[NoOne]

One of the more interesting articles i read but can no longer find, was about rbi opportunities per spot in lineup. That is a major guideline to how i approach a lineup.

Basically , i want to match talent to the contexts most likely seen by each position in the linupe.

Context - only playoff caliber levels of team talent and a modern statistical environment or roughly modern.. primarily number of HR not being 1000-2000/year or otherwise very low. wher is that ine? not sure, but figure 4000+/year for a 30t 162g league, this is probably good.

#1 is a waste of power due to low rbi-opportunities (they don't see them EVER intheir first AB and that has a profoudn effect) but high RS potential. If your best obp guy is also a raker, don't even think of putting him here. Total waste of money as far as what creates value in a players contract demands. is it nice to hit 20+HR here? sure, but you better have power bats all the way to #6 or #7 in lineup to justify wasting it here..

#2 is a bit of a transition slot in line from #1, but it can make more use of power, but still quite a bit less than the big raking spots. Again, very difficult to justify putting real power here (30+ HR?) when it is better served batting #3-4-5. But, if you are stacked 6-7 deep, you can justify it.

#3-4-5 are your prime raking positions, and the futher you can extend that with power hitters deeper into lineup, the better. Based on averages of the sample data, #3 and #5 get similar number of rbi-oppportuniteis and #4 gets the most. so barring huge differences in power numbers, i'm putting higher obp power guys at the top and regressing from there. Lots of exceptions to this based on exact talent of the players invovled.

After that it's simply accruing as many power bats or otherwise competent bats you can find and afford, as well as stashing the pitcher or defensive wizards with little value in their bats. Usually these guys have severe weaknesses, if they are your 4th or 6th best power bat etc.

I like to have a 2nd high-quality leadoff bat. This is a luxury for large market sizes with high revenue. these guys don't break the bank and the bottom 3 hitters have significantly reduced PA and RBI-opportunities the deeper you go (i.e. lower ROI)..

It really keeps the offense humming at a high clip of the leadoff guy can consistently get on and i don't want to rely on a AAA callup, some mediocre bench player, or shifting bats that are better suited for 2-3-4-5-6 etc. for injury replacements. Preferably one the leadoff guys also plays SS with great defense.

I try not to rely on a Catcher for important spots in lineups, and few will demand that you do. My biggest issue on that is more about how the game handles resting catchers based on depth.. maybe this was fixed? but when a weak backup catcher goes in they are not shifted down to 8 or 9, so if you have a great bat at C, every third day your lineup is turned into a turd with a crap bat in an important spot. Less of a problem for other positions and it can either be avoided with off-days or rare enough to be less concerned about the effect

Always consider offesne and defense as mutually exclusive except for the fact you do have to cover all 8 positions.

Ther's no reason to pay more per expected runs created just because they play SS or C. This will only reduce efficiency of spending for runs. Money is oil, not fuel. Itneeds to be distributed properly and less waste = more wins.

Don't waste 10s of millions on the "best" bench. they play so little. Poor ROI.

Depth should be at AAA where it is cheap and likely very similar in quality to a typical bench player in MLB. in fact, your prospects will likely bet better players on average, and the little ML experience seems to be a positive factor for them, too.

Why pay 5-10M for a crap player to sit on the bench (or play 25% of the time in a platoon) that's only slightly better than a minimum salary from your mil? Especially since in any context you care they won't play much on a talented team capable of the WS. In seasons with extreme amount of injuries there's no escape from that no matter how you plant or what depth you have. "depth" wouldn't be your depth players if they were good enough to play everyday -- someone would have paid them to do so, otherwise, right? these are borderline trash players..don't believe they add much value compared to a very similar cheap similarly rated AAA player, because it isn't true. Certainly not worth millions of dolars more when you can spend that elsewhere with FAR greater ROI.

Maximize 3-4 SP, 3-4 RP, 4-7bats - bigger markets can expand on the bats and weaker markets may not be able to afford even the lower values. Have good low cost options at AAA for an amount of injuries that don't 100% derail the season. If they don't currently have a ML contract, even better.

the high end talent is worth the money and makes the biggest difference to your team's resulting record. Learn how many of those contracts you can afford at once and maximize that as often as you can while mixing in club-controlled contracts to exceed those limits in short-term contexts, but always have an exit strategy before you become finaicially handcuffed and your team absolutely sucks for 3-5 years due ot that lack of planning.

Oh, common sense adjustments for LHP.RHP. But, usually the guys you pay the big bucks for don't shift too far.

also, not that better teams are not average. so looking at the averages is notalways the best thing to compare. E.g. with rbi opportunities, exper more opprtunities to go deeper into lineup on a good team than you see with averages. if a team averages 5 times throught the lineup vs 4 that will make difference in the averages, i expect. But you want your RBI bats where they are most useful, nonetheless.

anecdote --in a high power offesne, #5 seems to get more rbi opportunities than #3 despite fewer PA (what is it? 4-5% fewer PA per step in lineup? it is an effect to consider regardless of exact value), but could be wrong... .