Phillies Lineup

[LoneStarPhan]

I believe that it is correct that analytical studies have shown that the batting order has little to do with runs scored. Somehow, that seems wrong. Regardless, some line up orders seem right and some just don't.

[zambonir]

Pretty much why we have analytics isn't? We can all remember 5 or 10 or 20 times when we saw line-up protection or batting order seem to affect the outcome, but the guys who log and break down 100,000 ABs can provide a much bigger picture of how often it really happens. Same with the shift (may it rest in peace).

The funny thing is both the analytics approach and the "gut" approach are two-way streets - there are times when you clearly do the "right" thing and get a bad outcome and also times when you do the "wrong" thing and get the desired outcome.

[bkeich]

I am not sure that it is accurate to say that lineup order does not affect runs scored. If I remember correctly it said that you should put your best hitter first, 2nd best next, etc. it just didn't agree with the traditional 3rd hitter is best overall, 4th is best power hitter, 1st is fastest logic. The studies I saw did however say to get the best jitters the most plate appearances and score more often.

[phillychuck]

Any sensible lineup with the better hitters at the top and the weaker hitters at the bottom is basically indistinguishable in terms of run production. This has been researched extensively, and can be seen in hundreds of thousands of random simulations of different lineups from different eras with hundreds of teams..

[julio]

Yes - any sensible lineup with the better hitters at the top and the weaker hitters at the bottom.

But of course, not all managers are sensible. There’s occasionally the manager who seems to think that because he’s always used his CF, or his SS, at leadoff, that he has to continue doing that, even if the current player in that position sports a .280 OBP.

This is less common than it once was, because fans and media know about the importance of OBP, and dunderhead lineup choices like that will be challenged. (We can thank the “stat heads”for this.) But I’ll wager it’s only a matter of time until some manager decides that, because Johnny is fast, and has some pop, Johnny should lead off…with a .297 OBP and a .650 or so OPS.

[zambonir]

There is no lack of reading material on this. It's not that they don't ever matter, it's that some things we think of as obvious aren't true. And yet some of them are probably are.

Bill James actually tackled this fairly recently and found that yes, you want your best hitters in the middle of the order (though not necessarily where you might think exactly - the analysis he ran says your best hitter should definitely be 4th not 3rd.

https://www.billjamesonline.com/batting_order_position_values/

This one takes the straight, "hit your three best hitters 1-3" argument.

https://baseballjudgments.tripod.com/id99.html#:~:text=Every%20player%20bats%20in%20each,in%20the%20starting%20batting%20order.

This one from 10 years ago says batting order can make a difference of between 5 to 15 runs a season, which is not insignificant. I mean, we often say managers don't matter either, or might only be worth 1 or 2 wins a year at most. And the same is probably true of batting order. But 1 or 2 wins might actually mean something!

How Significant Is Batting Order?

Of course this is also a fairly specific discussion. It is probably true that Kyle Schwarber should be hitting 3rd through 5th (and even the loss of ABs from hitting 5th would still be offset by his increased productivity). In this case Girardi and Thomson simply valued consistency and the comfort of the player (and he wasn't a bad leadoff hitter) over looking for a better solution, or thinking it mattered to have a fast guy (I don't think it did, but he definitely didn't drive in as many runs from there).

[andyb]

It is possible these lineup assessments will change somewhat as baseball changes. I think the general rule of having your best OBP players at the top of the lineup is good. And power is probably slightly more valuable in the middle of the lineup as opposed to the top where the RBI potential is wasted a bit.

Speed has probably been overrated through the years, though we are clearly in a low SB era. Would the value of speed at the top of the lineup be greater in an era with more stolen bases and higher percentages of success? Well we are about to find out. Turner at this point of his career runs a bit less because of wear and tear (not lost top end speed). But we might hit a year or two when he can steal 50+ bases with the new rules.

I think the "knows how to handle a bat" second hitter is pretty dead these days. Moving runners is less important than avoiding outs. That was the big Bill James lesson.

[Callison]

IMHO, Stott is a better ss than Turner, so Turner plays 2B against RHP. Looks like Stott might be improving at the plate a little, too. Got some big hits in the playoffs.

Castellanos owes the team a great year and I think he brings it.

I just wanna watch this team hit when Harper gets back.

[julio]

Would the value of speed at the top of the lineup be greater in an era with more stolen bases and higher percentages of success? Well we are about to find out. Turner at this point of his career runs a bit less because of wear and tear (not lost top end speed). But we might hit a year or two when he can steal 50+ bases with the new rules.

I think the "knows how to handle a bat" second hitter is pretty dead these days. Moving runners is less important than avoiding outs. That was the big Bill James lesson.

Yeah, all of this. With the additional observation that even if speed at the top of the lineup becomes more valuable, that will only be speed coupled with on-base ability. A fleet base-stealer who can't reach first base isn't of much value to anybody.

Avoiding outs is the biggie. Fewer outs/plate appearance equates to more runs, holding SLG constant.

[allentown]

The question here is whether shuffling between two positions impacts his offense or general self confidence in his game.

[zambonir]

I think that discussion just... isn't one. All the reporting about the Turner signing said the Phillies determined he was going to be their shortstop, and he was the SS they liked best of the four free agents (they assigned Mike Ondo to start watching them mid-season). And also that they think he can stay at the position for as long as six years (but at least four).

Given all of the above, they'd also already decided Stott would play 2B. Turner would have to really stink it up defensively to consider any change over the next three seasons. And by then, Stott might not be as good at SS simply for not having played the position.

I also imagine Turner was promised he would be the SS during the negotiations, even if lip service is paid to him being unselfish about that.

[andyb]

The question here is whether shuffling between two positions impacts his offense or general self confidence in his game.

I think it is also about Turner playing every day and Stott being less certain to do so. Even if Stott is a tiny bit better defensively (where the data is only one year and pretty close), he is also likely to platoon with Sosa. Turner plays every day and should stay at SS until we have an alternative that would be both clearly better and pretty likely to play every day.

[phillychuck]

I think Stott, Sosa, and Bohm sort of rotate at 2nd and 3rd. Stott 5 games, Bohm 5 games, and Sosa 4 out of every 7, with some variance on who is hot and some times when you want your best glove in the infield (Sosa). Injuries change this dramatically, of course.

I think the Phils contending will come down to the pitching and whether we get a bounce-back season from Castellanos, at least in the first half-season.

[zambonir]

What is "contending" at this point given what a team that barely squeaked into the playoffs last year did? That said, they set a high bar last year once Thomson took over.... .585 ball despite missing two key starters and a pretty rough September slump. Even w/o Harper they should be able to play .550 ball and stay close to the division lead or first wild card. Castellanos becoming his old self would be nice but Stott and Marsh and Bohm just continuing to progress was a key difference between the April team and the August team, so hopefully there's another gear.

The DH plan is also going to be a big factor. Bohm, Castellanos and Hoskins could also go there, even against RHP if Hall doesn't make the roster. . Sosa or Maton (if he makes the team) could play RF or even 1B (as well as 3B) and so can Vierling.

I'm also super curious to see what the win total over/under is going to be from the sports books.

[phillychuck]

I think our sports book total will be 87 wins.

[zambonir]

I'm thinking 90-92. I believe the Phillies are no worse than 4th or 5th for World Series winner odds. I'd take the over if it's 87, even though I think 85 or even 83 is possible if things go sideways. But casual bettors and bandwagon fans are likely to be drawn to them.