Revisiting Joe Nathan

[David]

 

Nope, sure don't. If Pujols is hitting leadoff, he would walk an awful lot more. But, in that lineup, Pujols being on base with no outs and anyone else on that team hitting behind him is far less desirable than Eckstein being on base with no outs and Pujols batting.

 

Why would he walk a lot more? The additional number of at bats he would get over a season would seemingly mitigate the number of times he leads off an inning. Furthermore, I would assume that pitchers would be much more likely to pitch to him if he lead off an inning than if there were runners on, assuming that the worst damage he could do would be a single run. I don't see how, over a the course of 600 ABs, the difference would be statistically significant.

 

As far as I know, the only long-term study of the batting order issue was done by Baseball America, and I believe it was found that batting order is relatively insignificant. From what I remember, they basically advocated putting the players in order of OBP from highest to lowest, but seemed to say that in the grand scheme of things, there wasn't a significant difference regardless. Someone else could probably fill in the details better than me here.

 

As long as you aren't doing something extreme and completely stupid like going from worst hitter to best. I just want to point that out before people start to nitpick and question it.

[David]

Why people continually insist that you should put your best reliever in some of the easiest spots you would bring a reliever into is beyond me.

 

The closer is up there with the leadoff hitter among the most overrated roles in baseball. They come in in the 9th, with a lead, often of 2 or 3 runs, and nobody on and nobody out. Meanwhile, you're bringing other (supposedly lesser) guys into tight spots with men on and often less comfortable (and sometimes no) leads.

 

Where on earth is the logic?

 

I'll likely be ridiculed for this, but here goes anyway...

 

So, a message board poster has it right, and ALL of baseball has it wrong? Come on, it's really not too difficult to figure out. The reason that the 9th is a much more important role, and *usually* the best place for a closer is due to the fact that you are down to your final 3 outs, if any, by that time in the game. You give up the lead in the 7th, you still have 6 or 9 outs offensively. In the 9th, the game is over, or you have 3 outs to play with. That is INCREDIBLY different, and it's why great closers are hard to come by. Pressure is much different in that situation, and it's why guys like Farnsworth can be very good middle relievers and subpar closers.

 

Okay, NSB groupthinkers, flame away.

 

At what point do you think a victory is more in jeopardy and a run is more likely to score.. in the 9th, with a 1 run lead (basically the most difficult situation a closer will face), nobody on, and nobody out... or, say, in the 7th with a 1 run lead with runners on first and third and one out?

 

Extremely myopic point of view. At what point are we more likely to score a run or two and take the lead? In a game where we have 3 innings (and therefore, an at bat for everyone in the lineup) or in the 9th inning alone?

 

Coming back at that point in the game is highly unlikely anyway. I'd rather use the best possible protection for my lead when it's in greatest jeopardy than to sacrifice some of that certainty (i.e. using a lesser pitcher) because I'd have a better chance of coming back if I blew it that early. That's completely backwards and makes so little sense to me that it is making my head hurt. I'm pretty sure the numbers would back me up, too.

[wrigley23]

there have been numerous articles written in the chicago papers & it's been on chicago radio numerous times that the cubs prefer to move soriano down in the order as he has leg issues & that he is not ideal leading off because he does not get on base at a high clip & he does not work the count. Contrast that with the effort put into getting Roberts who is a leadoff hitter & that is a pretty good deduction. I'd like to see someone promote the stat of how many first inning leads hold up & turn into a win. I'd much rather have Roberts get on via a walk or single, steal second & then come home on a Lee double, Sori single or aram homer in the first than to start the game w/ a 3 or 4 pitch strikeout to Soriano.

[BudHouse]

Position in the batting order doesn't matter? Oh come on. Managers have been putting their best power hitters 3-6 in lineups since the beginning of time. What sort of manager would put a Babe Ruth, a Lou Gehrig, a Henry Aaron batting leadoff?

 

How soon we forget the impact a Bob Denier and Kenny Lofton had on Cubs teams. They worked the count, didn't swing for the fences and knew their job was to get on base. While Soriano isn't the prototypical leadoff man, he may have been placed there during his career because the Yankees, Rangers, etc.. had enough power and no speed in the 3-6 part of the lineup.

 

Stats explain what happened. Others explain why.

[BigbadB]

there have been numerous articles written in the chicago papers & it's been on chicago radio numerous times that the cubs prefer to move soriano down in the order as he has leg issues & that he is not ideal leading off because he does not get on base at a high clip & he does not work the count. Contrast that with the effort put into getting Roberts who is a leadoff hitter & that is a pretty good deduction. I'd like to see someone promote the stat of how many first inning leads hold up & turn into a win. I'd much rather have Roberts get on via a walk or single, steal second & then come home on a Lee double, Sori single or aram homer in the first than to start the game w/ a 3 or 4 pitch strikeout to Soriano.

 

Can you provide a link to one of these articles where the Cubs prefer to move Soriano down in the order?

 

In your own words, you state the importance of good OBP to set up the production hitters. But, there are 2 guys who hit in front of these production hitters, not just one. And when you beg for Roberts to hit first, you are basically asking for Theriot to hit second as well. If you haven't looked lately, Theriot has a worse on base percentage than Soriano. So, if you had your choice, are you honestly saying you would rather have:

 

Roberts/Theriot batting 1/2

 

or

 

Soriano/Roberts batting 1/2?

 

I won't allow you to use Roberts/Fukudome in there because there have been plenty of articles published quoting Hendry as wanting a lefty bat to split up all the big righty bats.

 

And I'm honestly not making the following stat up.

 

Soriano in the first inning in 2007: 20 strike outs

Roberts in the first inning in 2007: 18 strike outs

 

Oh my, those 2 extra K's is really killing the Cubs starting off a game.

 

Soriano leading off an inning in 2007: 45 K's

Roberts leading off an inning in 2007: 38 K's.

 

Yikes, 7 more K's starting off innings 250+ times per year. Fire that man.

 

Soriano leading off a game with a HR: 12

Roberts leading off a game with a HR: 1

 

Soriano leading off an inning with a HR: 13

Roberts leading off an inning with a HR: 4

 

Roberts scores a run every 7.17 times he steps to the plate.

Soriano scores a run every 6.7 times he steps to the plate.

 

Please explain why less home runs, less K's and less runs scored per game (Roberts x 3) makes someone a more valuable lead off hitter. I'm dying to hear it.

[inari]

there have been numerous articles written in the chicago papers & it's been on chicago radio numerous times that the cubs prefer to move soriano down in the order as he has leg issues & that he is not ideal leading off because he does not get on base at a high clip & he does not work the count. Contrast that with the effort put into getting Roberts who is a leadoff hitter & that is a pretty good deduction. I'd like to see someone promote the stat of how many first inning leads hold up & turn into a win. I'd much rather have Roberts get on via a walk or single, steal second & then come home on a Lee double, Sori single or aram homer in the first than to start the game w/ a 3 or 4 pitch strikeout to Soriano.

 

Are you sure?

[cbbryan]

Can wrigley23 be banned? So much wasted thread space from his meaningless posts and arguments inspired by them.

 

Bleh anyway....we don't need Joe Nathan, especially at his price tag.

 

What exactly is his "price tag?" And how do you rule out an acquisition without knowing what it would involve to get them?

[Guest]

Can wrigley23 be banned? So much wasted thread space from his meaningless posts and arguments inspired by them.

 

Bleh anyway....we don't need Joe Nathan, especially at his price tag.

If you go to your control panel, there's a new feature called Friends & Foes. If you set him up as a foe, you'll ignore his posts.

[BigbadB]

In your own words, you state the importance of good OBP to set up the production hitters. But, there are 2 guys who hit in front of these production hitters, not just one. And when you beg for Roberts to hit first, you are basically asking for Theriot to hit second as well. If you haven't looked lately, Theriot has a worse on base percentage than Soriano. So, if you had your choice, are you honestly saying you would rather have:

 

Roberts/Theriot batting 1/2

 

or

 

Soriano/Roberts batting 1/2?

 

I won't allow you to use Roberts/Fukudome in there because there have been plenty of articles published quoting Hendry as wanting a lefty bat to split up all the big righty bats.

 

And I'm honestly not making the following stat up.

 

Soriano in the first inning in 2007: 20 strike outs

Roberts in the first inning in 2007: 18 strike outs

 

Oh my, those 2 extra K's is really killing the Cubs starting off a game.

 

Soriano leading off an inning in 2007: 45 K's

Roberts leading off an inning in 2007: 38 K's.

 

Yikes, 7 more K's starting off innings 250+ times per year. Fire that man.

 

Soriano leading off a game with a HR: 12

Roberts leading off a game with a HR: 1

 

Soriano leading off an inning with a HR: 13

Roberts leading off an inning with a HR: 4

 

Roberts scores a run every 7.17 times he steps to the plate.

Soriano scores a run every 6.7 times he steps to the plate.

 

Please explain why less home runs, less K's and less runs scored per game (Roberts x 3) makes someone a more valuable lead off hitter. I'm dying to hear it.

 

To be fair, Roberts did have 100 more plate appearances than Soriano in 2007, so Soriano's K totals would likely be up a bit, as would his HR totals. Also, I didn't explain that the runs per PA was lifetime, not just last year.

 

Soriano's PA per run in 2007: 6.36

Roberts' PA per run in 2007: 6.95

 

Soriano's PA per run in 2006: 6.11

Robert's PA per run in 2006: 7.4

 

I included 2006 in the event someone wanted to argue that the Cubs heart of the order was clearly better than the Orioles heart of the order, even though I believe the two were very comparable. Clearly, the 2006 Nats heart of the order doesn't nearly compare to either of the 2007 Orioles or Cubs heart of the order.

 

Just for giggles, I'll include the 3-5 hitters for each of the above teams:

 

2007 Cubs:

3rd: .309 .391 .496, 80 RBI

4th: .312 .381 .531, 122 RBI

5th: .256 .321 .401, 75 RBI

 

2007 Orioles:

3rd: .288 .353 .457, 109 RBI

4th: .276 .357 .422, 99 RBI

5th: .267 .325 .408, 85 RBI

 

2006 Nats:

3rd: .259 .346 .443, 93 RBI

4th: .269 .390 .467, 96 RBI

5th: .267 .339 .450, 99 RBI

 

Looks like the 2007 Orioles win the RBI battle, followed by the 2006 Nats. But, the Cubs heart of the order had better AVG, OBP and SLG.

 

2006 Nats 1/2 OBP: .357/.362

2006 Nats 1/2 RS: 119/97

 

2007 Orioles 1/2 OBP: .375/.320

2007 Orioles RS: 107/97

 

2007 Cubs 1/2 OBP: .341/.336

2007 Cubs 1/2 RS: 127/99

 

Cubs get last place in OBP at the top of the order, but win the runs scored contest. Imagine how much better the Cubs heart of the order would be if Soriano hit lead off and Brian Roberts hit 2nd. Especially when you factor in how much better Fukudome will be hitting behind Ramirez. Without Roberts, Soriano/DeRosa would be much better than Soriano/Theriot and not too far off from what Soriano/Roberts would likely provide. One thing that does need to be considered about Roberts is the first year in a new league could hamper his numbers a bit. Some guys do quite well switching leagues. Others, well, not so much. It cannot be assumed that Roberts will automatically do better or equal performance switching leagues and facing a lot of pitchers for the first time.

 

I will say that Soriano, Roberts, Lee, Ramirez, Fukudome is arguably one of the best 1-5's in baseball, depending on how Fukudome's numbers from Japan translate to MLB.

[Guest]

 

Not really, a leadoff hitter gets probably an extra 120 PA over the #7 hitter over the course of the season.

 

I may have been unclear in my original sentiment.

 

The point was more that, when the substantive statistics behind the two hitters in question aren't significantly different, advocating one because he fits the mold of a "traditional" leadoff hitter doesn't make sense. Using position in the order as a defining characteristic is what is arbitrary, not the difference between the two spots in the order.

 

Right. Because Albert Pujols would be just as valuable batting leadoff as he is batting 3rd, right?

 

You don't think Albert Pujols batting an additional 40 times per season would help to offset most of the difference?

 

Actually, Tom Tango advocates batting Pujols second in that lineup.... food for thought.

 

Nope, sure don't. If Pujols is hitting leadoff, he would walk an awful lot more. But, in that lineup, Pujols being on base with no outs and anyone else on that team hitting behind him is far less desirable than Eckstein being on base with no outs and Pujols batting.

 

First, going along by your logic:

 

Since you say the Cardinals lineup is so bad, what's the difference between Pujols coming up with none on and no outs and none on and two outs? You think the Cardinal lineup is so bad that they couldn't do anything behind Pujols if he's batting first so why would they be expected to do anything if he's batting third? And Eckstein isn't on the Cardinals anymore - he went to Toronto.

 

And for other logic:

 

How many times can you guarantee me that your leadoff hitter will actually lead off an inning in any given game? The answer is one. After that it's a crapshoot. The idea with batting your better hitters higher in the lineup is that they will get more at bats over the course of the season.

 

Let me just throw out this hypothetical, your team is down a run and has the bases loaded with two outs and you have your leadoff hitter coming up. Who would you rather have coming to the plate, David Eckstein or Albert Pujols?

[badnews]

With Soriano being such a questionable clutch hitter, who wants him hitting down in the lineup? Then we get to pay $17 million a year for an .810 OPS guy.

 

In terms of the topic, any resources devoted to obtaining Roberts or Nathan should be directed towards getting a quality #2-3 starting pitcher since we're not upgrading shortstop. Getting another 2b and a closer instead of getting a shortstop and a starting pitcher is just not smart.

 

I don't know why we keep concentrating on the "all sizzle, no steak" roles like closer and leadoff and not improving where we need it the most to win.

 

I also harbor no fantasies about A.J. Burnett coming as cheaply as DeRosa, Dempster, and whoever. That simply doesn't make any sense at all.

[SouthSideRyan]

Does somebody get a prize for making the 100th posting of the Lofton/pre-Lofton offensive #s for the '03 Cubs?

[Guest]

Does somebody get a prize for making the 100th posting of the Lofton/pre-Lofton offensive #s for the '03 Cubs?

It should just be added to the FAQ.

[fromthestretch]

Position in the batting order doesn't matter? Oh come on. Managers have been putting their best power hitters 3-6 in lineups since the beginning of time. What sort of manager would put a Babe Ruth, a Lou Gehrig, a Henry Aaron batting leadoff?

 

How soon we forget the impact a Bob Denier and Kenny Lofton had on Cubs teams. They worked the count, didn't swing for the fences and knew their job was to get on base. While Soriano isn't the prototypical leadoff man, he may have been placed there during his career because the Yankees, Rangers, etc.. had enough power and no speed in the 3-6 part of the lineup.

 

Stats explain what happened. Others explain why.

 

Bob Dernier worked the count? The same Bob Dernier with a career .318 OBP? He may have known his job was to get on base, but he sure didn't do it well.

[CuseCubFan69]

Position in the batting order doesn't matter? Oh come on. Managers have been putting their best power hitters 3-6 in lineups since the beginning of time. What sort of manager would put a Babe Ruth, a Lou Gehrig, a Henry Aaron batting leadoff?

 

How soon we forget the impact a Bob Denier and Kenny Lofton had on Cubs teams. They worked the count, didn't swing for the fences and knew their job was to get on base. While Soriano isn't the prototypical leadoff man, he may have been placed there during his career because the Yankees, Rangers, etc.. had enough power and no speed in the 3-6 part of the lineup.

 

Stats explain what happened. Others explain why.

 

Bob Dernier worked the count? The same Bob Dernier with a career .318 OBP? He may have known his job was to get on base, but he sure didn't do it well.

 

What was his OBP the year the Cubs did well?

[Keener98]

Position in the batting order doesn't matter? Oh come on. Managers have been putting their best power hitters 3-6 in lineups since the beginning of time. What sort of manager would put a Babe Ruth, a Lou Gehrig, a Henry Aaron batting leadoff?

 

How soon we forget the impact a Bob Denier and Kenny Lofton had on Cubs teams. They worked the count, didn't swing for the fences and knew their job was to get on base. While Soriano isn't the prototypical leadoff man, he may have been placed there during his career because the Yankees, Rangers, etc.. had enough power and no speed in the 3-6 part of the lineup.

 

Stats explain what happened. Others explain why.

 

Bob Dernier worked the count? The same Bob Dernier with a career .318 OBP? He may have known his job was to get on base, but he sure didn't do it well.

 

What was his OBP the year the Cubs did well?

 

.356 in 1984

[fromthestretch]

Position in the batting order doesn't matter? Oh come on. Managers have been putting their best power hitters 3-6 in lineups since the beginning of time. What sort of manager would put a Babe Ruth, a Lou Gehrig, a Henry Aaron batting leadoff?

 

How soon we forget the impact a Bob Denier and Kenny Lofton had on Cubs teams. They worked the count, didn't swing for the fences and knew their job was to get on base. While Soriano isn't the prototypical leadoff man, he may have been placed there during his career because the Yankees, Rangers, etc.. had enough power and no speed in the 3-6 part of the lineup.

 

Stats explain what happened. Others explain why.

 

Bob Dernier worked the count? The same Bob Dernier with a career .318 OBP? He may have known his job was to get on base, but he sure didn't do it well.

 

What was his OBP the year the Cubs did well?

 

So we're going to let one season represent his entire body of work? The previous poster said:

 

How soon we forget the impact a Bob Denier and Kenny Lofton had on Cubs teams. They worked the count, didn't swing for the fences and knew their job was to get on base.

 

Apparently, Dernier only knew his job was to get on base for one season. I'm not trying to dimish what he did to help the '84 team. His .356 OBP wasn't the best in the world, but it certainly didn't hurt. However, if you want to talk about the impact he had on Cubs teams, you also have to include the negative impact his .315 OBP had in 1985 or his .275 OBP had in 1986. He played well in limited action in 1987 after the Cubs wised up and realized he just wasn't that good against right-handed pitching.

[CuseCubFan69]

Position in the batting order doesn't matter? Oh come on. Managers have been putting their best power hitters 3-6 in lineups since the beginning of time. What sort of manager would put a Babe Ruth, a Lou Gehrig, a Henry Aaron batting leadoff?

 

How soon we forget the impact a Bob Denier and Kenny Lofton had on Cubs teams. They worked the count, didn't swing for the fences and knew their job was to get on base. While Soriano isn't the prototypical leadoff man, he may have been placed there during his career because the Yankees, Rangers, etc.. had enough power and no speed in the 3-6 part of the lineup.

 

Stats explain what happened. Others explain why.

 

Bob Dernier worked the count? The same Bob Dernier with a career .318 OBP? He may have known his job was to get on base, but he sure didn't do it well.

 

What was his OBP the year the Cubs did well?

 

So we're going to let one season represent his entire body of work? The previous poster said:

 

 

I just simply asked what his OBP was. Did he have a career year, maybe, but it proves that if you have a guy that gets on base it certainly does help you score runs. The Cubs caught lightning in a bottle that year and I wouldn't plan on that happening either but this is why you have scouts and hopefully they see something that the team that has the player didn't or see that the player has figured out some things regarding being a better hitter.

[fromthestretch]

Did he have a career year, maybe, but it proves that if you have a guy that gets on base it certainly does help you score runs.

 

Is anyone arguing otherwise?

 

I'm just saying that Bob Dernier isn't exactly the best example of a guy that gets on base.

[CuseCubFan69]

Did he have a career year, maybe, but it proves that if you have a guy that gets on base it certainly does help you score runs.

 

Is anyone arguing otherwise?

 

I'm just saying that Bob Dernier isn't exactly the best example of a guy that gets on base.

 

Oh I agree from his career numbers and imo his peak was a very small window. What I am saying is that he did get on base in 84 and that particular year a lot of Cub fans will remember forever.

[Rob]

there have been numerous articles written in the chicago papers & it's been on chicago radio numerous times that the cubs prefer to move soriano down in the order as he has leg issues & that he is not ideal leading off because he does not get on base at a high clip & he does not work the count. Contrast that with the effort put into getting Roberts who is a leadoff hitter & that is a pretty good deduction. I'd like to see someone promote the stat of how many first inning leads hold up & turn into a win. I'd much rather have Roberts get on via a walk or single, steal second & then come home on a Lee double, Sori single or aram homer in the first than to start the game w/ a 3 or 4 pitch strikeout to Soriano.

 

I don't have that handy. But why don't you check this stat out?

 

Runs by inning:

1st inning - 114 runs

2nd inning - 69 runs

3rd inning - 93 runs

4th inning - 79 runs

5th inning - 80 runs

6th inning - 94 runs

7th inning - 93 runs

8th inning - 72 runs

9th inning - 55 runs

Ext inning - 3 runs

 

Now I don't personally believe much in the effect of lineup order... but if Soriano is such a terrible leadoff hitter, how do you explain the Cubs scoring so many more runs in the first (the one inning he's guaranteed to lead off) than in any other inning?

[Derwood]

there have been numerous articles written in the chicago papers & it's been on chicago radio numerous times that the cubs prefer to move soriano down in the order as he has leg issues & that he is not ideal leading off because he does not get on base at a high clip & he does not work the count. Contrast that with the effort put into getting Roberts who is a leadoff hitter & that is a pretty good deduction. I'd like to see someone promote the stat of how many first inning leads hold up & turn into a win. I'd much rather have Roberts get on via a walk or single, steal second & then come home on a Lee double, Sori single or aram homer in the first than to start the game w/ a 3 or 4 pitch strikeout to Soriano.

 

I don't have that handy. But why don't you check this stat out?

 

Runs by inning:

1st inning - 114 runs

2nd inning - 69 runs

3rd inning - 93 runs

4th inning - 79 runs

5th inning - 80 runs

6th inning - 94 runs

7th inning - 93 runs

8th inning - 72 runs

9th inning - 55 runs

Ext inning - 3 runs

 

Now I don't personally believe much in the effect of lineup order... but if Soriano is such a terrible leadoff hitter, how do you explain the Cubs scoring so many more runs in the first (the one inning he's guaranteed to lead off) than in any other inning?

 

Cubs say....leadoff hitter.....lefty.....