Can we please stop batting Gunnar at lead-off?

[DrungoHazewood]

9 hours ago, baltfan said:

No you bat your best hitter second.  That is what all the analytics say.  And I would love to see him hit second. 

Actually, the analytics say that the difference (over an entire season) between the most and least logical batting lineups is on the order of one or two dozen runs. So the gains from switching between any halfway reasonable lineups are too small to measure.

Literally all of the hand-wringing about lineup construction is much to do about nothing.

[baltfan]

4 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Actually, the analytics say that the difference (over an entire season) between the most and least logical batting lineups is on the order of one or two dozen runs. So the gains from switching between any halfway reasonable lineups are too small to measure.

Literally all of the hand-wringing about lineup construction is much to do about nothing.

I agree this is in general the case.  However, it is undeniable that some players do better in some spots than others.  It's possible that what we are seeing with Gunnar is sample size related, but he especially leading off the game does not appear generally very comfortable.  

[G54377]

By the end of the year I doubt Gunnar is leading off.

[DrungoHazewood]

19 minutes ago, baltfan said:

I agree this is in general the case.  However, it is undeniable that some players do better in some spots than others.  It's possible that what we are seeing with Gunnar is sample size related, but he especially leading off the game does not appear generally very comfortable.  

I agree that it's easy for fans and announcers to come up with narratives that, after the fact, describe outcomes as being a result of comfort or mental state or belief in a higher deity or any number of things that are probably just random variation.

But, on the off chance that all this stuff isn't completely made up post facto rationalizations, Gunnar has a career OPS of 1.249 when batting 8th. So just to be safe Hyde should bat him 8th for the next 3-4 years to see how it plays out.

[baltfan]

52 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I agree that it's easy for fans and announcers to come up with narratives that, after the fact, describe outcomes as being a result of comfort or mental state or belief in a higher deity or any number of things that are probably just random variation.

But, on the off chance that all this stuff isn't completely made up post facto rationalizations, Gunnar has a career OPS of 1.249 when batting 8th. So just to be safe Hyde should bat him 8th for the next 3-4 years to see how it plays out.

Let me be clear.  If Gunnar says he is comfortable leading off, I have no problem leaving him there longer to see if things change a bit.  I am a bit concerned though that he is not there by choice but by default. 

[baltfan]

1 hour ago, G54377 said:

By the end of the year I doubt Gunnar is leading off.

Yep hopefully Holliday with Gunnar second or third. 

[Snutchy]

I fixed the title. These thread titles have been wild this week. 

[Yossarian]

I'm old enough to remember when pretty much every team followed the same philosophy in developing a batting order. 

The leadoff guy was one of the fastest on the team with a high OBP and usually little power.  He was also the best bass stealer, typically. 

Number 2 hitter was a guy with good bat control,  didn't sing and miss a lot,  and could bunt.

Number 3 was the best hitter on the team with a combination of power and average. 

Numbers 4 and 5 were the boppers.  They were the power hitters and usually the home run leaders on the team.

The rest were filled in depending on the situation with the #9 hitter (in the AL) usually the weakest hitter, but with speed. 

The game has changed. 

[Yossarian]

Just now, Yossarian said:

I'm old enough to remember when pretty much every team followed the same philosophy in developing a batting order. 

The leadoff guy was one of the fastest on the team with a high OBP and usually little power.  He was also the best bass stealer, typically. 

Number 2 hitter was a guy with good bat control,  didn't sing and miss a lot,  and could bunt.

Number 3 was the best hitter on the team with a combination of power and average. 

Numbers 4 and 5 were the boppers.  They were the power hitters and usually the home run leaders on the team.

The rest were filled in depending on the situation with the #9 hitter (in the AL) usually the weakest hitter, but with speed. 

The game has changed. 

I apologize for the misspellings - I should have proof read before posting.   My phone doesn't always agree with the words I think I'm trying to write.

[dzorange]

18 hours ago, baltfan said:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/tools/share.fcgi?id=9vlmP
See above for his first at bat when he is the first batter in the game. I don’t like him being the first batter of the game.  He seems like a guy that benefits from seeing guys hit in front of him. Per your own chart he is better batting second or third.  It’s undeniable that when he leads off the game he is generally worse than normal.  

Could you at least post what the league averages are for comparison sake? 

[jabba72]

42 minutes ago, Yossarian said:

I'm old enough to remember when pretty much every team followed the same philosophy in developing a batting order. 

The leadoff guy was one of the fastest on the team with a high OBP and usually little power.  He was also the best bass stealer, typically. 

Number 2 hitter was a guy with bat control,  didn't sing and miss a lot,  and could bunt.

Number 3 was the best hitter on the team with a combination of power and average. 

Numbers 4 and 5 were the boppers.  They were the power hitters and usually the home run leaders on the team.

The rest were filled in depending on the situation with the #9 hitter (in the AL) usually the weakest hitter, but with speed. 

The game has changed. 

I dont think teams are doing it wrong if they went back to this philosophy. You want your best hitters at the top of the lineup and I doubt many managers would bat their best power hitter 2nd or 3rd. They want guys on base in front of them.

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, jabba72 said:

I dont think teams are doing it wrong if they went back to this philosophy. You want your best hitters at the top of the lineup and I doubt many managers would bat their best power hitter 2nd or 3rd. They want guys on base in front of them.

But your classic #2 hitter isn't one of your best hitters.  He's a guy that can waste an out bunting your leadoff hitter over.

[jabba72]

On teams that maybe didnt have 4 good hitters you might put a #2 like that in there. Any manager who was thinking about sacrificing when his high OBP leadoff hitter got on base wasn't doing it right, I agree.

[Yossarian]

35 minutes ago, jabba72 said:

I dont think teams are doing it wrong if they went back to this philosophy. You want your best hitters at the top of the lineup and I doubt many managers would bat their best power hitter 2nd or 3rd. They want guys on base in front of them.

The philosophy of the classic #2 has changed,  as Can of Corn pointed out.  It has gone from a light hitting bat control guy that can bunt and hit-and-run with to today's #2 hitters like Judge, Ohtani, Harper, Trout, etc.  Teams are batting their best hitter at #2, not #3.

[baltfan]

1 hour ago, dzorange said:

Could you at least post what the league averages are for comparison sake? 

The issue is what is best for Gunnar, not how he compares to the rest of the league.  However, I am reasonably sure that his .530 OPS leading off games isn’t among the league leaders.