Bat Hardy 3rd and Jones 4th

[Can_of_corn]

Phantom don't waste your last five posts on this thread. I am giving up, when they start citing a lack of proof as proof it is time for a reasonable man to leave.

[Sports Guy]

Phantom don't waste your last five posts on this thread. I am giving up, when they start citing a lack of proof as proof it is time for a reasonable man to leave.

When you come to the table with real proof, then you can talk to us.

But you don't have proof...and you know why? Because it doesn't exist.

That's the issue. There is no definitive proof to any of this.

[Phantom]

No, of course not...There is no proof to any of this which is why I think it is foolish to definitively say it doesn't matter.

Well, there is evidence pointing to lineups not mattering much, and, I believe, evidence pointing toward players not really hitting any differently anywhere in the lineup. Until there is evidence pointing the other direction, I know which way I will lean. Not being able to definitively prove something does not mean it shouldn't be believed.

[Sports Guy]

Well, there is evidence pointing to lineups not mattering much, and, I believe, evidence pointing toward players not really hitting any differently anywhere in the lineup. Until there is evidence pointing the other direction, I know which way I will lean. Not being able to definitively prove something does not mean it shouldn't be believed.

Simulations aren't evidence.

Besides, when you are battling for a few games here and there, 20-50 runs a year can be significant.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Simulations aren't evidence.

Besides, when you are battling for a few games here and there, 20-50 runs a year can be significant.

They are most certainly evidence.

[Sports Guy]

They are most certainly evidence.

No they aren't because you don't know how a player is going to react.

Computers can't tell you that.

Athletes like things a certain way. They like routine.

Understand something here...I don't think lineups should matter outside of saying, I want my best hitters to get more at bats than my worst hitters. However, when you have guys like Nick and Wieters say that they have different approaches to hitting depending on where they are in the lineup, that must be taken into account. There is no way that a simulation can take that into account.

I think this is stupid. If you have a great approach hitting 3rd, that approach should be the same hitting 7th but the reality is, that's not the case. Its just not true. Whether we think it is stupid or not, its just the way it is.

No "evidence" out there takes this into account and because of that, you can't prove it.

Its like people who use ERA+ and say that so and so would pitch this way because ERA+ is league adjusted. While that is true, what you don't know is if Joe Schmoe pitched at Petco, how much better would he be than if he pitched in OPACY.

You just do not know those things until it actually happens and happens over a large sample size.

[Phantom]

I think this is stupid. If you have a great approach hitting 3rd, that approach should be the same hitting 7th but the reality is, that's not the case. Its just not true. Whether we think it is stupid or not, its just the way it is.

No "evidence" out there takes this into account and because of that, you can't prove it.

So, you won't believe scientific simulations based on decades of baseball statistics, but you will take their word for it? I know which one I trust more.

[Sports Guy]

So, you won't believe scientific simulations based on decades of baseball statistics, but you will take their word for it? I know which one I trust more.

The problem is, decades of stats don't take into account what I am discussing.

Its fine that you want to rely on that..go right ahead. I just think it makes no sense and, as I said, even if the difference truly is 20-30 runs, that is still enough for it to be important.

Playoff spots are decided by 1-2 games all the time, so eeking out every run you can and every win you can is important.

[Phantom]

The problem is, decades of stats don't take into account what I am discussing.

I agree, but you are talking about optimizing something based on feeling.

Its fine that you want to rely on that..go right ahead. I just think it makes no sense and, as I said, even if the difference truly is 20-30 runs, that is still enough for it to be important.

Playoff spots are decided by 1-2 games all the time, so eeking out every run you can and every win you can is important.

I agree that an effort should be made to optimize the lineup, but that we spend way too much time debating it, for how little of an effect it has. The best possible lineup might win 3-4 games more than the worst possible, but I have never seen a manager apply the worst possible lineup. Batting Vlad 4th might have cost us one game this season.

We also debate it in a dumb way, as evidenced by the premium given to the 3rd spot in these discussions, which is the 5th most important spot to bat in.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/3/17/795946/optimizing-your-lineup-by

You want to debate the lineup by the above (or other) analysis? Great. You want to debate it by feeling? What's the point of doing that?

[CA-ORIOLE]

No they aren't because you don't know how a player is going to react.

Computers can't tell you that.

Athletes like things a certain way. They like routine.

Understand something here...I don't think lineups should matter outside of saying, I want my best hitters to get more at bats than my worst hitters. However, when you have guys like Nick and Wieters say that they have different approaches to hitting depending on where they are in the lineup, that must be taken into account. There is no way that a simulation can take that into account.

I think this is stupid. If you have a great approach hitting 3rd, that approach should be the same hitting 7th but the reality is, that's not the case. Its just not true. Whether we think it is stupid or not, its just the way it is.

No "evidence" out there takes this into account and because of that, you can't prove it.

Its like people who use ERA+ and say that so and so would pitch this way because ERA+ is league adjusted. While that is true, what you don't know is if Joe Schmoe pitched at Petco, how much better would he be than if he pitched in OPACY.

You just do not know those things until it actually happens and happens over a large sample size.

This sounds like the clutch hitting argument or the protection argument. It doesn't fly. Could there be a few guys like Murray who hit outside there statistical norm in the clutch ..yeah. Still, I'll break down Murray's (good as he was) numbers to pretty close to there norm with some analysis. Same with the protection argument, there may be a few outliers, but they all regress towards the norm over time.

The ERA/ERA+ argument isn't relevant imo. In this case we're taking and entire lineup and neutralizing all the factors. No park adjustments are needed. There is no change of venue to consider, hence no real volatile factors like PETCO to OPACY. Not to mention we're talking about 9 guys performance.....not one.

[CA-ORIOLE]

The problem is, decades of stats don't take into account what I am discussing.

Its fine that you want to rely on that..go right ahead. I just think it makes no sense and, as I said, even if the difference truly is 20-30 runs, that is still enough for it to be important.

Playoff spots are decided by 1-2 games all the time, so eeking out every run you can and every win you can is important.

Well, I think we can all agree that a potential 2-3 wins is important enough to optimize the batting order. That being said, managers aren't stupid and we're probably talking about 1-2 wins. Like I said before, I do think further effeciencies with platooning and speed can be gained.

[Sports Guy]

I agree, but you are talking about optimizing something based on feeling.

I agree that an effort should be made to optimize the lineup, but that we spend way too much time debating it, for how little of an effect it has. The best possible lineup might win 3-4 games more than the worst possible, but I have never seen a manager apply the worst possible lineup. Batting Vlad 4th might have cost us one game this season.

We also debate it in a dumb way, as evidenced by the premium given to the 3rd spot in these discussions, which is the 5th most important spot to bat in.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/3/17/795946/optimizing-your-lineup-by

You want to debate the lineup by the above (or other) analysis? Great. You want to debate it by feeling? What's the point of doing that?

I am not debating anything by feeling. I am debating it based on reality and how baseball players are. I don't even agree that it should be that way. I think its stupid but by looking at computer simulations, too many other things get ignored and because of that, the validity of that "evidence" has to come into question.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I am not debating anything by feeling. I am debating it based on reality and how baseball players are. I don't even agree that it should be that way. I think its stupid but by looking at computer simulations, too many other things get ignored and because of that, the validity of that "evidence" has to come into question.

You really don't have any anecdotal evidence. How is it not feeling? I take it you're in the clutch hitting and protection camp?

[waroriole]

I agree that an effort should be made to optimize the lineup, but that we spend way too much time debating it, for how little of an effect it has. The best possible lineup might win 3-4 games more than the worst possible, but I have never seen a manager apply the worst possible lineup. Batting Vlad 4th might have cost us one game this season.

Interesting discussion. I have a question though. Is the 3-4 games more of an average? Is it possible that it could have a broader, or narrower, effect?

If a player's WAR is 4, that seems like a rough estimate of what he was worth to a team. However, if you go game by game through a season can you make the argument that a player was worth drastically more or less to his team?

Anyway, I don't have any answers to these questions, just wondering what some of you think about it.

[Sports Guy]

You really don't have any anecdotal evidence. How is it not feeling? I take it you're in the clutch hitting and protection camp?

Clutch? No

Protection? Somewhat but more in extreme cases. IE, Izzy batting behind Pujols.

You are choosing to ignore way too many factors that I am just not willing to push aside and pretend don't exist.