There’s a theory that players are most comfortable if they know their roles and stick with them.  Since the difference between Martin and Jeter leading off (against LH) is minimal, it would probably make sense that Jeter is leading off against LH.  Gardner obviously should lead off against RH.

So that brings up the next question: how much would Jeter need to improve against RH for it to make sense for him to hit lead-off all the time?  How much would Gardner need to improve against lefties for him to hit leadoff all the time?

I guess to me, if the difference between Jeter hitting leadoff all the time and the “best” lineup is less than 2 runs, it may be fine to have Jeter hitting leadoff (ditto for Gardner).  The comfort-level of hitting in the same lineup spot may or may not be real, but if it is real, probably isn’t more than a run or two.  Of course, 2010 Jeter shouldn’t see the top of the lineup.  But I don’t think he has to get all the way back to 2009 Jeter.

Thanks, SG.  Purely out of curiosity (and to get a sense for the sensitivity of lineup construction), would it be possible to see how many runs the “worst-constructed” line-up using the nine regulars would be projected to score?

Here you go.  Scroll down to see the worst lineups.

Looks like the worse lineup (Granderson/Jeter/Rodriguez/Gardner/Swisher/Martin/Posada/Teixeira/Cano) would be around 5.364 runs per game.  So a bit less than 0.3 runs per game worse, which would add up to around 47 runs over a full season.  That’s bigger than I’d have thought.

I’d be surprised to see Jeter anywhere other than leadoff on opening day.  And I’m afraid even if they contemplate a demotion, it will be to #2 because he bunts good or something. 

Because they are teh POWER HITTERS, Tex and Arod will be 3-4 or at the very least 4-5.

Assuming Jeter stays at #1, does it not make sense then to slot Cano at #2?  Won’t he get even more meatballs to hit ahead of Tex (at least in the post-April months)?

I could conceivably get behind Swisher at #2.  Even: Jeter/Swisher/Cano/Tex/ARod.  After the demise of Nick Johnson, who batted 2nd the majority or plurality of the time last season?  Was it mostly Swisher and Gardner?  I don’t remember much Granderson there. 

What I think it’ll be:

Jeter
Swisher
Tex
Arod
Cano
Posada
Granderson
Martin
Gardner

What I wish it would be (at least vs RHP):

Gardner
Cano
Tex
Arod
Swisher
Posada
Granderson
Martin
Jeter

Maybe it’s sub-optimal to have the two lefties at the top of the order.  Thus perhaps: Gardner/Swish/Cano/Tex/Arod etc.

If Montero’s in this lineup, my guess is they’ll stick him in the bottom third.  But he might not fit 8th with Granderson 7th (back-to-back lefties again).  Maybe instead: Montero (6)/Posada (7)/Granderson (8).  And Po swallows more pride…

So does that mean that a team could be reasonably expected to improve significantly simply by intelligently constructing a lineup if acquiring additional talent is not an option?

So does that mean that a team could be reasonably expected to improve significantly simply by intelligently constructing a lineup if acquiring additional talent is not an option?

Not really, because it’s doubtful they’d ever go with the most sub-optimal lineup.  If you look at why the Yankees’ lineup in post 3 is sub-optimal, it’s because they’re batting two of their best hitters at 8/9 in lineup and they’re hitting their worse power hitter at cleanup.  It’s just not realistic.

I suppose you could see a scenario where a team could pick up a win or something with a better lineup, but I’d be surprised to see any team using a lineup that’s costing them much more than that on a regular basis.

Looks like the key to a terrible lineup is having a guy who slugs under .400 cleanup and your best hitter 9th.

If Montero’s in this lineup, my guess is they’ll stick him in the bottom third.

Random musing:  if Montero’s in the lineup, does that increase the odds of Gardner leading off?  If Gardner doesn’t, then you have the three lefties Montero, Granderson and Gardner all assigned to the bottom third.

None of this matters. (a) It has already been demonstrated that lineup construction is a negligible factor in producing/impeding offense. (b)  Girardi has already demonstrated he is basically a traditionalist when it comes to making out a lineup; he’s not going to doing anything dramatically different from what he has always done.  (c) The names we are toying around with are going to change throughout the year depending on injuries, days off, whether Montero makes the team, etc.

If Gardner doesn’t, then you have the three lefties Montero, Granderson and Gardner all assigned to the bottom third.

Except Montero’s a righty, so you can bat him 8th between Granderson/Gardner and it’s a non-issue.

I’d like to see Gardner/Swisher/Teixeira/Rodriguez/Cano/Posada/Granderson/Montero or Martin/Jeter, but I can’t see them doing Jeter ninth.  I think B-Man’s right, if Jeter gets moved down it’ll be to the #2 spot.

Cano should bat no lower than 4th.

[11] I’m pretty sure 5th is considered a more important lineup spot than 3rd.  So Cano *should* bat 4th or 5th.  Now, 4th is more important than 5th.  But is Cano a better hitter than ARod?  I guess that depends on ARod - if his hip caused him to lose a good portion of offense the last two years, and his hip is 100% healthy, ARod is probably no worse than Cano (edit: I meant to add, quite probably better).  If his hip isn’t 100% healthy, Cano is better.  But again, it probably isn’t worth more than a run or two a year, if that.

IDK where Jeter will bat.  I imagine he’ll start off the year leadoff vs. lefties and 2nd vs. righties.  But by June he could be leadoff 100% of the time, or he could be in the bottom 3, maybe even 9th.  Girardi often moves slower than many of us would like, but he’s not so stubborn that he doesn’t eventually make the right move - and of course sometimes the right move turns out being no move.

[12] I thought your best hitter tends to bat 3rd, if only to get more AB? If so, at this point, I think Cano is their best hitter.

Best hitter batting third is conventional wisdom, but according to the research in the Book, your best hitter should actually hit 2nd, 4th or 5th. 

I am still not sure that Cano’s their best hitter, 2010 notwithstanding.  He may be, but I need to see him do it again.

Except Montero’s a righty

As Rick Blaine said about the waters in Casablanca: “I was misinformed.”

Yes, Cano has to be higher.  All the more so if they’re stubborn and insist on keeping his captaincy at the top of the order.

Isn’t Cano 2nd better than Cano 5th?

[14] Oh, sometimes I have gaps between what I learned as a non-thinking player and what I am trying to learn as a thinking non-player.

Isn’t Cano 2nd better than Cano 5th?

If Jeter is batting leadoff, I think so.  If Gardner’s batting leadoff I think you want to avoid stacking lefties, because platoon advantage trumps lineup order.

Swisher 2nd makes sense primarily for that, because it doesn’t matter who bats in front of or behind him in terms of platooning.

[17] If avoiding stacking lefties is the concern, I’d give serious thought to Gardner/Swish/Cano/Tex/A-Rod over Gardner/Swish/Tex/A-Rod/Cano.

Because of status quo bias, I fear we’ll get the worst of both worlds—Jeter #1 and Cano #5.  Or, not much better in the event of the Jeter (non)-demotion: Gardner/Jeter/Teix/Arod/Cano.

POOMA, but I have a hunch . . .

I suspect Long wouldn’t be talking this way if they hadn’t already decided to move Jeter to the bottom of the order.  This is the “paving the way” period—when you get the media and fans used to an idea so as to avoid a huge sudden controversy later. 

It’s not a move to 2nd.  Moving Jeter to 2nd wouldn’t be a big deal to most media and fans anyway; that’s always been considered his “natural” slot, as if it’s in his genes or something.

They’ll move him somewhere senseless like 7th, so as to avoid making it seem as much of a demotion. 

The rationales will be all kinds of things:

“Oh we need to bat Montero 9th so as to mitigate the pressure”
“We like Granderson batting 9th so he can be a second leadoff man.”
“Jeter’s always been clutch so we’ll take advantage of that by hitting him behind guys like A-Rod and Posada who get on base a lot”
Etc.

[19] They could still bat him 9th - whether they believe it or not, the Yankees were certainly happy to go w/ the press when Gardner was batting 9th, as it being, “like having two leadoff men”.  And of course if Gardner is 1st, they can split the lefties…

There’s a lot that can go on though, and even if they do drop Jeter to bottom 3rd, he’ll probably be the “alternate” leadoff man, at the beginning of the year.

I am still not sure that Cano’s their best hitter

I agree, he’s probably their best hitter over the next 3 years, but he’s still unlikely to be better over a full season than ARod or Tex.

Of course Montero is going to put this argument to rest by hitting .407/.491/.789.

.789

Mesmerizing.

Of course Montero is going to put this argument to rest by hitting .407/.491/.789.

Either your BA is too high, or SLG too low.  Montero doesn’t have the speed to sustain a BABIP that would get him to .407.  So the BA either needs to go down 50 points, or the SLG up 50.  .407/.491/.839.  Yeah, that looks better.

I’m must be in far, far worse shape than I thought.  Although it’s somehow typical that 199… gets replaced by 200…, it’s not typical for me to shift the OPS number to the SLG column.
Which would have been mesmerizing.
I’m going to stop writing until I get some sleep.

[24] You’re much more entertaining this way! 

Sweet dreams…

How solid are the Bagwell roid rumors because his stats sure are impressive.

[23] I’m glad someone is double checking me.

Near as I can tell, Bagwell’s roid rumors are entirely speculative.  Doesn’t mean he’s clean, but there’s no evidence against him besides ‘look how big his arms were in this picture.’  No Mitchell report stuff, no failed test, no claims by Canseco. 

I already have a hard time taking the Hall of Fame seriously, but I’m pretty much to the point of not caring if they start holding guys out with zero case against them.  Call me when Mo gets in and I’ll start caring again.

Paging Jeff Passan…

Heyman:Kevin Millwood and Freddie Garcia rumors.  Isn’t that special?

So, Bert Blyleven.  Let the Tim Raines outrage commence.

Whew we got Brian Schlitter.  I was afraid Cash would let him slip away.

[32]  That seems like a decent claim, actually.  Anyone know more about the guy?

Also, who knows anything about Radhames Liz?  Worth a flyer to see if the Rothschild magic can work?

PS Seems obvious L-Roth advised on the Schlitter claim, right?

That lineup tool doesn’t take base-running into account.  If Gardner can hit abouit as well as he did last year, I think he should lead off.  When one factors in his stolen bases, his impact on the pitche when at 1B, his ability to take an extra base, and his ability to score from 3rd on a shallow sacrifice fly, he seems a far better choice than Jeter to lead off.

Unfortunately, I don’t think Girardi has the guts to use Gardner as leadoff and put Jeter in the bottom third of the batting order.

Whatever one thinks about Blyleven’s qualifications for the Hall, I find it somewhat unctious when he claims to be humbled by his admission after years of yelling about what an injustice it was that he wasn’t in.

HOF votes:

Bobby Higginson (1)  0   0 %
Charles Johnson (1)  0   0 %
Raul Mondesi (1)  0   0 %
Kirk Rueter (1)

There will be a special ring of hell for a lot of these Hall of Fame voters.

To clarify, that number in parenthesis is the year on the ballot.

I just wanted to post that (37) to show how ludicrous that ballot is.

I remember all those “H-O-F” chants for Charles Johnson.
Wait, what were we saying about my memory?

Is Peter von Wombat’s memory on the Verge of Collapse?

What NO votes for Mondesi-that’s an outrage!

Mondesi got plenty of no votes.

Could Splittorff teach Schlitter the schplitter?

[44] Nice.
[41] Not nice! What are you saying about my… about my… what was I…
... this is good cake…

Is Peter von Wombat’s memory on the Verge of Collapse?

Tasmania weeps.

Whew we got Brian Schlitter.  I was afraid Cash would let him slip away.

I smell a new meme germinating. “That game went into the Schlitter quick…”

already decided to move Jeter to the bottom of the order

So bat Jeter ate and call him “Second Cleanup”.

Proudly sails the HMS Pin-afire.
(And thank you for reminding me of the TW meme; seldom have we been more in need of it.)

Don’t bat Jeter behind a high OBP guy unless you’re going for the GIDP record.

[48]  So Jeter bats behind Granderson?  Just a quick glance, Granderson looks like the only Yankee who is likely to have an OBP that isn’t above league average - one of a few that doesn’t look to be at least 20 points above league average.  That works too, b/c Curtis is fast, and can steal 2nd if Jeter is going through one of those stretches where 100% of his BIP are grounders.

I’m guessing a lot of this is hinging on whether or not Jeter sucks in 2011. Long saying that it’ll be a fluid situation is probably the best thing for us to hear.

[50] Yes - even 2008 Jeter (.363 OBP) is probably fine at the top of the lineup.  Not ideal, but not criminal either.  2007 Jeter I don’t think there’s much argument (2009 Jeter you may argue to move him to 5th).

Not sure if this a legit criticism of the lineup analysis tool, but I think it obviously glosses over some 2nd and 3rd order effects. Jeter’s GIDP tendency has been discussed, but I think there’s also something to be said about a guy like Gardner or Granderson being on base and drawing some focus away from the pitcher, who then is more likely to make a mistake to a dangerous guy like Teixiera, Rodriguez or Cano.

[52] I’m not sure how you could use a tool for those effects.  They may be real, but IDK if they are quantifiable.  Since it is (at this point) subjective, I’d say instead your best bet would be to use the tool (or a tool, anyway), come up with all lineups within some threshold (top 10, every lineup within 2 runs of top lineup over the course of 162 games, etc).  Then start to apply the subjective measures.  E.g. If you don’t feel Girardi would *not* bat ARod cleanup, only keep lineups where he is cleanup hitter.  Apply measures for things like, “disrupting the pitcher”.  Etc.

(2009 Jeter you may argue to move him to 5th).

Wait, you wouldn’t want a .406 OBP with good baserunning at leadoff?

[54] Sure, but I also like that .334 average and .465 slugging 5th.  Or put another way, I’d think the Yankees *may* be better off if they lose ~.020 in OBP by having Gardner leadoff, and let Jeter’s superior slugging hit in a more important position.

Debating it is just academic anyway.  Though I believe Jeter is going to rebound from last year, 2009 Jeter is sitting on a beach having drinks w/ 2007 Joba.

Not sure if this a legit criticism of the lineup analysis tool, but I think it obviously glosses over some 2nd and 3rd order effects. Jeter’s GIDP tendency has been discussed, but I think there’s also something to be said about a guy like Gardner or Granderson being on base and drawing some focus away from the pitcher, who then is more likely to make a mistake to a dangerous guy like Teixiera, Rodriguez or Cano.

What the Book found was that a disruptive runner was actually a bigger negative influence on the batter than on the pitcher, although I’d imagine that effect varies depending on all three participants (batter, pitcher, runner) and their strengths and weaknesses.

Not only should you “not stack lefties”, but you SHOULD stack opposite hand hitters, when possible.

Cano/Tex/Arod is less effective than Cano/Arod/Tex.  A team can bring in a lefty to face Cano and then think “well, we might as well leave him in for tex, since tex will always have the platoon advantage”.  With Cano and Arod back to back, You give one of them a platoon advantage when they wouldn’t normally have it (or you force the manager to pull their reliever).

Gardner
Swish
Cano
Arod
Tex
Posada
Jeter
Granderson
Montero