Should LoDuca bat 2nd?

[Guest KC]

JD: >>>unless one really really outplays the other in spring, one of Boone or Matsui gets traded<<<

I kinda forget about Boone, I don't take him being around too seriously.
And I thought he was an invite or something, not someone they can trade.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

I agree, completely. But if he plays at or near Matsui's level this spring, then it's just a question of who's cheaper and Matsui loses that battle too. I'm sure the Mets call Boone's bluff if he sucks.

[Guest KC]

Boone's not a Met, though - unless I'm thoroughly confused.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

I' think you're right about the trade. I guess it's win the job or be dumped for both the vets, essentially. Continued at Second Base thread...

[Guest Edgy DC]

It's a good way for Boone to put pressure on the team though. If they both have a good spring, an employer can reason that he should give the job to the guy who'll retire if he doesn't start because that leaves you a fallback position whereas the alternative doesn't.

Of course the team can object to that kind of subtle manipuulation by saying, "Fine, retire now.

[Zvon]

]Should LoDuca bat 2nd?

NO!

[duan]

Nymr83 wrote: ="Johnny Dickshot"]That the Mets bend the rules for stars like beltran ought to be evident by the fact that a superior centerfielder was moved aside to accommodate him in a manner similar to superior slot hitters moved elsewhere to reserve No. 3 for his bat. I think it's very much a showcase/pride thing. you're right, and its pretty fuckin annoying that the mets used the "24+1" argument to avoid getting Alex Rodriguez but then give Beltran the 24+1 treatment.

I really THINK that this is COMPLETELY explainable.

There's a completely plausible theory which says it is much harder for a player to move BACK to a more defensively challenging position after playing significant time at a less challenging one.

So if you have to make a 7 year commitment to Beltran you want to be sure you get him as a centre-fielder in 07/08/09.

As for the 3 hole; last year Beltran clearly didn't have a great season, but in reality his competitors for the 3 hole would have been Cliff Floyd, Mike Piazza, Cameron & David Wright.

We've looked at the way Willie used Wright, you can argue about the rights and wrongs of that, but I don't think it's unfair to suggest that he was never going to be in the number 3 slot ahead of Beltran last season.

Floyd went from the 5 slot to clean up - a perfectly natural home for him. I don't think anyone could criticise them for that. Then you have Mike Cameron. Cameron's a good hitter, but don't forget he started the season on the dl, DID get over 50 plate appearances in the 3 slot and then was out for the last 6 weeks of the season.

I think there's a huge difference this year, in that Wright, Delgado & Floyd are CLEARLY potential 3,4,5 hitters (with the order an issue due to handedness) and that having David Wright hit SIXTH with Reyes, Beltran, AN OTHER getting way more abs then him would just cost you runs.

The big issue for me is the leadoff slot. If Reyes keeps his .300 ish obp we have a problem. Anyone have an aversion to thinking about Beltran for that?

[nymr83]

i would definetaly be ok with that, but i know the Mets wouldn't move Reyes out of there no matter how low his obp gets.

[smg58]

The problem is that we'd be resigning the first two spots of the lineup to players who make too many outs -- "productive" or otherwise.

If you make the argument, as I would, that some combination of Beltran, Wright, Floyd, and Delgado should be 2-5, then I think that does leave Reyes as the best leadoff option. His OBP is poor, but LoDuca, Matsui, and Diaz aren't a whole lot better in that regard and speed does count for something.

But if you go with Reyes, I think it's that much more important to place somebody second who will get on base. If you add LoDuca's productive outs to his hits and walks, you still get a number far less than you'd get from Wright. I'd prefer to bat Beltran second and Wright lower because Wright is the better hitter, but I'd need some assurance that Beltran will get on base more often than he did last year. I'd also prefer to sandwich Wright between Delgado and Floyd because I think you make the other manager's late-game pitching decisions easier when you put your best lefties together, but I couldn't tell you how much difference that really makes.

[nymr83]

i'm lazy but curious... if you turned each of Reyes' singles/walks after which he stole a base into a double and then turned the ones in which he was caught stealing into an out where would his OPS be?

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

Say no to LaDuca in the 2 slot. I think Beltran should be in the two slot.

As the team currntly stands, I would probably go with:
Reyes
Beltran
Wright
Delgado
Floyd
Nady/Diaz
LaDuca
Matsui/Boone/Keppinger/Hernandez/whoever

I expect that Willie will do something to split up the lefties batting in succession.

[Zvon]

If Matsui would play like I wish and hope he can, he'd be good in that spot.

Beltran is of course, a perfect fit and has proven himself comfortable there, and with the added artillery of Delgado, a repeat performance by Floyd, and the emergence of Wright, we can easily afford to do that.

But I think Matsui has the tools to excel there and a good spring might give him that shot. A reeeeeeeal good spring.
Otherwise Beltran, although he would be such a great number three hitter if he posted numbers like he did before last year.

Both those I mention above wont be easy to double up.

In any case, NOT Lo Duca.
Thats wasting a spot that can be used for more productive things than just moving Reyes over.

[RealityChuck]

Obviously, the best lineup is:

1) David Wright
2) Carlos Delgado
3) Carlos Beltran
4) Victor Diaz
5) Cliff Floyd
6) Jose Reyes
7) Kaz Matsui
8) Pitcher
9) Paul lo Duca

The numbers prove it:
http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/LineupAnalysis.py

And we all know the numbers are never wrong. Never.

[nymr83]

its certainly too radical to try, but if you believe that getting your best hitters the most PAs is the way to score the most runs it would probably work... why Loduca behind the pitcher though?

[Guest Rotblatt]

RealityChuck wrote: Obviously, the best lineup is: 1) David Wright 2) Carlos Delgado 3) Carlos Beltran 4) Victor Diaz 5) Cliff Floyd 6) Jose Reyes 7) Kaz Matsui 8) Pitcher 9) Paul lo Duca The numbers prove it: http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/LineupAnalysis.py And we all know the numbers are never wrong. Never.

Well, I doubt we'd continue questioning the size of Willie's balls if he batted Martinez before LoDuca.

Anyway, their algorythm is screwed up. That lineup doesn't make any sense, even in the context of the original reseach. I tried to test it using the PECOTA projections (cause, you know, those are sure to be right too) but nothing happened when I clicked submit.

The general consensus on baseball blogs seems to be that the research basically means this:

1. Put the best OPS in 3rd
2. Put the best remaining Slg in 4th
3. Put the best remaining OBP's in 1st and 2nd (with the better Slg in 2nd)
4. Arrange the remaining players in order of descending Slg

which would give us this (using 2005 #'s):

1.LoDuca (.334 OBP)
2. Floyd (.358 OBP/.505 SLG)
3. Delgado (.399 OBP/.582 SLG)
4. Wright (.388 OBP/.523 SLG)
5. Diaz (.329 OBP/.468 SLG)
6. Beltran (.330 OBP/.414 SLG)
7. Reyes (.300 OBP/.386 SLG)
8. Matsui (.300 OBP/.352 SLG)
9. Martinez (.100 OBP/.087 SLG)

Now, it sounds crazy to bat LoDuca 1st but given how atrociously bad our OBP was last year, it actually makes a lot of sense. And the fact that LoDuca's slow wouldn't matter if we've got Floyd hitting extra bases behind him.

[RealityChuck]

I don't know. The numbers said to put him there and numbers are always right. Always.

And, of course it's all bogus. The fallacies are obvious: The numbers plugged in to the formula assume the batters will have exactly the same OBA and SLG this year as last year -- highly unlikely. Also, it doesn't take into account that a person's OBA and SLG are affected by where he bats, and who bats before and after him. It's a textbook case of pulling numbers out of your butt and claiming it proves something. By being able to give an exact number of runs -- to three decimal places -- it fools the unwary into believing this is scientific.

43.865437% of all statistics are useless. In Sabermetrics, the number is 16.986896% higher.

[nymr83]

]The general consensus on baseball blogs seems to be that the research basically means this: 1. Put the best OPS in 3rd 2. Put the best remaining Slg in 4th 3. Put the best remaining OBP's in 1st and 2nd (with the better Slg in 2nd) 4. Arrange the remaining players in order of descending Slg which would give us this (using 2005 #'s): 1.LoDuca (.334 OBP) 2. Floyd (.358 OBP/.505 SLG) 3. Delgado (.399 OBP/.582 SLG) 4. Wright (.388 OBP/.523 SLG) 5. Diaz (.329 OBP/.468 SLG) 6. Beltran (.330 OBP/.414 SLG) 7. Reyes (.300 OBP/.386 SLG) 8. Matsui (.300 OBP/.352 SLG) 9. Martinez (.100 OBP/.087 SLG)

I agree wholeheartedly with that method of lineup construction, but i'd have to use what the players are projected to do this year rather than what they actualy did last year....which in this case means switching LoDuca and Beltran's spots.... Beltran, Floyd, Delgado, Wright, Diaz, LoDuca, Reyes, Matsui, Pitcher is a very reasonable lineup.

] I don't know. The numbers said to put him there and numbers are always right. Always.

The numbers are ALWAYS right, if you're using the right numbers...that is to say if you could predict with absolute certainty every player's stats on a per-AB basis you'd be able to plug them into the lineup in a way that produced the most possible runs. Reasonable people can, of course, disagree with what a given player is going to do in the coming season, but to disregard studies of lineup formation in favor of the "tradition says the speedy guy with the low obp bats here and the guy who can bunt with the .200 batting average here..." method is just plain stupid.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

RealityChuck wrote: 43.865437% of all statistics are useless. In Sabermetrics, the number is 16.986896% higher.

You don't take this to its logical extreme. The problem is that we use these crazy numbers to keep track of runs in a game, and of wins in a season.

Get rid of this stupidity, and you'll resolve the entire "numbers" scam that wrecks our purely aesthetic appreciation of the game of baseball.

[Elster88]

Nymr83 wrote: ] I don't know. The numbers said to put him there and numbers are always right. Always. The numbers are ALWAYS right, if you're using the right numbers...that is to say if you could predict with absolute certainty every player's stats on a per-AB basis you'd be able to plug them into the lineup in a way that produced the most possible runs. Reasonable people can, of course, disagree with what a given player is going to do in the coming season, but to disregard studies of lineup formation in favor of the "tradition says the speedy guy with the low obp bats here and the guy who can bunt with the .200 batting average here..." method is just plain stupid.

I think he was being sarcastic.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

OOOhh, sarcasm. It's sooooooo scary. Let's run.

[Guest Rotblatt]

]OOOhh, sarcasm. It's sooooooo scary. Let's run.

How is sarcasm scary? And running never solved anything, Bret.

[Zvon]

="Bret Sabermetric"] Get rid of this stupidity, and you'll resolve the entire "numbers" scam that wrecks our purely aesthetic appreciation of the game of baseball.

I agree with this 100%.
And as far as some of the lineups displayed between this and my last post here,
ARE YOU PEOPLE INSANE!?!

[Frayed Knot]

Adam Rubin's column in today's Daily News features Willie discussing lineup machinations:

* Beltran probable for #3 and doesn't necessarily buy the cause-and-effect differences in his career stats between hitting 2nd & 3rd (on that point I agree)

* as hinted at in his visit last night ... Matsui is a possibility for the #2 slot on days LoDuca sits (providing Kaz shows something during ST) as a less disruptive alternative to swapping Beltran's spot every few days

* Not automatically adverse to letting the lefties (CF & CD) hit back-to-back

* defends his "break-in" process with Wright last year

[Guest abogdan]

]The general consensus on baseball blogs seems to be that the research basically means this: 1. Put the best OPS in 3rd 2. Put the best remaining Slg in 4th 3. Put the best remaining OBP's in 1st and 2nd (with the better Slg in 2nd) 4. Arrange the remaining players in order of descending Slg

Which doesn't mean that general consensus is generally the best. There's been some recent work on it that the Baseball Musings algorithm is based on here and here, which doesn't come to the same conclusions as that general consensus.

[nymr83]

abogdan wrote: Which doesn't mean that general consensus is generally the best. There's been some recent work on it that the Baseball Musings algorithm is based on here and here, which doesn't come to the same conclusions as that general consensus.

which is good, arguing over which study is best is infinetaly preferable to arguing over which guy the clown manager (NOT singling out Randolph or anyone else here) thinks best fits some coneventional wisdom stereotype for a lineup spot.

[Guest Rotblatt]

abogdan wrote: Which doesn't mean that general consensus is generally the best. There's been some recent work on it that the Baseball Musings algorithm is based on here and here, which doesn't come to the same conclusions as that general consensus.

It's all based on the exact same research. While most of the blogs tried to simply the BTB research into "rules," the Catfishstew blog actually applied the BTB coefficient to the PECOTA projections to figure out which lineup would produce the most runs.

The only difference is that the blogs ignored the whole "put one of your weakest hitters 3rd" thing that the research spits out, since that, more than anything, doesn't make intuitive sense. I suppose the idea is that spreading out your crappy batters is a good idea?

Anyway, what the research really shows isn't necessarily the most optimal lineup, but how the relative value of OBP & SLG changes based on where in the lineup someone hits. It doesn't take into account anything BUT OBP & SLG, so its use is limited.

Just for the hell of it, the lineup I'd like to see would theoretically produce 830 runs (more or less): Reyes, Beltran, Wright, Delgado, Floyd, Diaz, LoDuca, Matsui, Martinez. That's based on PECOTA projections and assumes that each batter plays all 162 games in that exact slot in the order.

The blog-rule lineup of Beltran, Floyd, Wright, Delgado, Diaz, Reyes, LoDuca, Matsui & Martinez would net us an additional 2 runs.

Slotting a crappy player into #3 gives 3 runs on top of that: Beltran, Floyd, LoDuca, Delgado, Wright, Diaz, Reyes, Matsui, Martinez.

I can't do the optimization thing, but I suspect that would be among the most effecient.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

We're not likely to find out with Willie at the helm. Well, we're not likely to find out with any MLB manager at the helm but, based solely on observing Willie's response to developing situations and assimilating new information last year, I'd say he seems the least disposed of MLB managers to employ a non-traditional ingame strategy.

If you came up with a computer-generated model showing that batting an eggplant in the #3 slot would result in a net increase in runs scored, Willie would employ that model only after the other 29 MLB clubs had shown that it works. He's unimaginative to the point of being hidebound, making any innovation unlikely under his management. Willie's from the Reality Chuck school of "Tell your numbers to shut up."

[Guest Rotblatt]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: We're not likely to find out with Willie at the helm. Well, we're not likely to find out with any MLB manager at the helm but, based solely on observing Willie's response to developing situations and assimilating new information last year, I'd say he seems the least disposed of MLB managers to employ a non-traditional ingame strategy. If you came up with a computer-generated model showing that batting an eggplant in the #3 slot would result in a net increase in runs scored, Willie would employ that model only after the other 29 MLB clubs had shown that it works. He's unimaginative to the point of being hidebound, making any innovation unlikely under his management. Willie's from the Reality Chuck school of "Tell your numbers to shut up."

Yeah, Willie's not going to do anything outside the box, that's for sure.

Although I'd probably take my time on the eggplant idea too . . .

I read somewhere recently that Omar, not Willie, was behind the "LoDuca to 2nd" movement, and that Willie wasn't convinced yet.

It sounded promising, but now I can't find the damn thing, which I'm pretty sure was in one of yesterday's papers.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Ah, here's the meaty article (essentially a review of an even meatier book, "The Book")we were all looking for. It combines stats AND analysis. Good times.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/constructing-lineups/

Here's the Mets relevant section:

]The Mets will probably have four great hitters in their lineup this year, if they stay healthy (Delgado, Wright, Beltran and Floyd) and these guys should obviously be placed in four of the top five slots. Their fifth-best hitter will probably be the Nady/Diaz platoon in right field. Their next-best hitters are projected to be Reyes, Lo Duca and Matsui (or whoever plays second). As you can see, that leaves Reyes, who led the NL in stolen bases last year, in the sixth position, which is probably the best place for him. First of all, Reyes will almost certainly have a lousy OBP this year, no matter how much he works at it. Secondly, a basestealer for the Mets will have more value batting sixth instead of first. Why? According to The Book, there are a couple of reasons: * A stolen base has the most value when it's done in front of singles hitters who don't strike out too much. Lo Duca and Matsui may be the two most prolific singles hitters the Mets have in 2006, and Lo Duca doesn't whiff very often. * A caught stealing does much more damage with a Carlos Delgado or David Wright at the plate than a Paul Lo Duca or Kaz Matsui. The logic seems overwhelming to me. Bat Reyes sixth.

Of course, if we're NOT going to bat Reyes anywhere but first (which we're not), does this logic imply that LoDuca IS our best option in the 2 hole?
y
Read the article. It's interesting. I definitely need to pick this book up. Another one of its findings is that, indeed, we should not put our best hitters in the 3 hole, but rather in positions #1, #2, #4.

The optimal lineup here would be Beltran, Wright, Flod, Delgado, Diaz/Nady, Reyes, LoDuca, Matsui.

[Guest abogdan]

]Of course, if we're NOT going to bat Reyes anywhere but first (which we're not), does this logic imply that LoDuca IS our best option in the 2 hole?

I don't think so. If we assume that Reyes will hit first, and some combination of Beltran/Wright/Delgado/Floyd will occupy the 3-5 slots, I think you need a high OBP guy in the #2 hole to take advantage of the skills of the players hitting in the #3-5 spots, even at the slight expense of not taking full advantage of Reyes' speed in the leadoff spot. Otherwise, you're in the same position the Mets were for most of last year - Beltran coming up with 2 outs and no one on base.