Posted by tianyi7886 on 4/19/2011 3:50:00 PM (view original):
Besides the Cards (and apparently, the Brewers too), who does it quite a bit, which other major league franchise has pitchers batting 8th? Sure you can potentially get the top of your lineup to bat with runners on base, but the opposite holds true as well; your pitcher that's hitting .089 on the season can come in on a bases loaded situation as opposed to your normal 8th hole batter. 

That can happen anytime, 8-hole, 9-hole, 1-hole. Does it happen sufficiently more often in the 8-hole than the 9 to offset the advantage of having the 9-hole guy working as a secondary leadoff hitter for the top of the lineup? Also, some of those bases-loaded situations in the 8-hole will occur when it's time for a pinch-hitter, in which case the pitcher's batting prowess means nothing.

Posted by footballmm11 on 4/19/2011 4:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zubinsum on 4/18/2011 3:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by footballmm11 on 4/18/2011 3:03:00 PM (view original):
ncmusician...beyondtheboxscore was using the lineup optimization put forward in The Book. the authors of that book are some of the most respected baseball analysts in the field. i was more referring to their work, which i put a lot of stock in.

Yeah, but the problem is that in rel-life there is no marginal cost associated with getting your players more PAs.  In the sim (at least in an OL) you need to manage the number of PAs you are using and balance that against the output of the line-up.

I think the sim only provides MORE opportunities where it makes sense to bat your pitcher higher than 9th. This research proves that regardless of PA-fatigue, it is at least reasonable if not optimal to bat your pitcher 8th. Add in some of the intricacies of the sim, mainly distribution of PAs, and it is an extremely viable option.

You seem to be missing my point.  I agree that batting the pitcher 8th is likely optimal to score runs.  What I saying is that you will burn through the PAs of your 2-4 guys (likely the best hitters in your line-up) in doing so.

To elaborate...Most people who argue for batting the pitcher eighth, argue for shifting a traditional lineup as follows:
1) a ---> b
2) b ---> c
3) c ---> d
4) d ---> e
5) e ---> f
6) f ---> g
7) g ---> h
8) h ---> j
9) j ---> a

Before your best hitters b, c, and d hit 2,3, and 5 and now they are 1,2 and 3.  They are slightly less productive per PA early in the game (1st and perhaps 2nd inning) because they are less likely to bat with someone on base.  This however is offset throughout the game as they are likely to get more PAs on average.  In real-life this type of line-up costs the team no more than when the pitcher hits ninth.  In the sim however, each PA a player takes is in essenced expensed against that player's salary.  So batting you best hitters 1,2 and 3 might be slightly more productive but it also slightly more expensive.  In essence the exchange turns out to be a wash. 

zub: That depends on how you draft and whether you do so with a certainty that your best batters will still be hitting 2nd, 3rd and 4th. Essentially, this means a lineup with two leadoff types: one leading off and the other batting 9th.

Posted by doubletruck on 4/19/2011 9:37:00 PM (view original):
zub: That depends on how you draft and whether you do so with a certainty that your best batters will still be hitting 2nd, 3rd and 4th. Essentially, this means a lineup with two leadoff types: one leading off and the other batting 9th.

Doubletruck:
I didn't mean to imply this was the only way to bat a pitcher eighth.  My point was to demonstrate why typically batting the pitcher eighth typically isn't a net gain.  Sure you typically score a fraction of a run more every game, but you are also buring through your offensive dollars a bit more quickly (typically).

If you do what you propose (move your ~#7 hitter to #9) I'm not sure you will see a net benefit.  Any gains the second leadoff man brings is probably offset by getting your worst hitters (your pitchers) a dozen more PAs and bringing you worst hitters closer to your best.   

Posted by zubinsum on 4/19/2011 9:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by footballmm11 on 4/19/2011 4:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zubinsum on 4/18/2011 3:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by footballmm11 on 4/18/2011 3:03:00 PM (view original):
ncmusician...beyondtheboxscore was using the lineup optimization put forward in The Book. the authors of that book are some of the most respected baseball analysts in the field. i was more referring to their work, which i put a lot of stock in.

Yeah, but the problem is that in rel-life there is no marginal cost associated with getting your players more PAs.  In the sim (at least in an OL) you need to manage the number of PAs you are using and balance that against the output of the line-up.

I think the sim only provides MORE opportunities where it makes sense to bat your pitcher higher than 9th. This research proves that regardless of PA-fatigue, it is at least reasonable if not optimal to bat your pitcher 8th. Add in some of the intricacies of the sim, mainly distribution of PAs, and it is an extremely viable option.

You seem to be missing my point.  I agree that batting the pitcher 8th is likely optimal to score runs.  What I saying is that you will burn through the PAs of your 2-4 guys (likely the best hitters in your line-up) in doing so.

To elaborate...Most people who argue for batting the pitcher eighth, argue for shifting a traditional lineup as follows:
1) a ---> b
2) b ---> c
3) c ---> d
4) d ---> e
5) e ---> f
6) f ---> g
7) g ---> h
8) h ---> j
9) j ---> a

Before your best hitters b, c, and d hit 2,3, and 5 and now they are 1,2 and 3.  They are slightly less productive per PA early in the game (1st and perhaps 2nd inning) because they are less likely to bat with someone on base.  This however is offset throughout the game as they are likely to get more PAs on average.  In real-life this type of line-up costs the team no more than when the pitcher hits ninth.  In the sim however, each PA a player takes is in essenced expensed against that player's salary.  So batting you best hitters 1,2 and 3 might be slightly more productive but it also slightly more expensive.  In essence the exchange turns out to be a wash. 

I see what you're saying as far as the sim goes. Still, I'd say given that you are going to hit your 8 position players in the order a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h (where b and c are your two best hitters) I would say the optimal pitcher placement is between g and h and not after h. Obviously this is different than what you are saying (which is that you would draft different players for a, b, and c knowing that they'll hit higher in the order, etc.).

Posted by footballmm11 on 4/20/2011 12:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zubinsum on 4/19/2011 9:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by footballmm11 on 4/19/2011 4:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zubinsum on 4/18/2011 3:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by footballmm11 on 4/18/2011 3:03:00 PM (view original):
ncmusician...beyondtheboxscore was using the lineup optimization put forward in The Book. the authors of that book are some of the most respected baseball analysts in the field. i was more referring to their work, which i put a lot of stock in.

Yeah, but the problem is that in rel-life there is no marginal cost associated with getting your players more PAs.  In the sim (at least in an OL) you need to manage the number of PAs you are using and balance that against the output of the line-up.

I think the sim only provides MORE opportunities where it makes sense to bat your pitcher higher than 9th. This research proves that regardless of PA-fatigue, it is at least reasonable if not optimal to bat your pitcher 8th. Add in some of the intricacies of the sim, mainly distribution of PAs, and it is an extremely viable option.

You seem to be missing my point.  I agree that batting the pitcher 8th is likely optimal to score runs.  What I saying is that you will burn through the PAs of your 2-4 guys (likely the best hitters in your line-up) in doing so.

To elaborate...Most people who argue for batting the pitcher eighth, argue for shifting a traditional lineup as follows:
1) a ---> b
2) b ---> c
3) c ---> d
4) d ---> e
5) e ---> f
6) f ---> g
7) g ---> h
8) h ---> j
9) j ---> a

Before your best hitters b, c, and d hit 2,3, and 5 and now they are 1,2 and 3.  They are slightly less productive per PA early in the game (1st and perhaps 2nd inning) because they are less likely to bat with someone on base.  This however is offset throughout the game as they are likely to get more PAs on average.  In real-life this type of line-up costs the team no more than when the pitcher hits ninth.  In the sim however, each PA a player takes is in essenced expensed against that player's salary.  So batting you best hitters 1,2 and 3 might be slightly more productive but it also slightly more expensive.  In essence the exchange turns out to be a wash. 

I see what you're saying as far as the sim goes. Still, I'd say given that you are going to hit your 8 position players in the order a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h (where b and c are your two best hitters) I would say the optimal pitcher placement is between g and h and not after h. Obviously this is different than what you are saying (which is that you would draft different players for a, b, and c knowing that they'll hit higher in the order, etc.).

I wasn't implying drafting different players.  I was implying that your 2-4 players in a traditional line-up are your best and therefore most expensive (adjusted for defense and position) hitters.

I have a AAA catcher who batted around .270/.370/.340 for most of the season and a lineup full of high OBP guys. It seemed to make more sense to bat him 9th so that he can get on base for the leadoff hitter rather than the (poorly hitting) pitcher.

It's really on a team by team basis. I really only play progressives though, so it's all maximizing runs without the hassle of cost efficiency... I like hitting the pitcher 8th when it fits, since I usually bat my best all around hitters 2 and 3. You really want a high AVG low SLG guy (SB are a bonus) to make the most of a pitcher hitting 8th. That way his low SLG will be offset by rarely having a guy on in front of him that he's unable to drive in with his high # of singles (if the pitcher bunts). If he can steal he'll have the bonus of not having anyone on the base in front of him more often than not too.

In the example above with the AAA catcher, it'll depend on the rest of your lineup. Neither him nor the pitcher are going to do a great job driving in runners before them. His walks will rarely advance anyone in the 9 hole, but you'll save a few DP's too... If your 1st and 2nd hitters are good AVG guys I would probably hit him 8th and let him get bunted over while getting a few more PAs in over the pitcher. If the top of your lineup is more walk friendly, or are double hitting machines, then having him hit 9 might make sense.

Me personally, I have no problem at all hitting a starting pitcher 8th.  In fact, I do it on most all my teams.  However, I also almost always have a .370+ OBP base stealing guy to follow the pitcher and hit 9th.

I'd like to see one lineup (stating W, 1B, 2B, 3B, HR/PA for each lineup spot) where batting the worst hitter anywhere other than 9th is optimal.  I'm taking stolen bases, baserunning speed, etc out of the equation so we can focus only on hitter ability.

You're only adjusting the first time thru the batting order, then that 9 hole hitter is essentially another leadoff guy. Your pitcher most likely won't work a complete game, he's likely to get only 2-3 PA per start. Not a bad strategy, in RL or the sim...If you bat a speedy/high AVG/high OBP hitter 9th, you're potentially giving the heart of your order another baserunner to drive in, rather than the pitcher...Potentially more big innings? More runs scored over a large sample size? I feel it's just another reason why NL ball is better than the AL's DH "experiment"...

Posted by rbow923 on 4/27/2011 4:02:00 PM (view original):
^ why is that a failure? i thought the point of DH is so the pitcher doesn't bat. Mission accomplished.
That wouldn't work in WiS because fatigue is calculated by PAs not by time in the field.

It's not a failure, if you narrow the discussion to the single point of not having pitchers hit. Yes.

WIS owners can do it. In a low-cap league, it's often better to spend for concentrated batting ability at the top and middle, and cheap hitters at the bottom. If you have several cheapies (John Wehner, Howie Clark, Derrick Lee, etc.) on the bench, they can be rotated into the DH spot for key games while mediocre AAA players take the role the rest of the time.