Optimal positions in lineup

[ThePretender]

Ideally:

1) One of your 3 best hitters. I don't mind power in this spot. Emphasis on OBP, but should be able to hit for doubles, and 15+ HR power works. But ideally your 3 best hitters go here.

2) One of your top 2 bats. Power/OBP combo is fantastic. Slightly more OBP emphasis than power here. Only your clean up guy should be better. Comes up to bat second most times with RISP, so you want a fantastic hitter here.

3) Your best HR bat. Comes up the most times in a game with nobody on, so his job is to get on base and drive himself in.

4) Your best bat goes here. Simple as that.

5-9 - Descending order of offensive capability, while breaking up streaks of LH/RH hitters.

[DFyvie]

Originally Posted by drhay53

This is what I do, in this order of selection:

2 - highest OPS
4 - highest SLG remaining
1 - highest OBP remaining
5 - highest SLG remaining
3 - highest OPS remaining
6-9 OPS descending order

Technically, I actually select the top 5 hitters by OPS, use them to fill slots 1-5 as shown above, and then fill in 6-9.

I converted to this model a few years ago. I led the league in Runs Scored with the 2016 Padres a few 'new games' ago. T'was a pretty nice feeling.

[NoOne]

the concept behind this is looking at what is different at each spot in the lineup.

who sees more RBI-opportunities (notice i say opportunities, not resulting rbi)

who gets more ab? (obvious but, important)

who's more likely te be driven in? (not the same spots as the rbi-opp spots)..

etc etc... what do yo uwant out of that slot in the order? it should be common sense how you should build it up.

does power help anywhere in the order? Yes... it does... but it helps more at certain sports in the lineup.. .specifically 3-4-5 will have the most opportunities.

does that mean you shouldn't put someone fast there? no... but it depends. if you have enough power, sometimes putting that power guy with speed #1/2 in lineup because no one else can fill the role. the guys in 3-4 or 5 may produce less runs, but the benefit he adds to teh #2 spot covers than and then some (net positive = do it, regardless of platitudes and theories stated by anyone in this thread, including this post).

what combination results in the most runs scored... that is all that matters... use the basic concepts you already know and adjust to context. sometimes it will make sense to do something odd-looking, but most of the time not so much.

#1 fewest rbi-opps / most AB -- so, obp, speed, these types of intangibles become a bit more important relative to other factors... since return on power is minimized here.

#2 - supposedly needs versatility, and that makes sense... if i have 2 obp guys and one has ~average power, i like that in the 2-hole. however, ability easy trumps intangibles... e.g. you choose between a .280 guy and a perrenial .300+ guy who doesnt bunt as welll and all other features the same.. if you don't go with the guy taht's ~7% better at gettgin on base for a sac bunt opp that occurs a handful of times a year you are nuts. put things in proper perspective based on how freqently it occurs and always related back to ability to score runs.. .nothign else. (pretty sure the 7% more hits per ~500+ ab is > a few bunt attempts) Definitely want Doubles power minimum in the #2... any intangibles also help more so than other slots later in the order... but slugging / hitting still hugely more important.

Putting a monster #2 isn't a good idea, if that's your best ops or best player etc... but some situations may warrant it, despite that fact. even # 3 gets less opportunities to rake than 4-5, so it's already starting to negatively effect that portion of the equation for your "best" ops or power guy. (ops isn't proportional, btw -- some dummy literally just added to other stats together without even thinking about it... i use ops too, don't get me wrong, but i never think it's accurate description on its own and at best is just mildly correlated with how you are using it.)

i put my best pure bomber #4, but a more professional hitter with power i prefer #3... tehy can take a walk and turn the lineup over to the #4 guy in the 1st inning more often with people on base. (do you load up 1st inning for the 3rd or 4th guy? 4th guy probably more volatile but bigger returns in first innnign scoring... tuned for #3 guy in first inning you may get more consistent runs but not as big of peaks and valleys in comparison. i prefer to load up for the #4 guy)

After the first inning you have virtually no control of order of batters... it's random (this is exclusive from the comment saying some spots get more rbi opps - different concept and both true). so, don't worry about order of the batters after the first inning... meaning after 1-4ish you simple want the better offensive players in descending order - because you have no idea if they are batting 1.2 or 3+ in the inning, ever.

3-4-5
#3 should be the 'best' hitter, they say... again makes sense relative to what hte player will likely see. not as many rbi-opps as #4.. probably a bit less than #5 -- despite those spots getting less plate appearances. i want this guy to have average+ eye, too... a little speed is nice but far down the list for me in most cases.

4-5 i want bombers... consistently .500+ slugging type #'s. i'm less concerned about BB and intangibles... although these 3-4-5 guys can score alot of runs, too.

6-7 - whatver you can afford... you can't always have 5 or 6, 25-35+HR guys. maybe he's got a high average and not a tone of HR... or the yhave a lot of hr and crappy BA/OBP etc.. these guys likely have flaws... raking RBI is still > running skills at #6/7.

8-9 - get into your worst offensive players for sure by this point. i take anything i can get that's better than average here... if they are speedy, i put them in front of a power guy in the bottom 3. generally i just order purly on ability to Rake after 3-4-5, but speed mixed in the last 3 is a wash most likely.

So, alot of that doesn't apply outside of the modern era... if your league is higher BA and lower power #'s, you should probably adjust what you read.

you can use what "they" say about modern league andn guesstimate the new weights you should put in power / eye / BA etc etc... what won't change is likely RBI-opportunites per slot in order and # of AB related to slot.. .if that needs to be said.

the break-even at when you should go with power or intangibles will change (oversimplified)

[Orcin]

I follow the ideas in this thread but one additional step is to consider how the players fit with each other. I don't like to have three consecutive lefties, so I might move someone to split them up. I don't like strikeouts bunched together either, so I sometimes bat a good contact guy with gap power fifth to split two power/strikeout guys.

[DawnBTVS]

I kind of veer away from pure Sabermetrics in this instance...

#1: Best Eye/Good Contact (think a Wade Boggs type hitter here). The Contact can be fudged around with but the important thing is getting guys who can walk at least 80+ times.
#2: 2nd Best Eye/Best Gap Power. I love having my 2nd guy being able to get on base or drive the leadoff hitter in. Ideal types would be Dustin Pedroia or Edgar Martinez types.
#3: Best Power Hitter. Even low contact guys like a Mark McGwire or low OBP guy like Sammy Sosa works for me here but he has to have pop.
#4: 2nd Best Power Hitter/High OBP guy. Can continue an inning/drive in runs or serve as a 'leadoff' hitter for the 2nd Inning.
#5: 3rd Best Power Hitter/High OBP guy.
#6: 4th Best Power Hitter/High OBP guy.
#7: 2nd Best Gap Power/5th Best Power. Think a Bernie Williams/Derek Jeter type hitter here. Can drive in some runs and come up big with Doubles or a few Triples.
#8: Speed guy here if you have one or a guy with low contact. 'Weakest' hitter here but somebody who could still drive in runs now and then.
#9: Prototype of Leadoff Hitter. Ideally, somebody who can set up the table and if you're lucky, you can get 2-3 guys on base by the time the #3 hitter comes up.

[conception]

After reading this thread and especially some of the articles posted in here I've begun to think a lot more about lineup optimization, moving away from the traditional view of things, ie. leadoff hitter fast, second hitter obp only, third batter your best, fourth your most powerful. It really worked when I won the championship after four years of failing in the playoffs despite good talent. I did it with unproven guys batting third and some of the best guys batting 2nd and 4th. Finally admitted that my speedy and good contact but low OBP guy needed to be moved from leadoff for a guy who couldn't run but got onbase.

The hard part with optimal lineups is that it is so rare to go through a season where everyone hits like they are supposed to. If a good bat is struggling I've got to move pieces around to get them going, regardless of if they make the most sense when guys are hitting their norm. My lineup by the middle of the year is composed of wherever I have gotten guys going.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by professor ape

Bill James has spent a good bit of time studying the impact of the construction of batting orders. The conclusion has been that (as counterintuitive at it may seem) the impact of the traditional 'optimal' lineup over random orders is much less than expected. Maybe a few runs over the course of the season.

Basically as long as you aren't putting a pitcher in the #3 slot, there are a lot of other things to put your energy into rather than stressing about whether to bat someone 4th or 5th.

it's something like 16runs vs. average lineup (or was it vs. "worst")

how much it affects a season depends on distribution of those runs which to simplify is pretty random.

also, the "optimal" theory for whom goes where often gets thrown out the window based on whom you have.

look at that tiger's lineup up above... it's rational. but, kinsler is probably a better #2 than a #1. on that particular team, he's the best #1, so he gets used there because there's enough power hitters to allow it. if there was a power outage, you don't see him #1 or even maybe #2

if detroit didn't have 3-4 guys capable of producing good power numbers, kinsler wouldn't be batting leadoff if his raking ability is too good in comparison to other options in the 3-4-5 spot of the order (probably the 3 in his case could be viable on some teams).

so, even though there is an optimum way, without endorsing any theory specifically, you'll likely do somethign that contradicts it on many levels based on what you have to work with on your team. there is always a break-even analysis required... the optimal method is not always the best method given the materials at hand. (but it actually is the optimum way if you look at it from the right perspective... it's understanding when trait A overcomes trait b, even though trait b is significantly more important, in general)

planning ahead becomes integral... i always make sure i have an OBP guy and a guy how can at least fill that role during injuries. so, 2/9 slots taken on the team for that... the rest i want power, although 1-2 of those guys i want some speed, too (low priority, but if possible). speed for #2/3 is nice but definitely not worth sacrificing strong offensive numbers.

you can't always just sign the 30hr/100rbi guy and call it good... if you don't have other roles in the lineup, i think it increases volatility, even if it may produce a few more runs. (when the proportion of runs scored becomes too heavily in chunks... easier to come up zero, even if you average more)

other thing to think about:

in this video game, taking walks can actually hurt a guy expected to focus on RBI's. so, i typically have the better eye in front of the lesser eye (3-4-5) in addition to the other concerns for placing players in those more important slots.

i'm not going to put someone who's increadibly better 5th just for that reason though.. .but when they are similar i look for something less prevalent (cause/effect that's less important / less frequent).

this situation is a complex web of various curves that don't necessary max out at the same time for the same reasons. so, all or nothing is never going to work well in this situation... be fluid and maleable to what you have to work with on your roster...

if you prefer a certain type of structure to teh lineup, make sure your player procurement methods are in line with your thoughts aobut hte lineup... from top-to-bottom you need to be creating synergy in how you do things.

[slugger922cubs]

Came across this article today. Thought it would be interesting for those in this thread.
https://theringer.com/2017-mlb-previ...r-2e49f6ff7c58