Barrett batting second

jmajew · July 19, 2006

I thought this was fascinating simply for the fact that maybe Dusty has realized how valuable a guy with an OBP of 390 is in front of guys like Lee and Ramirez. They need guys on base in front of them in order to drive in runs.

Barrett by the way is the perfect number 2 hitter, even better than Walker (Who should bat sixth). Pierre, Barrett, Lee, Aramis, Jones/Murton(situational), Walker, Jones/Murton, Cedeno.

To be honest I don't think this Cubs offense is as bad as its numbers say. If Dusty were to use players in good spots for them this offense should be in the middle of the pack. Assuming Lee was healthy all year.

Anyone agree or disagree?

Edited July 19, 2006 by jmajew

rynefan · July 19, 2006

Did you see the post-game show? They did a survey asking where Barrett should bat, and fifth got the most votes with second, second. Third wasn't a choice.

stitchface · July 19, 2006

I disagree that the lineup order would improve this team much.

jmajew · July 19, 2006

Wow Thanks for the insight.

OBP off all of those spots in the lineup with current players and splits included.

Pierre (320), Barrett (399), Lee (396), Aramis (324), Jones/Murton (372), Walker (356), Jones/Murton (287), Cedeno (280).

WrigleyField 22 · July 19, 2006

Well I would say that with those players I would under normal circumstances I would place Walker 1 or 2, but he has tailed off a ton since the beginning of the season. I'd also usually take a guy with the OBP of Pierre to lower in the order, but he has been heating up. Murton would look good in the two spot against lefties, but Jones wouldn't be best used there against righties so it can't be an exact swap, but Barrett would work well there as his OBP doesn't drop off from righties much, just his SLG.

So:

LEFTIES

Pierre

Murton

Lee

Barrett

Aramis

Jones

Walker

Cedeno

RIGHTIES

Pierre

Barrett

Lee

Aramis

Jones

Walker

Murton

Cedeno

Ultimately, many would agrue that the order won't make much of an effect anyway, and those small changes aren't enough to change this ballclub into a successful one. But it would help. In an effort to help the youth, Theriot could see time at 2B or even SS too and fill in at the bottom of the order.

Edited July 19, 2006 by WrigleyField 22

stitchface · July 19, 2006

no need for the sarcasm just because your argument has been proven wrong by dozens of people who do nothing but analyze baseball.

RockTheIvy · July 19, 2006

The problem is, at least with Dusty, is that he see's Barrett hitting .over .300, and ignores his .390 OBP. Just like earlier in the year he saw Ronny Ce and his .300 avg and batted him second, completely ignoring his sizzling .320 OBP. This is why Adam Dunn won't be on the Cubs any time soon.

Marmolade · July 19, 2006

It's not like he's saying that if the Cubs just "tweaked" their lineup a little bit they'd be scoring 9 a game, he's just saying that the awful lineups Dusty puts on the card every morning are only worsening the offensive potential of this club. I see nothing wrong with the argument that batting the sadly scarce high OBP/lowish power guys the Cubs have 1 and 2 with the decent power guys they have 3-4-5, instead of this Neifi Perez #2 crap, would improve the Cubs' offensive situation.

Andy · July 19, 2006

Barrett batting 3rd in front of Lee, Ramirez, then Jones plz

fromthestretch · July 19, 2006

I think most people here would agree that it's best to get your high-OBP guys in front of the power bats. Obviously, that increases your chances of having someone on when Lee and Ramirez come to the plate. And while we're all for maximizing scoring opportunities, the difference won't be as big as you think. Who you have in the lineup is much more important than where they bat.

moorecg · July 19, 2006

Not to jump into the fray...but...(jumps)...so would these same people say it makes no difference if you hit the pitcher and Neifi in front of Lee? I think it makes a difference...it doesnt' make this mess of a team a contender, but how Dusty constructs a line up does make a diffefrence.

Careless · July 19, 2006

Worst in baseball to middle of the pack is a large improvement.

Ding Dong Johnson · July 19, 2006

Actually, over the course of a season, their studies lead them to believe the difference would be negligible. Not that I subscribe to the theory, just saying.

goonys evil twin · July 19, 2006

I disagree that the Cubs offense isn't as bad as its numbers say. It is bad, it's been bad for years. They haven't addressed the biggest problem areas and they allowed other problems to come up due to neglect.

Dusty makes it worse by playing guys like Neifi Perez on a regular basis, but it's still a bad lineup.

minnesotacubsfan · July 19, 2006

I all fairness stitch, you arent really providing much of an arguement here.

WHO says WHAT in your arguement? what are you saying??

CubColtPacer · July 19, 2006

True, but he said also that they would be in the middle of the pack if Lee was healthy all year. If Lee had been healthy, that would have made a big difference in the offense.

fromthestretch · July 19, 2006

The Cubs got a career year out of a healthy Lee last season and still finished in the bottom third in the majors in runs scored. Barrett's having a career year this season, and Jones has been an improvement over Burnitz. Ramirez has been worse than last year. Walker has been ok but has hit for a lot less power than last year.

A healthy Lee would make a difference, but I don't think it would be enough to really vault this offense up the charts too many spots.

cheapseats · July 19, 2006

The misconception is that batting order doesn't make any difference. It does make a difference, but the difference isn't as much as some would think.

Using current OBP and SLG numbers for each player, according to the Lineup Analysis tool at Baseball Musings, here's the worst possible order for the players the Cubs put on the field last night:

Marmol

Cedeno

Jones

Pierre

Perez

Lee

Ramirez

Barrett

Nevin

Not even Dusty would do that.

The difference between the best possible order and the worst possible order above is just less than 1 run. Dusty's orders, as ridiculous as they are sometimes, don't approach the level of stupidity of leading off with the pitcher, batting Pierre cleanup, etc.

Dusty's batting orders might be able to cost us a third of a run or half a run sometimes, but, as others have said, who is in the lineup is more important than the batting order. That's where Dusty really fails.

CubColtPacer · July 19, 2006

There is one other big difference in the team from last year. As bad as many people think Pierre is doing, he has had to have much more of a help then Patterson did last year posting a .254 OBP in 451 AB's. Also, left field has been significantly improved-remember Hollandsworth got the plurality of at bats there and posted a .301 OBP. I think that would be enough change-I mean, we finished 20th in runs last year, and all he's saying is that we might be 13th-20th again with a healthy Lee.

BigbadB · July 19, 2006

I've never believed the argument that batting order has very little effect on run production.

How many more RBI would Derrek Lee have had last year with 2 .400 OBP guys hitting 1st and 2nd in the order? How many more RBI would Neifi Perez have had? How many more RBI would Burnitz have had? Good OBP gets wasted when it is followed by poor AVG/SLG.

There is a particular reason that it makes sense to have good OBP guys hitting first in the game. There is also a particular reason that it makes sense to have your biggest boppers hitting directly behind those guys.

And just less than 1 run is a significant increase offensively. Just less than a run a game would propel this Cub team from 30th in the league to 10-12th in run production. That is very significant.

frostwyrm · July 19, 2006

Cubs offense is last in OBP, last in SLG, 2nd to last in HR, last in BB, last in runs scored. This is simply a terrible offense. Even with a healthy DLee it would have been bad.

frostwyrm · July 19, 2006

I've never believed it either. Nobody can make me believe it makes no difference if you bat Juan Pierre after Derrek Lee.

cheapseats · July 19, 2006

I consider 1 run a game significant, too.

However, note that the worst possible lineup, the one that would produce just 3.5 runs a game, is one in which the pitcher bats first, Juan Pierre hits cleanup, and Barrett and Nevin bat 8 and 9. As bad as Dusty is at lineup construction, he's never filled out such an atrocious card.

Therefore, adding 1 run per game through batting order construction is a pipe dream. The difference between the optimum batting order and the one Dusty used last night is .273 runs per game. That would be good enough to put the Cubs in 29th place in runs scored instead of 30th.

Ding Dong Johnson · July 19, 2006

Derrek Lee's 2005 is the exact reason I don't buy it. I wonder if the assumption was that each position was filled with players performing right at the league average. I don't remember.

Anyway, I believe the assertion was that the difference was a handful of runs over the course of a season, not a single run per game.

UK1679666180 · July 19, 2006

http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~raj/writing/BattingOrder.html

Barrett batting second

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs