Pitcher hitting eight!

[biglumber24]

The Marlins I believe would be better served by hitting the pitcher in the eight hole, and hitting amazega in the nine spot. Even though runs have not been a problem for the Marlins this might add people on base when Ramirez come up. Discuss!

[Rabbethan]

Honestly, I wouldn't be completely against it while Hanley is still hitting leadoff.

 

Hmm.

[Marlins2003]

I've said for over a year that this is an experiment I'd like to see play out. I'm interested in seeing what the results would be.

[PitchingWinsGames]

There was a study done on this

 

I think Amezaga's SLG% would have to be under .400 for it to show any positive run scoring improvement in the lineup.

 

It was in an article where the Brewers said they were gonna do it with Kendall

[ultimopain]

There was a study done on this

 

I think Amezaga's SLG% would have to be under .400 for it to show any positive run scoring improvement in the lineup.

 

It was in an article where the Brewers said they were gonna do it with Kendall

 

They're not suggesting it because Amezaga is not hitting ... they're suggesting it because it will give someone a chance to get on base in front of Hanley when his turn comes around again to bat.

 

Pretty good idea imo.

[LordMagnus]

Fredi is not gonna change the line up. He's pretty stubborn with it, and so far its worked.

[Admin]

Assuming that Amezaga gets on with less than two outs, the pitcher simply bunts him over into scoring position. I'd rather just move him down in the order.

[LordMagnus]

Well, Hanley has had RBI opportunies the last few nights, and was not able to drive in the runs. What makes you think he's an RBI guy?

[PitchingWinsGames]

Those familiar with this discussion will no doubt know that the authors of The Book found that by batting the pitcher eighth, teams could realize an increase of around two runs, and by totally optimizing their lineups a maximum of 15 runs--equivalent to a win and a half--over the course of a season. At first that former result may seem counterintuitive. However, the reason for the small improvement is that although inferior-hitting pitchers will be given more plate appearances in the eighth slot, this will be offset by the fact that a regular hitter in the ninth hole will result in more RBI opportunities for the top of the lineup, especially the third-place hitter.

 

In the case of the Brewers--where Kendall has a PECOTA projected OBP of .324 but a slugging percentage of just .321--there is little doubt that the strategy makes sense. A quick run through the lineup analysis tool provided by BP alum David Pinto (based on work by Cyril Morong, Ken Arneson, and Ryan Armbrust) shows that all of the top 30 suggested lineups using both the 1998-2002 and 1959-2004 models place Kendall in the ninth spot. Using the latter model, a reasonable lineup using their PECOTA projections (Weeks, Cameron, Fielder, Braun, Hart, Hardy, Hall, Kendall, pitcher's spot) would be projected to score 5.385 runs per game, whereas switching the pitcher and Kendall would result in 5.388 runs per game, for a gain of almost five runs in a season. With the 1998-2004 model, the difference is a whopping 18 runs over the course the season. This also considers all hitters who batted in the ninth spot in the order for the Brewers in 2007 (where they put up a collective .233 OBP and .282 SLG, and assuming they would replicate that performance in 2008), so pinch-hitters are included. As you might imagine, the better the pinch-hitters, the less of an effect the strategy would have.

 

What makes it work in this case is that Kendall's combination of an adequate OBP and a woeful slugging percentage is not that different from the typical ninth spot hitter in the order. This means that when batting eighth he won't be driving in many of the four-through-seventh place hitters who reach base, but when hitting ninth he gets on base enough to allow Fielder and Braun opportunities to drive him in, resulting in a net offensive gain. It appears the break-even for this strategy as far as the Brewers go is somewhere around Kendall delivering a .360 SLG. That is, if Kendall's slugging percentage were .360 or higher (while delivering the same OBP), it would essentially be a wash as to whether to bat him eighth or ninth.

[Rabbethan]

Well, Hanley has had RBI opportunies the last few nights, and was not able to drive in the runs. What makes you think he's an RBI guy?

Maybe because he's 10th in the league right now and got 81 last season as a leadoff hitter?

[PitchingWinsGames]

And he's gonna end up as a number 3 hitter anyways, this just gives him similar opportunities while actually giving him the most ABs which is what we want anyways...

[biglumber24]

Alfies has a career slugging percentage of .343 kendall has better numbers.

[PitchingWinsGames]

Kendall was a much better player in his prime, so he will have the better numbers, but this year, I kind of expect them to be somewhat similar, with Amezaga to have a bit better power. But if Amezaga continues to slug around 0.343, than this is actually perfect for the lineup (if he were to bat 8th)

[rferry]

There was a study done on this

 

I think Amezaga's SLG% would have to be under .400 for it to show any positive run scoring improvement in the lineup.

 

It was in an article where the Brewers said they were gonna do it with Kendall

Slugging or on base percentage? Slugging is somewhat important for the 8th hitter because he has to clear the bases before the automatic out that bats after him. But wouldn't the real loss by OBP, otherwise known as Not Out Percentage, because of the loss of at bats in dropping down a spot?

[PitchingWinsGames]

There was a study done on this

 

I think Amezaga's SLG% would have to be under .400 for it to show any positive run scoring improvement in the lineup.

 

It was in an article where the Brewers said they were gonna do it with Kendall

Slugging or on base percentage? Slugging is somewhat important for the 8th hitter because he has to clear the bases before the automatic out that bats after him. But wouldn't the real loss by OBP, otherwise known as Not Out Percentage, because of the loss of at bats in dropping down a spot?

 

Having a decent OBP is key to this. His OBP ability is what turns him into a second leadoff hitter... if his SLG were above .400 though, he'd be more likely to drive in more runs from the 8th spot, than create/score runs from the 9 spot which would make putting him in the 9 spot useless.

[rferry]

A OBP better than the pitcher makes sense, because otherwise 1. they shouldn't be starting and 2. there's no advantage to your leadoff hitter.

Moving a better than decent OBP performer from 8th to 9th does not because it means you're giving up more outs. Slugging hardly plays into it at all. Can you repost the study?

[Rabbethan]

A OBP better than the pitcher makes sense. Moving a better than decent OBP performer from 8th to 9th does not because it means you're giving up more outs. Slugging hardly plays into it at all. Can you repost the study?

How would that be giving up more outs? It would, at most, be moving the out from the 9th spot to the 8th spot.

 

This would be especially good when Scotty is batting. Maybe even Hendickson if he keeps up his batting now that he can see. Even Ricky can swing it a little.

[PitchingWinsGames]

A OBP better than the pitcher makes sense, because otherwise 1. they shouldn't be starting and 2. there's no advantage to your leadoff hitter.

Moving a better than decent OBP performer from 8th to 9th does not because it means you're giving up more outs. Slugging hardly plays into it at all. Can you repost the study?

 

 

Slugging does play into it...

 

Let's use Scott Olsen (hands down our best hitter as an example:

 

Scott Olsen in his career is: .174/.180/.215

Alfredo Amezaga is hitting: .252/.320/.343

And Cody Ross (for this example): .254/.320/.479

 

(I found it awesome that they had the same OBP for this, it helps a lot)

 

Now, using Ross (who wouldn't be batting 8th for us, like, ever) demonstrates the value SLG has

 

Hanley

Uggla

Hermida

Hammer

Jake

Cantu

Treanor/Rabelo

Amezaga

Olsen

______________________________________________________________________

This is our current lineup, this is what we've been using, and what happens in the case of Amezaga is that, he's a singles hitter. Rarely he does more, but for all intents and purposes, it's best to expect a single. Therefore, any guys that are ahead of him, are less likely to score on singles, meaning Amezaga's best suited to do the "by the book" get on base, Olsen bunts him over, Hanley drives him in (I hate that strategy FWIW). Using that means we are more likely to give up an out between Amezaga and Hanley, reducing our chances of scoring, via a Hanley Awesome (because Hanley just doesn't hit the ball, he awesomes it :lol )

 

Hanley

Uggla

Hermida

Hammer

Jake

Cantu

Treanor/Rabelo

Olsen

Amezaga

______________________________________________________________________

This lineup is a little different. What happens here is that the 6-7 hitters, if/when they get on base, have to be driven in by Olsen. Olsen as a hitter is more concerned with "slugging" the ball, than trying to just get on base. Past that however, If Olsen were to make the last out of the inning, we now have a bonafide hitter coming up before Hanley, giving Hanley a chance to drive in runs. Also, at the same time, it turns our #2 hitter into a pseudo #3 hitter, hopefull Uggla gets moved out of that spot and Hermida would move into it, which would also increase our chances of scoring, because Hermida is all-around a better, more disciplined hitter. By association, everyone would bump down a spot in the lineup (#3 becomes pseudo #4 and so on). This gives our sluggers a better chance because we have more runners on.

 

Hanley

Uggla

Hermida

Hammer

Jake

Cantu

Treanor/Rabelo

Ross

Olsen

______________________________________________________________________

This is the wrinkle in this "experiment". Cody has the same exact OBP as Amezaga, but slugs nearly 150 points higher. By having him bat in front of the pitcher, given his ability to slug better, there is a better chance that the guys ahead of him score. This is simply because he "gets the extra base" on his hits more often. Then because he "gets the extra base" more often than someone like Amezaga, it makes it easier for the pitcher to drive him in, OR if he bunts *shudders* it, more often than not, puts him on third base, which is obviously more valuabe than a runner on second with 1/2 outs. Hanley "Awesomes" the ball again, and we all cheer.

 

Hanley

Uggla

Hermida

Hammer

Jake

Cantu

Treanor/Rabelo

Olsen

Ross

______________________________________________________________________

Lastly, by doing this lineup, we actually hurt the team. Olsen batting in front of Ross ends up putting an out up, reducing the chance Cody drives in a run, which is something he's more likely to do than Amezaga. The thing that makes this lineup appealing is that Cody's higher chance of hitting a double puts Hanley up with a RISP, which sounds sexy, but not at the cost of not driving in the 6/7/8 guys.

 

For this whole thing to work, you have to consider how the lineup turns over through the middle innings, after the first 2/3 innings, all the lineup does is essentially guarantee the top guys more ABs. However, the bottom of the lineup, hitters are more interchangeable, meaning if you have a disparity in SLG, such as that between Ross and Amezaga, it's more important to give your best hitters more chances with RISP, and you do that via something like this to the lineup.

[rferry]

I understand the point of switching the 8th/9th batters. You clearly articulated them. I worry about its worth. The 8th hitter gets more at bats than the 9th hitter. Moving a terrible OBP performer into the 8th spot creates outs more often. That means fewer opportunities for the 9th/1st hitters. There's 27 outs to be used in a game, 3 per inning, the point is not to place them as efficiently as possible. The point is to score as much as you can before the third out.

 

It would seem that the "bat the weak slugger 9th" argument is premised on the fact that the weak slugger doesn't offer a significant impact any where in the lineup, but would help the the leadoff hitter in rather limited scenarios. The argument doesn't prove the weak batter would help the team by hitting 9th, the argument merely suggests that the team would be better if the weak slugger were to sit on the bench.

[PitchingWinsGames]

I understand the point of switching the 8th/9th batters. You clearly articulated them. I worry about its worth. The 8th hitter gets more at bats than the 9th hitter. Moving a terrible OBP performer into the 8th spot creates outs more often. That means fewer opportunities for the 9th/1st hitters. There's 27 outs to be used in a game, 3 per inning, the point is not to place them as efficiently as possible. The point is to score as much as you can before the third out.

 

It would seem that the "bat the weak slugger 9th" argument is premised on the fact that the weak slugger doesn't offer a significant impact any where in the lineup, but would help the the leadoff hitter in rather limited scenarios. The argument doesn't prove the weak batter would help the team by hitting 9th, the argument merely suggests that the team would be better if the weak slugger were to sit on the bench.

 

What Im saying is that it gives your best hitters more RBI opportunities. Considering your top guys have more ABs than the other players, it would reason that putting them in more positions with runners on would improve scoring... and according to that Milwaukee study, net you 15 more runs a season, which equates to 1.5 wins, or something like that