 4 OFs (plus Cust) in that lineup, right?
Apparently you don’t believe in a middle infield.
www.zekeishungry.com
If we've got enough outfielders,
then EVENTUALLY the ball is gonna roll out there for one of ’em to pick up.
by Nate on Feb 2, 2010 11:54 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Also
This is part of our strategy for amassing the maximum number of outfielders on our roster. It’ll be the ultimate singles only defense.
@worldblee on Twitter.
Dissenting opinion
I see no one is presenting a real dissenting opinion here, so I will. (Opinions expressed are not necessarily my own. I’m actually much more stat-minded on this issue than you might guess. I just don’t think this should go uncontested when there are legitimate objections to be made.)
You ask:
That being said, why not try and squeeze all of the runs we can get out of the players we have? Unlike most other tweaks to a team, changing a batting order doesn’t cost a dime. So why not have it be the best that it can be?
Because "doesn’t cost a dime" is not accurate.
To put it in stat-speak, the costs of tweaking the lineup, although they are small and we have no good way of measuring them, are probabilistically non-zero. Given the smallness and uncertainty of the measured benefit of doing so, there’s a genuine risk that the costs outweigh the benefits.
Or in old-school speak, you don’t do weird things with the lineup for the same reason you don’t tell the players what music to play in the clubhouse or make them shave off the horrible monstrosities of facial hair they sometimes grow*. Because it messes with their heads and that might make them play worse. You want your guys to be comfortable so they can play their best. That includes putting guys in the lineup spot where they belong.
*Yes, I realize the Yankees do this, but … hello? Do you really want to be the Yankees?
Many baseball players feel differently about hitting in different spots in the lineup. Many of them feel it affects their hitting, and many managers think so too. Lots of players say they hate not knowing what their role is, and they perceive a regular lineup position as part of that role. Maybe all this is a myth, or maybe it’s real, but it needs to be taken into account as a possibility.
Now before someone gets all snarky and says, "Um, we also don’t know that replacing Stomper with a flying spaghetti monster as mascot won’t improve our hitting, so why aren’t you recommending that we do that? huh?" let me just say that that’s retarded, you bozo there’s a difference between a completely absurd non-sequitur and an unproven tradition that has a number of plausible connections to real results.
We know that baseball is partly a psychological game. Hitters rely on practiced instincts but these instincts work best when they are in the right focused state of mind. Psychological distractions can affect this state of mind, and while professional hitters have many years of training to not be bothered by things that would bother you or I, that does not necessarily include the same things that years of living in the baseball culture trains them to believe are important. (Indeed, rituals and superstitions may well be the very tools they use to combat other distractions.)
Studies in other lines of work show that workers’ psychology has a huge effect on productivity. In general, people do a better job when they are happy. And while we don’t know for sure that this affects professional athletes the same way, it’s not baseless to guess that it might. And even if it were possible to determine that making the players happy has zero effect on how well they play, if the cost is so little is not a happy clubhouse an end in itself? If not for the players’ sake, then because it makes a better product to sell to the ticket-buying audience and a better recruiting tool for the next free agent negotiation?
I’m not against The Book and its findings about lineups. I’m just saying you have to recognize how small they are, and you can’t pretend that every other unmeasured effect of the lineup is zero. For any realistic tweak of the sort discussed in this post, you’re looking at an average expected gain of about one game over the whole season. And given the uncertainty of the projection, what’s the plus-or-minus that goes with that? More than one? Against that, if Mark Ellis says, "I just don’t feel right batting leadoff," or if Art Howe says, "I think Miggy is pressing too much under the pressure of batting in the three spot," how much weight do you give to those? Maybe it’s zero, but maybe it’s not. Given that using the gain from using the computer-generated lineup might also be zero, you don’t have to be Joe Morgan to want to give some consideration to the traditional gut feeling.
Somewhere upthread somebody said that optimizing the lineup as discussed here should be "the easiest thing about managing". Sure, but do you know what’s not the easiest thing about managing? Getting into players’ heads and figuring out how to get them in a state of mind where they play their best. Knowing how to play a guy so he feels most comfortable, or knowing when he needs a kick in the ass to feel less comfortable. Knowing when a guy complaining about his lineup spot is just whining and when it’s a real indication that he needs to be moved, or knowing when a guy is uncomfortable in his lineup spot but not complaining about it because he’s too proud.
A smart manager should use any tool available to him. He absolutely ought to be familiar with what The Book says about lineups, and he should keep it in mind when making marginal decisions or when he needs to shake things up and try something different. But he shouldn’t throw away everything else he ever thought he knew about lineups on the assumption that this replaces it.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
by iglew on Feb 2, 2010 11:59 AM PST reply actions 6 recs
I'm not sure it's non-zero so much as
“not worth measuring.”
I totally agree with you, BTW. To some extent, this is what baseball cool to follow, IMO: the mental chess game that is the players’ psyche vis-a-vis the needs of the team.
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
by cuppingmaster on Feb 2, 2010 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
I would say
the one concrete lesson to take away is not to put a shitty hitter second, as many teams do, and otherwise the effects of not offending players/making them comfortable is a reasonable consideration, and making the lineup that way may or may not be better than using a robot lineup, but probably doesn’t make too much difference.
With stout hearts, and with enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. ----Hero Defector Montgomery
Very interesting, iglew.
You’re right. It’s definitely a reasonable assumption to say that a batter’s psychological state could affect his performance, more so than these lineup changes. That being said, it’s the manager’s job to keep his players happy and ready to play. Let him figure out a way to maximize both player happiness and offensive output. I’m sure some of these changes could be made without affecting player morale.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
How about giving the manager back the 2-300 hours that he's going to spend figuring out lineups
so he can spend it on trying to improve player happiness in some other way?
Or just write a program which can be instructed to exclude certain possible lineups (eg “no lineups where Davis bats first”). Not really very difficult.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
a good idea
would be to just come up with the lineup at the start of the season (or maybe two lineups, for RHP and LHP) and then stick with it. When we’re talking about a handful of runs over the course of a season, anything that inspires Geren to shuffle things around is surely noise. The A’s tendency to field like 162 different lineups per season always strikes me as a lot of rearranging deck chairs. (except for injuries, of course)
Wouldn’t this suggestion satisfy both the optimizers and also the people who follow iglew’s argument?
If the club had nine solid players to play every day, then yes.
With platoons and auditions and question marks, there has to be some shuffling.
"Sniff some krazy glue, and start a religion!"- The Reverend Billy Lard
by Gaijin_Suketto on Feb 2, 2010 5:06 PM PST up reply actions
Some shuffling, of course. But all the question is about the extent of the "some".
I’ve always thought it was weird that a manager would “post” the lineup card the afternoon of the game, and the players would crowd around and look. Do they still do that? There should be maximum predictability so that all focus is on performance. So yes, have two lineups, I’m not entirely opposed to platooning, let someone (like Zukes, but not only him) know how often he is likely to rest.
Look, I get the whole player psychology aspect
I agree that you don’t want to make the player feel uncomfortable doing something they’re not used to doing. But that’s just it, optimal lineups DO NOT DO THAT!
What they do is challenge the conventional wisdom of what a player is “supposed to do” in a particular lineup spot. Nobody is saying put Cust somewhere so he can’t bunt more. They’re saying put Cust in a spot that really should have a player like Cust there (and he will never, or almost never, do any bunting from that spot).
That’s just a rough example, so no need to pick at it. But the point is that there really should be no psychological effect here. All you have to tell players is “Do what you always have done. Don’t change anything because of where you are in the order, because we do things the right way here.”
I guess I don’t see how that is so hard.
www.zekeishungry.com
Weird Question
But, I wonder how players do during season’s that they are going through a separation/divorce at home? McGwire, Duke, and Blanton come to mind… I think they all struggled during difficult times at home. Just throwing it out there. Psychological factors play roles in player performance.
... or they played worse because they were spending their time talking to divorce lawyers instead of working out
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Was Macha reading The Book when he was batting Bobby Crosby 3rd?
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - danmerqury
Macha was reading Penthouse and occasionally scratching himself
He let the boys play Hurts Don’t-It to figure out the batting order.
"Smokey, this be not the foul jungles of the darkest East Orient. This be ninepins. We are bound by laws."
Would you like to add some potstickers?
Or perhaps you’d like some of Cindi’s Egg Rolls?
Your fortune reads “It could be worse, you could still have Bobby Crosby.”
My lineup is part "book," part "my own book":
Davis – CF
Barton – 1B
Kouzmanoff – 3B
Cust – DH
Sweeney – RF
Suzuki – C
Ellis – 2B
Crisp – LF
Pennington – SS
That’s the one that makes the most sense to me. Notice that I have Davis in both the batting spot and the field position he is used to, and Crisp (the veteran) making the biggest adjustments from his comfort level.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I wouldn't be opposed to that lineup.
Particularly if Davis outperforms his CHONE projection. If the Davis we see this year is “end of ’09 Davis”, I’ll be a happy man indeed.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
Bookless
Davis—CF
Pennington/Rosales—SS
Barton—1B
Kouzmanoff—3B
Cust/Fox/Chavez—DH
Suzuki—C
Sweeney—RF
Ellis—2B
Crisp—LF
With Rajai on base and being held at first I like the idea of Pennington a) bunting or b) putting the ball in play to the right side or c) hit and run. Barton looks to be the key to the lineup—if he can replicate his Aug/Sept.
Everything looks nicer when you win. The girls are prettier. The cigars taste better. The trees are greener. Billy Martin
Bunting is a whole lot worse than you think it is.
So are the hitters you’re putting in the #2 hole.
Read The Book, you might like it.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
Sweeney
Come on, you can’t hit him seventh in this lineup.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Feb 2, 2010 4:45 PM PST up reply actions
Caribbean WS
Anyone else watching? It’s hilarious that Vinny Castilla is still playing for Mexico.
And that looks like our (released) Petit playing SS for Venezuela.
"Do I talk to myself? No, I just remind myself of what I'm trying to do. You know, I never answer myself so how can I be talking to myself?" - Rickey
ESPN
I’m watching the Mississippi-Kentucky game.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Feb 2, 2010 5:12 PM PST up reply actions
My lengthy traditionalist argument above notwithstanding,
I’m a big fan of having a non-traditional leadoff hitter. I like the idea of Barton batting first, and indeed I would completely support danmerqury’s proposed lineup in its entirety. I like it better than any other lineup I’ve seen posted on AN for this year.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
I don't know about the CHONE predictions being sobering
Because I’m quite certain that seeing them makes me want to drink.
"Smokey, this be not the foul jungles of the darkest East Orient. This be ninepins. We are bound by laws."
Because besides being a lot cheaper, Barton's probably better overall anyway?
{Psst … defense}
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Actually Branyan's decent defensively
He’s no Adam Dunn out there, as much as he may resemble him as a hitter.
My problem with Branyan right now is his health. He has back problems which apparently seriously affected his hitting ability in the second half of last season.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
And he's in his mid-thirties
And I just can’t advocate going after a guy that old when he’s only going to be marginally better (or, possibly, a LOT worse).
www.zekeishungry.com
I was looking at the little chart thingy
don’t you think the possibility of Rajai stealing 50+ bases would compensate for the less times he got on base compared to Barton? And maybe the # 2 guy could sacrifice bunt sometimes since he will most likely strike out anyways. And I think the best hitter bats 3rd because if he’s the best and he does what he’s suppose to do then the clean up guy gets up to, I love rallies, crooked numbers, that’s baseball. I remember when we would have rallies?long time ago.
Yes
Because the absolute best way to generate “rallies” and “crooked numbers” is by deemphasizing getting on base, in order to slightly increase the rate at which one uses strategies which reduce the number of men who get on base even further.
I love classic baseball “reasoning.”
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Tough day ahead?
Your sarcasm level is reading unusually high this morning.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
No
I’m just saying if Rajai gets on base and steals a base putting himself in scoring position it’s like hitting doubles. I just want to why you guys read a book and now you think you can reinvent the game of baseball.
There's more to it
Is Barton going to be able to take third on a single, or score from second or first on a hit, or score from third on a sacrifice, steal a base and get into scoring position late in a game when down a run? The game ismore then numbers, Jack Cust sucks I don’t care what the books says.
This is like shooting fish in a barrel
You do realize that “late in a game” the lineup position doesn’t matter at all, right?* To all intents and purposes, where you’re at on the lineup in any given 7th, 8th or 9th inning is utterly random.
It matters in the FIRST INNING. Precisely the point at which you want to maximize total runs and avoid one-run strategies like the plague. Precisely the point at which you most desire long “rallies.”
*The relationships between the players (eg wanting basestealers in front of impatient singles hitters) still matter a tiny bit, but which lineup slot (1st-9th) they’re in doesn’t.
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
I see a series of unrelated questions, then a conclusion which has nothing to do with the questions.
All followed by a yet again unrelated jab at Cust. None of which makes the least bit of sense.
Always the summers are slipping away.
Find me a way for making it stay.
Cust is a platoon player
I can live with Cust’s .880 OPS vs. right handed pitching (989 AB’s last 3 years) but the .741 vs Lefthanders (400 AB last 3 years) leaves something to be desired.
Everything looks nicer when you win. The girls are prettier. The cigars taste better. The trees are greener. Billy Martin
by Steve in Napa on Feb 5, 2010 2:38 PM PST up reply actions
You ain't to cool for school-How can you say
it doesNt matter when the chart you’re basing your argument on proves the lead off man will bat almost 1 more time then the 9th slot? When the team rallies is what is utterly random and against any good pitcher it’s usually not going to happen in the first. I don’t like how we are replacing team concepts like a guy playing a role with numbers, especially when the numbers in question are relatively inept. Now if Barton had .390 obp, then what you say holds validity, but since it’s only a litlle bit better then Rajai’s; I do not think this justifies the swap when you consider the intangibles that Davis offers at the top of the order.

by 
























