Lineup Construction

[NAHSTE]

Let's talk about lineup construction. It's easily the most common thing fans like to complain about from their team's manager, even though the research shows it won't make much difference throughout the course of a 162 game season. Even though we know it doesn't matter, it's still fun to bitch about on a daily basis. So let's discuss.

My stance, get your best guys the most at bats, and try to alternate left and right handed hitters as much as you can. Alternating handedness seems to be the more important aspect, but that's about all that a manager should be taking into consideration, IMO. Too often managers go with the 1970s template that says you must have a speedy CF at the top and a middle infielder with "bat control" behind him to "move him over."

Obviously, if the speedy CF is also a good hitter, then hell yeah go nuts. But if that's the case, then why do you even need to waste your 2nd highest plate appearances on a guy who's merely moving shit down the assembly line? Unless said "bat control" guy is also one of your 4-5 best hitters, you're doing your lineup a disservice over the long run.

If your leadoff guy can run, he'll either a. steal 2nd or b. be able to score from 1st on a ball in the gap anyway. Let the scrappy mcscrapperson with bat control make his productive outs elsewhere. Get your best guys up as early and often as possible, cut out the middle man.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Like you said, lineup construction is something that matters less & less the larger the sample grows. Over the course of a season, unless you are talking about a completely absurd lineup, you are talking a miniscule amount of total runs lost/gained by using or not using an optimal lineup.

To use the Reds as an example, fans are screaming to get Zack Cozart out of the 2-hole, but in reality batting Cozart or Xavier Paul 2nd won't make much of a difference anyway over large samples. Personally I would move Cozart down, but really it's wasted stress to fuss over it because you are talking very few runs.

To also echo something you already mentioned, I think alternating R/L/R/L is more important than the order itself, because you'd like to force opposing managers into making tough decisions in the late innings.

To expand on my Reds example, let's say you move Paul into the 2-hole, because theoretically he will reach base something like twenty times more than Cozart over the course of a season. This would also mean you have L/L/L at the top of the order (Choo, Paul, Votto), making an opposing managers life a lot easier in the 7th or 8th inning of a close game. Any small edge you gain by having Paul in Cozart's place is lost or minimized due to the platoon advantage you are giving the other team in high leverage situations.

So at the end of the day, you are dealing with situations that only matter over small samples either way. Ideally you want to load the top of the order with the high OBA, but alternating handedness is not the worst idea either.

Unless you are doing something really goofy like batting your best hitter 7th, lineup construction is very overrated. I think the only spot that should be held to a hard & fast rule is leadoff, particularly in the NL where the 9-hole will be making a lot of outs (and in theory, some of those will be third outs). I think you are hurting your team to a large degree by having a low OBA player leading off. I don't think that player needs to be fast, and speed should not be a more important factor than OBA (keeping with the Reds theme, looking at you Corey Patterson, Willy Tavares, Drew Stubbs, and Dusty Baker), but if you have a good OBA player who is also fast and a good base stealer, it's pretty silly not to lead him off where he will bat in front of gap/power hitters.

 

[Senser81]

I think your top two guys should be your top two OBA guys, regardless of speed. Didn't Wade Boggs bat lead-off for awhile? Then your #3 guy should be you slugger (Riggleman would bat Sosa 3rd). Your #4 guy should be your best hitter and from there you just plug in your next best hitter. Maybe alternate handedness if the batters are close in talent, but I think managers change bullpen pitchers so often that alternating handedness is kind of an advantage only in one's mind.

Somewhat on-topic, I was the true "no hit, all field" middle infielder in high school. Very fast, but couldn't really hit. The manager would bat me last and try to soften the blow by telling me "its like having a 2nd leadoff guy at the bottom of the lineup!"....yeah, a 2nd leadoff guy who is way worse than the actual leadoff guy and struggles to hit .200! I might have been born in the dark, but it wasn't last night!

 

[ThomasTomasz]

It doesn't make much of a difference, as most of the time, you are constructed it for the first time through the order, as more often than not your leadoff guy isn't going to lead off another inning.

Me personally, your high OBP guy should be first. Second, I want a patient hitter who is going to work the count and frustrate the hell out of the pitcher to hopefully have him lose focus on my two best hitters who would be next.

The only practical thing about lineup construction to me is balancing handedness, because you don't want three straight lefties in the order to make it an easy decision on which reliever to bring in.