Systematic Approach to Setting the Lineup

Smodes · 01-29-2018, 02:42 PM

What do you think about this approach to setting the lineup?

Assign each player these 4 custom ratings

- OBP Speed Player = Contact + Eye + Speed
- OBP Player = Contact + Eye
- Power Hitter = (Contact x 2) + (Gap x 1.5) + (HR x 1.5) + K
- Contact Hitter = Contact

Each custom rating is associated with a specific spot in the lineup.

Lineup Position / Custom Ranking
1 / OBP Speed
2 / Power
3 / OBP
4 / Power
5 / Contact
6 / Contact
7 / Contact
8 / Contact
9 / Contact

Fill the lineup in the following order assigning the player with the highest rating in that custom rating. (Provided that the player hasn't already been assigned a spot).

1,2,4,5,3,6,7,8,9

For example...
First, place the player with the highest OBP Speed rating in the number 1 spot. Second, place the player with the highest power rating in the number 2 spot. Third, place the player with the next highest Power Hitter rating in the number 4 spot, etc...

NoOne · 01-29-2018, 08:11 PM

to avoid the most "ifs" at each point i'd do it in a particular order.

start with the toughest spot to fill - typically requires the most or makes the most of some talent that is not predominant in the league - like extreme power, for example.

you don't put the highest obp guy 1st if he is your best raker.

in my leagues the combination of power and contact is the most expensive and difficult thing to find on offense (not speaking about pitchers). if your league is different, just substitute as needed. and of course, slight variances in lineup choices.

****************************
#3-4-5 first--
these spots produce the most RBI-opportunities (not "rbi" unless you put the best rbi-producer available).

3-4 probably should have the guys with higher obp, since they would be on base more often for the person behind them. similar to speed, but speed is more of a garnish than a side item(obp relative to 3-4-5) or entree(power).

#2 gets less rbi-opps than 3-4-5-6 possibly 7th, i forget the exact info i had read. can't seem to find it through google anymore, either. simply due to cyclical nature of 1-9 repeated and starting at "1".

#1 obp/speed if possible. (prefer speed if possible everywhere, but power far greater impact than speed in my leagues)

7-8-9 - faily easy at this point on all but superstar teams. even then fairly obvious. even 1000run teams have a clunker or 2. if i have a straggler high-end obp, which i try to do, he's 9th and it really boosts the 1-2-3-spot's #. so an obp/weak hitter is optimal for 9th, mainly due to cost and ROI. **a "good" obp, not the best obp of the choices available** still let situation dictate.

*****************

so, i prefer not to have a 40hr guy 2nd, if at all possible. on a great offensive team 20-30+ or 40 in a good year isn't a bad thing out of the 2-spot at all. if i have 4 or 5 40+ hr guys, no doubt one is going 2nd. anything less and the difference between them 2nd and 6th or 7th+ in lineup isn't as great as the difference of who replaces the slugger and the domino effect at that spot and later in lineup if he's moved etc - touches more things, far more often a greater impact.

that's where i'd draw the line - unless swapping with ~7th or later, probably not a wise thing to bat them 2nd. swapping with 7-8-9 in order? no problem. possibly 6th, too.

no matter what your choices, start with most difficult to fill and keep -- maybe due to talent, maybe due to financial reasons -- all sorts of possibilities in ootp. then move to the next... your idea of this may change over time, but you likely already mostly know after a few years of drafting and signing FA.

never anythign written in stone either... odd situations can arise.

each league is a bit different. start paying close attnetion to the results you get at various spots in lineups of similar offenses. understanding how the same player would "look" at each spot in lineup makes these choices nearly automatic or close enough that it simply doesn't matter much.

ThePretender · 01-29-2018, 08:23 PM

I'm not sure that's accurate.

#2 batter gets a ton of high leverage at bats. So he's going to be a more important batter than your #3 guy.

If it was me I'd fill in 4, 2, and 1 first (in that order) and work around that.

NoOne · 01-29-2018, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePretender

I'm not sure that's accurate.

#2 batter gets a ton of high leverage at bats. So he's going to be a more important batter than your #3 guy.

If it was me I'd fill in 4, 2, and 1 first (in that order) and work around that.

it's not something i made up. wish i had the web site. when 1 factor effects 1ab a game, it's a fairly big deal.

it listed each spot in lineup based on rbi-opportunities, not RBI. #2 most defintieyl gets fewer rbi than 3-4-5, likely 6th too (it's been at elast a couple years, i may have quoted it in forums before)

i'll put it this way, if you can afford to move that 40+hr guy from 3-4-5 to 2nd in lineup, the increased # of runs and fewer inevitable RBI won't outweight the corresponding values batting "3-4-5".

not only that, you moved a slugger upto #2, if their is someone better suited for #6, now you also have to factor in the opportunity cose of the shift up in lineup after that point.

these factors compound and start with a large portion of what occurs.
****

i edited a couple things since you replied, but i don't think it had to do with this, fwiw.

no matter what, if you apply some semblance of logic, most ~decent lineups won't be more than a few runs apart from each other and none of them will be optimal unless lucky or simply too obvious due to parts that you have.

EDIT:

don't take my word, look at the math:

https://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/rb...batting-order/

putting a slugger 2nd causes a loss of rbi.. and not small from the perspective of 1 player. how many more runs is he scoring? if increased RS doesn't overcome the loss of rbi, it's a net loss. let situation dictate.

this is relative for any league ~similar to modern MLB. odd stats/ai / different eras could have different implications.

ThePretender · 01-29-2018, 09:14 PM

No, that article doesn't tell you what you think it does. It's not optimized, it just says you should expect that number of RBI based on batting order. You would get different results with more optimized lineups.

What you want to look at, is this. The article tells you where batters should be, not what results you should expect based on current lineups.

Quote:

The Books says the #2 hitter comes to bat in situations about as important as the #3 hitter, but more often. That means the #2 hitter should be better than the #3 guy, and one of the best three hitters overall. And since he bats with the bases empty more often than the hitters behind him, he should be a high-OBP player. Doesn't sound like someone who should be sacrificing, does it?

Quote:

The Book says the #3 hitter comes to the plate with, on average, fewer runners on base than the #4 or #5 hitters. So why focus on putting a guy who can knock in runs in the #3 spot, when the two spots after him can benefit from it more? Surprisingly, because he comes to bat so often with two outs and no runners on base, the #3 hitter isn't nearly as important as we think. This is a spot to fill after more important spots are taken care of.

Quote:

The Book says the #4 hitter comes to bat in the most important situations out of all nine spots, but is equal in importance to the #2 hole once you consider the #2 guy receives more plate appearances. The cleanup hitter is the best hitter on the team with power.

If you're looking for optimized lineups, you want to put a premium on selecting your 4, 2 and 1 hitters, not your 3/4/5. And again, you don't look for speed #1 since he's in front of all your power bats. If #1 has speed, that's a bonus, but it's less valuable in front of power hitters. You're not going to want your leadoff guy to run into outs with your power bats up. Speed is more valuable in front of guys who hit singles, so that you maximize the value of the hits as they won't often go for XBH. Personally, I don't mind if my leadoff guy has some pop.

pgjocki · 01-29-2018, 11:53 PM

There is much debate on optimizing a batting order but I know one thing that doesn't work and that is batting your catcher as lead-off...

Now, I take an approach that I want my lead-off guy to have a high OBP and be able to run as I love stealing bases and putting him in position to score on a single by either my #2 or #3 hitter in the 1st inning. I believe (caveat here pure speculation) that scoring first gives me a greater chance at winning the game than in trying to come back.

For what it's worth my #2 hitter last year had the following stat line:

AVG: .308
OBP: .367
SLG: .576
RBI: 111
HR: 42
R: 111

Yes, he had the same number of runs scored as RBI's. Now, the guy behind him had the following line:

AVG: .282
OBP: .411
SLG: .639
RBI: 102
HR: 43
R: 86

My lead-off guy had a .382 OBP and 44 stolen bases and scored 92 times.

I like loading up the first three and I also bat the pitcher 8th and put a scrappy OBP and high speed guy at 9th.

Your mileage may (caveat WILL) vary and the beauty is to find what works for you. It also depends (in my humble opinion) if you play the games out or just sim.

NoOne · 01-30-2018, 01:01 AM

didn't say you set it based on that.

that's not the original website. the one i read years ago was not from the player's perspective like a fantasy sports related article is. it was a rate(%) per slot in order. you compare that with a similar RS table (not the ones linked) and you can make a good decision based on ability to score runs and ability to drive them in. beyond those 2 things, not much will tip the scales enough to matter.

i found the other half that shows the whole picture from this writer's stab at it... but like i said this is info just from a perspective of a guy who hits 30hr/30ish doubles etc as they state. the key table is the one adding RS to RBI -- which is best for team, not fantasy baseball. a lineup that maximizes that for the best 9 players is optimal. this table does not give that type of info, just for this 1 example player and not the most precise way to do it. talking a ballpark idea here.

https://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/ru...batting-order/

in this 1 player's case (writer used same example player) his best position is 4th, then 2nd -- i don't see that in ootp though. my 3rd guy gets 20-30 more rbi than the 2nd guy. also, guys i bump form 2nd to third with similar ability see large increases in rbi after that move. excluding a tangible decline in stats, all careers have trended this way on my teams.

so the math does say second is a good spot for a slugger (even if it's just the ballpark, i can admit slightly that i am a bit wrong - meant to be funny) -- probably one that hits more HR than doubles or triples too.

this just isn't true in any of my ootp leagues i've ever created. i chalk it up to the 'ballpark' idea at the top and that my offenses are no where near ~average. this info is probably better for 700-800ish runs. theory isn't matching practice in ootp. (some doubts about RL too).

i would do a similar setup to the two articles, but use baselines for your team instead of baselines for the league where it makes sense... i read the first article, i only looked at tables in 2nd one. first one was reasonable. i bet that puts you <1RS of optimal every year. totally not worth all that effort, btw.

i wish i had the other url... tried a ootp site search earlier but i wasn't going to spend that much time looking.

ThePretender · 01-30-2018, 11:13 AM

I always run my optimal lineups and it works exactly how I want. It's also not just about RBI opportunities for your middle of the order vs #2 hitter, but avoiding outs and extending innings as well and capitalizing on high leverage spots.

In one league I have my 400 OBP guy leading off, and he's followed by my former clean up bat. I moved him to #2 in the lineup despite his 30 HR power because my new cleanup guy is an even better power hitter. My #3 guy is a 35-40 HR threat, so he's still a pretty fantastic hitter in his own right, but he's still less productive than my 1, 2 and 4 hitters.

My experience is that OOTP models it well, and I take advantage of it in whatever league I'm in.

Brad K · 01-30-2018, 04:19 PM

I usually find the game created batting order acceptable. A couple of exceptions.

Between a guy with a little more speed and a guy with a little higher OBP it will select speed to lead off. I prefer the higher OBP player.

Also the game plays lefty-righty stronger than I prefer. I will often bump up same side batters a spot from where the game puts them.

I agree with the concept of having a decent OPB guy batting last especially if he's fast. But that's 8th in my situation since I only manage NL teams.

I've never had a team with the kind of overall power previous posters mention.

01-30-2018, 01:01 AM	#7
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	didn't say you set it based on that. that's not the original website. the one i read years ago was not from the player's perspective like a fantasy sports related article is. it was a rate(%) per slot in order. you compare that with a similar RS table (not the ones linked) and you can make a good decision based on ability to score runs and ability to drive them in. beyond those 2 things, not much will tip the scales enough to matter. i found the other half that shows the whole picture from this writer's stab at it... but like i said this is info just from a perspective of a guy who hits 30hr/30ish doubles etc as they state. the key table is the one adding RS to RBI -- which is best for team, not fantasy baseball. a lineup that maximizes that for the best 9 players is optimal. this table does not give that type of info, just for this 1 example player and not the most precise way to do it. talking a ballpark idea here. https://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/ru...batting-order/ in this 1 player's case (writer used same example player) his best position is 4th, then 2nd -- i don't see that in ootp though. my 3rd guy gets 20-30 more rbi than the 2nd guy. also, guys i bump form 2nd to third with similar ability see large increases in rbi after that move. excluding a tangible decline in stats, all careers have trended this way on my teams. so the math does say second is a good spot for a slugger (even if it's just the ballpark, i can admit slightly that i am a bit wrong - meant to be funny) -- probably one that hits more HR than doubles or triples too. this just isn't true in any of my ootp leagues i've ever created. i chalk it up to the 'ballpark' idea at the top and that my offenses are no where near ~average. this info is probably better for 700-800ish runs. theory isn't matching practice in ootp. (some doubts about RL too). i would do a similar setup to the two articles, but use baselines for your team instead of baselines for the league where it makes sense... i read the first article, i only looked at tables in 2nd one. first one was reasonable. i bet that puts you <1RS of optimal every year. totally not worth all that effort, btw. i wish i had the other url... tried a ootp site search earlier but i wasn't going to spend that much time looking. Last edited by NoOne; 01-30-2018 at 01:04 AM.

01-29-2018, 02:42 PM	#1
Smodes Bat Boy Join Date: Jan 2018 Posts: 9	Systematic Approach to Setting the Lineup What do you think about this approach to setting the lineup? Assign each player these 4 custom ratings - OBP Speed Player = Contact + Eye + Speed - OBP Player = Contact + Eye - Power Hitter = (Contact x 2) + (Gap x 1.5) + (HR x 1.5) + K - Contact Hitter = Contact Each custom rating is associated with a specific spot in the lineup. Lineup Position / Custom Ranking 1 / OBP Speed 2 / Power 3 / OBP 4 / Power 5 / Contact 6 / Contact 7 / Contact 8 / Contact 9 / Contact Fill the lineup in the following order assigning the player with the highest rating in that custom rating. (Provided that the player hasn't already been assigned a spot). 1,2,4,5,3,6,7,8,9 For example... First, place the player with the highest OBP Speed rating in the number 1 spot. Second, place the player with the highest power rating in the number 2 spot. Third, place the player with the next highest Power Hitter rating in the number 4 spot, etc...

01-29-2018, 08:11 PM	#2
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	to avoid the most "ifs" at each point i'd do it in a particular order. start with the toughest spot to fill - typically requires the most or makes the most of some talent that is not predominant in the league - like extreme power, for example. you don't put the highest obp guy 1st if he is your best raker. in my leagues the combination of power and contact is the most expensive and difficult thing to find on offense (not speaking about pitchers). if your league is different, just substitute as needed. and of course, slight variances in lineup choices. ************************** #3-4-5 first-- these spots produce the most RBI-opportunities (not "rbi" unless you put the best rbi-producer available). 3-4 probably should have the guys with higher obp, since they would be on base more often for the person behind them. similar to speed, but speed is more of a garnish than a side item(obp relative to 3-4-5) or entree(power). #2 gets less rbi-opps than 3-4-5-6 possibly 7th, i forget the exact info i had read. can't seem to find it through google anymore, either. simply due to cyclical nature of 1-9 repeated and starting at "1". #1 obp/speed if possible. (prefer speed if possible everywhere, but power far greater impact than speed in my leagues) 7-8-9 - faily easy at this point on all but superstar teams. even then fairly obvious. even 1000run teams have a clunker or 2. if i have a straggler high-end obp, which i try to do, he's 9th and it really boosts the 1-2-3-spot's #. so an obp/weak hitter is optimal for 9th, mainly due to cost and ROI. a "good" obp, not the best obp of the choices available still let situation dictate. *************** so, i prefer not to have a 40hr guy 2nd, if at all possible. on a great offensive team 20-30+ or 40 in a good year isn't a bad thing out of the 2-spot at all. if i have 4 or 5 40+ hr guys, no doubt one is going 2nd. anything less and the difference between them 2nd and 6th or 7th+ in lineup isn't as great as the difference of who replaces the slugger and the domino effect at that spot and later in lineup if he's moved etc - touches more things, far more often a greater impact. that's where i'd draw the line - unless swapping with ~7th or later, probably not a wise thing to bat them 2nd. swapping with 7-8-9 in order? no problem. possibly 6th, too. no matter what your choices, start with most difficult to fill and keep -- maybe due to talent, maybe due to financial reasons -- all sorts of possibilities in ootp. then move to the next... your idea of this may change over time, but you likely already mostly know after a few years of drafting and signing FA. never anythign written in stone either... odd situations can arise. each league is a bit different. start paying close attnetion to the results you get at various spots in lineups of similar offenses. understanding how the same player would "look" at each spot in lineup makes these choices nearly automatic or close enough that it simply doesn't matter much. Last edited by NoOne; 01-29-2018 at 08:28 PM.

01-29-2018, 08:23 PM	#3
ThePretender All Star Starter Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,324	I'm not sure that's accurate. #2 batter gets a ton of high leverage at bats. So he's going to be a more important batter than your #3 guy. If it was me I'd fill in 4, 2, and 1 first (in that order) and work around that.

01-29-2018, 11:53 PM	#6
pgjocki All Star Starter Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Maryland - just outside DC Posts: 1,590	There is much debate on optimizing a batting order but I know one thing that doesn't work and that is batting your catcher as lead-off... Now, I take an approach that I want my lead-off guy to have a high OBP and be able to run as I love stealing bases and putting him in position to score on a single by either my #2 or #3 hitter in the 1st inning. I believe (caveat here pure speculation) that scoring first gives me a greater chance at winning the game than in trying to come back. For what it's worth my #2 hitter last year had the following stat line: AVG: .308 OBP: .367 SLG: .576 RBI: 111 HR: 42 R: 111 Yes, he had the same number of runs scored as RBI's. Now, the guy behind him had the following line: AVG: .282 OBP: .411 SLG: .639 RBI: 102 HR: 43 R: 86 My lead-off guy had a .382 OBP and 44 stolen bases and scored 92 times. I like loading up the first three and I also bat the pitcher 8th and put a scrappy OBP and high speed guy at 9th. Your mileage may (caveat WILL) vary and the beauty is to find what works for you. It also depends (in my humble opinion) if you play the games out or just sim. __________________ - - - World Series championships: 1926, 1931, 1934, 1942, 1944, 1946, 1964, 1967, 1982, 2006, 2011

01-30-2018, 11:13 AM	#8
ThePretender All Star Starter Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,324	I always run my optimal lineups and it works exactly how I want. It's also not just about RBI opportunities for your middle of the order vs #2 hitter, but avoiding outs and extending innings as well and capitalizing on high leverage spots. In one league I have my 400 OBP guy leading off, and he's followed by my former clean up bat. I moved him to #2 in the lineup despite his 30 HR power because my new cleanup guy is an even better power hitter. My #3 guy is a 35-40 HR threat, so he's still a pretty fantastic hitter in his own right, but he's still less productive than my 1, 2 and 4 hitters. My experience is that OOTP models it well, and I take advantage of it in whatever league I'm in.

01-30-2018, 04:19 PM	#9
Brad K Banned Join Date: May 2016 Location: St Petersburg Florida USA Posts: 6,693 Infractions: 0/2 (4)	I usually find the game created batting order acceptable. A couple of exceptions. Between a guy with a little more speed and a guy with a little higher OBP it will select speed to lead off. I prefer the higher OBP player. Also the game plays lefty-righty stronger than I prefer. I will often bump up same side batters a spot from where the game puts them. I agree with the concept of having a decent OPB guy batting last especially if he's fast. But that's 8th in my situation since I only manage NL teams. I've never had a team with the kind of overall power previous posters mention.