THE BOOK cover
The Unwritten Book is Finally Written!
An in-depth analysis of: The sacrifice bunt, batter/pitcher matchups, the intentional base on balls, optimizing a batting lineup, hot and cold streaks, clutch performance, platooning strategies, and much more.
Read Excerpts & Customer Reviews

Buy The Book from Amazon


SABR101 required reading if you enter this site. Check out the Sabermetric Wiki. And interesting baseball books.
MOST RECENT ARTICLES
MAIL : You ask | We say

Advanced


THE BOOK--Playing The Percentages In Baseball

<< Back to main

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

Pitcher batting 8th

By Tangotiger, 03:12 PM

In my Markov tests in The Book, putting the pitcher 9th or 7th was breakeven, with 8th being the optimal spot, but on the order of 2-3 runs or so.  (When MGL does his studies, he find the pitcher batting 9th to be ever-so-slightly preferable.) So, when Dave reports this:

The average pitcher-bats-9th team was 0.23 runs below optimal, while Pittsburgh and the AL teams averaged 0.07 runs below optimal. This would suggest flipping the pitcher and 8th hitter on the other NL teams would result in an improvement of about 0.16 runs. Over 162 games that is 25 runs or 2.5 wins, a surprisingly high number to me.

It should be surprising because it is impossible.  In my tests, moving the pitcher from 8th to 4th caused a 0.10 runs per game difference.  That’s the absolute limit for moving one player to the worst spot, while keeping the other 8 guys in the same order.  I presume Pinto’s model used SLG, OBP and regression, which I think he based it on Cy’s work (all this was done a few years ago)?  If that’s the case, then there is a limit to its usefulness.


#1    Kincaid      (see all posts) 2010/04/06 (Tue) @ 17:49

Guy’s comment from the FG article seems especially relevant:

Dave: Unfortunately, the Baseball Musing lineup tool doesn’t work. Not even a little. What it does is create a “multiplier” for each lineup slot, based on historical data. But it keeps these multipliers constant, even as it allows you to experiment with non-traditional lineups. So OBP for the 8th place hitter has relatively little value, for example, because it’s often followed by the pitcher. Putting the pitcher there thus appears to be a great move, because the cost is low — but that’s because the model is essentially assuming the #9 hitter is still a pitcher! Which of course is no longer true.

The model appears to be dynamic, but it’s really static. The #4 hitter’s SLG would still get a lot of weight, even if you put your three lowest OBP guys at the top of the lineup. Really, you just can’t rely on it for any analysis.

A couple other commenters also brought up the issue of lack of interaction between slots in the sim used for the article.


Page 1 of 1 pages


Name (required)
E-Mail (optional; WILL be published)
Website (optional)

<< Back to main


Latest...

COMMENTS

Feb 10 13:24
Performance through the ages

Feb 10 13:12
New PECOTA

Feb 10 13:03
MGL: Today on Clubhouse Confidential

Feb 10 12:49
Win expectancy charts used in football… in 1983!

Feb 10 12:17
Dwight Evans

Feb 10 11:40
Turbo Tax: the Netflix of tax software?

Feb 10 10:45
Psst… wanna intern in Canada?

Feb 10 09:25
For Your Soul

Feb 10 01:43
The will of the people?

Feb 10 00:36
Correlation of pitcher metrics: FIP strikes again