Some Stuff On Lineup Optimaztion

[Boopa1219]

Lineup optimization is basically maximizing the run scoring potential of your batting order, by minimizing the number of plate appearances by your worst hitter and increasing the number of plate appearances of your best hitter.

 

Here is an article that breaks down lineup optimization as it pertains to every spot in the batting order: http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/3/17...-your-lineup-by

 

There's a good book on it: http://www.amazon.com/Book-Playing-Percent...ywords=the+book

 

Here is an article on the teachings of the book: http://venomstrikes.com/2015/01/05/optimiz...can-score-runs/

[Jose Abreu]

This is the line of thinking that Robin used last year when he would put Abreu batting 2nd

[shysocks]

Bumping this because I've always found it interesting. One question arises from the articles.

 

3rd: The #3 hitter comes up to the plate with fewer runners on base on average than the #4 and #5 hitters. So why do managers put the run producers in the 3 hole when teams can benefit having them in the #4 and #5 hitters. The third spot isn’t really that important.

 

5th: The book says the number five hitter gets more plate appearances with men on, and can provide more value with extra base hits. After the #1, #2, and #4 slots are written in, the manager should put the next best hitter in the five-hole, not the three-hole.

 

Wouldn't it be true that the 5 hitter comes up with men on base more often because of the tradition of putting the a "role" hitter at 2 and your best hitter at 3? If the manager adhered to the newer recommendations, increasing the importance of the 2-spot, then putting the next best hitter at 5, then 3, then doesn't that decrease the importance of the 5-spot and and increase the importance of the 3-spot by design?

[bmags]

Bumping this because I've always found it interesting. One question arises from the articles.

 

3rd: The #3 hitter comes up to the plate with fewer runners on base on average than the #4 and #5 hitters. So why do managers put the run producers in the 3 hole when teams can benefit having them in the #4 and #5 hitters. The third spot isn’t really that important.

 

5th: The book says the number five hitter gets more plate appearances with men on, and can provide more value with extra base hits. After the #1, #2, and #4 slots are written in, the manager should put the next best hitter in the five-hole, not the three-hole.

 

Wouldn't it be true that the 5 hitter comes up with men on base more often because of the tradition of putting the a "role" hitter at 2 and your best hitter at 3? If the manager adhered to the newer recommendations, increasing the importance of the 2-spot, then putting the next best hitter at 5, then 3, then doesn't that decrease the importance of the 5-spot and and increase the importance of the 3-spot by design?

 

Was just thinking this. By making their recommended changes, you are changing their calculations of importance. The 4 and 5 spots are better because the 3 spot is usually best hitter.

[knightni]

The #3 hitter is the best hitter because he can keep the first inning going and avoid having the team go out 1-2-3.

 

He also has a better chance of early RBIs because usually, the top two hitters have the highest OBP.