Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Dan Marino Starting College For Developmentally Disabled

Optimizing the Astros line up by THE BOOK

I know that there has already been some discussion about Beyond the Box Score's article on how to best fit the Astros line up to Tango, Litchman, and Dolphin's seminal sabermetric inquiry to "The Book," but I figured I'd try my hand it.  I used PECOTA's weighted mean forecast because:

  1. I needed to use a standardized source for player forecasts.
  2. PECOTA is my go to projection for hitters, which is just personal preference.
After the jump, I'll delve more into the reasons for placing each hitter where they were per THE BOOK and BtB's analysis of its suggestions for optimizing a line-up.  However, I'll offer you a teaser to entice you to read more:
  1. Pence
  2. Berkman
  3. Tejada
  4. Lee
  5. Matsui
  6. Bourn
  7. Blum
  8. Pitcher
  9. Pudge
Enticed? Jump on over and find out the method to the madness.

Star-divide

I'll remark, from the outset, that the Astros line-up is tough to optimize this way because we have a plethora of high SLG relative to OBP guys on the team.  It was really depressing to put all this together because of that fact, but this was my best effort and probably my fourth revision of it.  There are plenty of alternatives that would make logical sense, and we should debate those in the comments.

So Pence should lead off in my interpretation of THE BOOK and BtB's suggestions.

 

The old-school book says to put a speedy guy up top.  Power isn't important, and OBP is nice, but comes second to speed.

The Book says OBP is king.  The lead-off hitter comes to bat only 36% of the time with a runner on base, versus 44% of the time for the next lowest spot in the lineup, so why waste homeruns?  The lead-off hitter also comes to the plate the most times per game, so why give away outs?  As for speed, stealing bases is most valuable in front of singles hitters, and since the top of the order is going to be full of power hitters, they're not as important.  The lead-off hitter is one of the best three hitters on the team, the guy without homerun power.  Speed is nice, as this batter will have plenty of chances to run the bases with good hitters behind him.

 

PECOTA sees Pence posting a .345 OBP which would be good for the third best OBP, and he'll also have the third best SLG, which means we're not wasting the most power potential at the alter of OBP.

Berkman follows pence:

 

The old-school book says to put a bat-control guy here.  Not a great hitter, but someone who can move the lead-off hitter over for one of the next two hitters to drive in.

The Books says the #2 hitter comes to bat in situations about as important as the #3 hitter, but more often.  That means the #2 hitter should be better than the #3 guy, and one of the best three hitters overall.  And since he bats with the bases empty more often than the hitters behind him, he should be a high-OBP player.  Doesn't sound like someone who should be sacrificing, does it?

 

Berkman is the ideal candidate for this position, and for those of you confused by why he shouldn't be hitting third for fourth in this, just keep reading.

I have Tejada in the third spot:

 

The old-school book says to put your best high-average hitter here.  The lead-off hitter should already be in scoring position and a hit drives him in.  Wham, bam, thank you ma'am.

The Book says the #3 hitter comes to the plate with, on average, fewer runners on base than the #4 or #5 hitters.  So why focus on putting a guy who can knock in runs in the #3 spot, when the two spots after him can benefit from it more?  Surprisingly, because he comes to bat so often with two outs and no runners on base, the #3 hitter isn't nearly as important as we think.  This is a spot to fill after more important spots are taken care of.

 

Tejada is a tricky candidate for the line up because he's not a great OBP guy and he has a stalwart propensity for GIDP, but given the qualifiers above, I think it's an ok placement of Tejada, instead of Matsui, as will be seen by the analysis of the four and five hitters.

Carlos Lee, like Berkman in the two-hole, ideally fits in the clean-up spot as prescribed:

 

The old-school book says to put your big power bat here, probably a guy with a low batting average, who will hit the big multi-run homeruns.

The Book says the #4 hitter comes to bat in the most important situations out of all nine spots, but is equal in importance to the #2 hole once you consider the #2 guy receives more plate appearances.  The cleanup hitter is the best hitter on the team with power.

 

So why Lee over Berkman? Because Lance is the more valuable hitter, so he it's best to give him those extra ABs.  I guess it's a debatable point, but after about twenty minutes of hemming and hawing over it, this is the conclusion I came too—especially because Berkman has the better OBP and creating scoring situations at the top of the line up felt more valuable to me than letting him sit in the clean-up position.

Kaz Matsui batting fifth:

 

The old-school book says the number five guy is a wannabe cleanup hitter.

The Book says the #5 guy can provide more value than the #3 guy with singles, doubles, triples, and walks, and avoiding outs, although the #3 guy holds an advantage with homeruns.  After positions #1, #2, and #4 are filled, put your next best hitter here, unless he lives and dies with the long ball.

 

That sounds like Kaz to me—well really just the avoiding the outs part—and that's about it.

Spots 6-9 get summarized as such:

 

The old-school book says the rest of the lineup should be written in based on decreasing talent.  Hitting ninth is an insult.

The Book basically agrees, with a caveat.  Stolen bases are most valuable ahead of high-contact singles hitters, who are more likely to hit at the bottom of the lineup.  So a base-stealing threat who doesn't deserve a spot higher in the lineup is optimized in the #6 hole, followed by the singles hitters.

 

Given the stolen base consideration, and the fact that PECOTA predicts a rosy .327 OBP for Michael Bourn, I have him batting sixth.  I chose to just use OBP as factor for determining spots seven and nine and that put Blum (.306) and Pudge (.301) in there, respectively.

Finally, why the pitcher should bat eighth:

Yes, giving an awful hitter more plate appearances by hitting him higher in the lineup is costly, but the benefit of having a better number nine hitter interacting with the top of the lineup is worth the trade-off, by about two runs per season.  By putting a decent hitter at the bottom of the order, the top spots in the lineup will have more runners on base to advance with walks and hits and drive in with hits.

Two runs a season is nothing to scoff at for this team, so I say employ it, it'll work even better when/if Backe is pitching that day.

As I stated at the beginning, I used PECOTA because it's my preference for hitting projections, but it's not always the best in all cases.  To account for this, I went through and optimized the line up again using CHONE and ZIPS projections.  Both have the added benefit of recalculating Pudge for the NL Central, for what that's worth.

CHONE:

 

  1. Tejada: .337/.441 (equal OBP to Pence, but less power, also neutralizes GIDP opportunities).
  2. Berkman
  3. Pence: Just because he has the advantage in HR over Matsui.
  4. Lee
  5. Matsui
  6. Bourn (.320 OBP)
  7. Blum (.301 OBP)
  8. Pitcher
  9. Pudge (.297 OBP)
  1. Tejada is projected to have a .344/.441 OBP/SLG by ZIPS so this makes him the ideal lead off guy under the current system because he out paces Pence at getting on base.
  2. Berkman
  3. Pence (.340/.500)
  4. Lee
  5. Matsui gets a much less favorable projection, but because this team isn't a great OBP team, he still gets to keep the fifth slot (.326/.395)
  6. Bourn is projected at a .306 clip, but I think he can still fill this spot given the stolen base consideration.
  7. Pudge (.313/.416)
  8. Pitcher
  9. Blum
CHONE and ZIPS provide pretty similar line ups, so perhaps Tejada should lead off and Pence should be in the three hole.  I suppose an argument could also be made for having Mastui in the three hole and Pence in the five hole, and I hope we have hash it out.  I just hope Cecil sees this.  This, of course, is subject to revision once we figure out what the 3B situation will be, so we'll revisit this in a week or so, I assume.

Comment 30 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Your article go linked on BBTF's...

newstand….in case you didn’t know.

by clack on Mar 26, 2009 8:05 AM CDT reply actions  

it would make a big difference if you used last year's actuals...

If Matsui repeats his .354 OBP, he clearly would be the best choice at lead off. If Pence repeats his .316 OBP, he would be a poor choice at lead off.

For what it’s worth, Bill James has a stat for teams runs scored in an inning when the batter leads it off. Runs score/inning: Pence .60; Matsui .58; Tejada .58. Believe it or not, the Astros had better results when Bourn led off: .67.

by clack on Mar 26, 2009 8:25 AM CDT reply actions  

A projection is a better guess for upcoming peformance than last year's numbers, though.

Although maybe I’m misreading what you meant.

In the Bill James stat, are those number when the batter leads off an inning as the lead off hitter or leads off an inning batting at any spot in the lineup?

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 26, 2009 9:21 AM CDT up reply actions  

I'm not criticizing DQ for using projections.

I’m just pointing out exactly what I said…there are some sizeable differences between a few players’ projected OBP and their actual OBP last year. Pence is someone we all hope will improve his plate discipline, but at this point, he is kind of at a crossroads as to whether his OBP looks more like last year or more like his minor league numbers (or 07 in the majors, even though that is probably overly optimistic). Kaz Matsui is a difficult guy to project, IMO. The Matsui with the Mets seems like a different player than the Matsui with the Rockies and Astros. His last 2 years have been in the .345-.355 OBP range. Is it just luck or is he more comfortable outside the NYC pressure? Who knows? And the projection systems can’t answer that question.

As for the second question, based on the number of plate appearances at lead off, my guess is that it shows the scoring in an inning when the batter leads off that inning (rather position in the lineup). But it’s not clear from James’ description of the measure. I wouldn’t use the stat to determine lineup position (I doubt that Bourn is good for the lead off slot, despite the outcomes), but it’s an interesting tidbit.

by clack on Mar 26, 2009 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions  

If it's leading off any inning

then of course a guy hitting ahead of the best hitters will look really good. Not because of him, but because of the other guys. The cleanup hitter probably looks bad, even though he’s a great hitter and would probably make a better lead off hitter than someone like Bourne, just because the guys after him all suck.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 26, 2009 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions  

Great post.

I really enjoy reading lineup construction articles from a smart point of view.

Even when there’s not an obvious right answer, just having the discussion is worthwhile.

Any chance you could post the projected AVG/OBP/SLG lines, or EqA, or wOBA, or something so we can see the relative value of the players we’re fitting into the lineup.

Berkman 2nd with Lee fourth is pretty much a no-brainer considering all of Lee’s value is in power and hits, while Berkman is OBP heavy. And nobody else is close to being as talented with the bat.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 26, 2009 9:25 AM CDT reply actions  

Geoff Blum's really starting? Yikes.

Here’s how CHONE sees the lineup’s hitting abilities, in terms of runs created per 150 games:

R150 Player
28 Lance Berkman
14 Carlos Lee
3 Hunter Pence
-4 Miguel Tejada
-16 Kazuo Matsui
-22 Ivan Rodriguez
-24 Michael Bourn
-24 Geoff Blum

Berkman, Lee, and Pence are the best three hitters. Berkman’s the most OBP heavy and Lee is the most power heavy, so they go 2nd and 4th respectively, leaving Pence to lead off. He doesn’t have the ideal skillset, but it’s ok and there aren’t any other good options.

Tejada’s the next best hitter, followed by, uh, nobody, meaning he’s fifth. I guess Kaz is the next best hitter, so he’s third. Switching him and Tejada might make aesthetic sense in that Tejada is more HR heavy and Kaz’s steals are valuable in front of the singles hitters lower in the lineup, but when the fourth best hitter is this much better than the fifth, The Book says he should bat 5th. A sim would be needed to tell for sure.

IRod, Bourne, and Blue project to be equally awful. So we should put the one with the lowest OBP and most power in front of the pitcher and the one with the highest OBP in the ninth spot to give Pence some baserunners to knock in when the lineup loops around. That yields:

Pence
Berkman
Kaz
Lee
Tejada
Blum
IRod
Pitcher
Bourn

Chances we see Kaz in the three hole…?

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 26, 2009 9:38 AM CDT reply actions  

I think

the justification for putting Tejada in the 3 spot is his propensity for GIDP. The three spot comes up with no runners on relatively frequently, so it gives him less of a chance to make extra outs.

by Only_A_Lad on Mar 26, 2009 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions  

The Three hole Assumption disappears

if Pence and Berkman are the one -two hitters.

Also, it seems to me Berkman ought to be the first batter up. His on-base percentage must be the highest on the team,

Matsui is second. With Pence third and Lee fourth – Actually – Pence second and Wigginton third would be good except for a minor problem of Wiggy not being on the team anymore.

I’d put someone a batter who does not walk much in the ninth hole. He will get pitches with Berkman, Pence et al following him in the lineup.

On a side but related topic. in a time long ago and faraway, it was popular to coordinate perfomance for each individual player with his biorhythms. Has any model taken into accont sabernatics modifed for a player’s biorythms ?

Astros fan for life

by Joe in Birmingham on Mar 26, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions  

I think there was a discussion about that in the BtB post about lineups

and, even when the lineup is optimized, the third hitter still comes to bat with nobody on more frequently than the 4-hole. Makes sense, though.

Also, it seems to me Berkman ought to be the first batter up. His on-base percentage must be the highest on the team,

But then you lose a lot of the benefit of his slugging ablility. If you move him down to the the 2 or 4, his larger hits tend to come with more baserunners. He’ll get fewer PAs, but that loss is more than made up for by better using his power.

by Only_A_Lad on Mar 26, 2009 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions  

Maybe

But it affects the dynamics of the batters that follow him. I just don’t k now how -and I’ve not seen any models that illustrate the mix of batters, and one batting information or behind antoher affects the individual (and team) batter’s performance.

Astros fan for life

by Joe in Birmingham on Mar 26, 2009 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions  

If you use the lineup optimizer at baseballmusings.com...

my recollection is that Berkman always comes out as the lead off hitter in all the highest run scoring lineups. David Pinto recently ran his annual prediction of the Astros’ lineup runs scored based on the probable lineup here
.Lower on that same page, you will see the highest scoring lineups which the tool spat out. Lance Berkman is the lead off in all of the best scoring lineups. The best scoring lineup was 4.67 runs/game compared to 4.495 runs/game in the probable lineup. The Astros scored 4.42 runs/game last year.

by clack on Mar 26, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions  

Thanks for backing me up.

I feel smarter already.

Astros fan for life

by Joe in Birmingham on Mar 26, 2009 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions  

Yes, Geoff Blum is starting

And that’s what happens when you have a terrible, terrible farm system and a front office that thinks veterans are the end all be all of the world.

I know that the consideration you’re throwing out is about their relative ability to create runs, but isn’t the point of The Book’s line up optimization about focusing on particular skill sets and maximizing their combinations? If we’re looking at that, I just can’t justify pushing Tejada to the five hole because of his propensity for the GIDP and he relative power advantage over Matsui.

The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.

by Stephen Higdon on Mar 26, 2009 10:54 AM CDT up reply actions  

astros probably will end up with a platoon at 3d....

but it is unknown whom Blum’s platoon partner might be. Chris Johnson? Someone picked up in the next week or so? Masonet or Smith?

by clack on Mar 26, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions  

The fifth spot is more important than the third spot, according to the book.

So you want the better hitter fifth.

I do agree with the point that when you have non-traditional player pools, the heuristics are less defined. You really need to simulate things to get the right answer.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Mar 26, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions  

Also

Chance we see Kaz in the three hole: .00001% Unless it’s pinch hitting situation…some how.

The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.

by Stephen Higdon on Mar 26, 2009 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions  

Berkman in the 2 slot makes a lot of sense.

But it’s probably less likely to happen than Kaz in the 3 hole. :)

by clack on Mar 26, 2009 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions  

If only "The Book"

Could get substituted for THE BOOK.

The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.

by Stephen Higdon on Mar 26, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions  

Ii wouldn’t go that far. maybe combined with THE BOOK. your still dealing with people and many aspects are hard to put into numbers. Like why basketball players can practice free throws and never miss but put them in a game shooting free throws and you go from 99.9% to 80%.

by joeljr on Mar 26, 2009 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions  

One of the biggest people problems....

is that players develop preferences for where they think they should hit, and then it becomes a self-fullfilling prophesy when they hit worse in a different lineup spot. Soriano and the lead off position is an example. Although Berkman hitting 1st or 2d might make sense (and he has batted in those slots earlier in his career), he has made clear that he does not like hitting in the 1 or 2 slot. Recall how bent out of shape Bagwell became when he was moved down to the 5th or 6th slot when he was in a slump in 2004. He then hit even worse. When Garner took over at mid season, he restored Bagwell to his No. 3 slot and all of the sudden he came out of his slump. That all may be a coincidence, but in the batter’s mind it isn’t, and it can affect his confidence.

by clack on Mar 26, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions  

But

Isn’t that mentality simply a by-product of the “The Book.” Line up spots, and their meaning, according “The Book” have just normalized how a player interprets their role, but I don’t think that that point impinges on the ability of THE BOOK to gain efficacy.

Couldn’t the normative interpretations of line up positions be redefined if the problem were approached the way Purpura was quoted at HBT from the MIT conference? He said he tried to utilize statistics in way that impressed upon the minor league players that certain skill sets were far more important than others. That’s a tactic that seems very applicable here.

If it is a mental block, stemming from a player’s ego, that prevents more effective line up construction, then why can’t someone just carefully explain how much more important the two-hole is than the three hole? That clean-up is the second most important spot, and so on?

The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.

by Stephen Higdon on Mar 26, 2009 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions  

I think it's possible for players' attitudes to change over time.

After LaRussa started using the “pitcher in the 8 hole” lineup, he was initially met with howls of outrage from other managers. But I was surprised how quickly it has caught on. Melvin started using that approach in Milwaukee. And now even Cooper, who was dead set against it last year, is considering batting the pitcher 9th. LaRussa’s action stirred up debate and discussion, as well as more sabermetric articles, and gradually the idea starts to make headway. I bet some other teams are at least considering a lineup change for the pitcher. One attack on LaRussa’ s lineup is that supposedly the batter in the 9th spot will feel belittled (as in, “I’m even worse than the pitcher”). It would be interesting to know how LaRussa presented this idea to players.

by clack on Mar 26, 2009 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions  

Ego

The “3” and "4 "slots are the prestige slots. A battre used to being the man at those places may take a move from them as a demotion, a slap in the face, a lack of confidence, a lack of standing among his teammates.

Moving Berkman from 3rd to first in the order would require Berkman buying into the plan, not being told to do it. (the change in attitude principle clack advances)

Astros fan for life

by Joe in Birmingham on Mar 26, 2009 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions  

I agree

and that is what I was trying to argue for, albeit in a far more jargon laden way. My apologies for that, I’m in the middle of writing a draft of my senior thesis and am finding it next impossible to stop thinking in that mode.

I think these recommendations are pretty easy to buy into. It just involves explaining the concepts in a effective way. In that respect, I think that Sky did a great job in BtB article doing just that. All the notoriety can still be kept, it just takes forward-thinking on an organizations behalf to make it happen,.

The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.

by Stephen Higdon on Mar 26, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions  

Hmmm

What do we know about Lee’s educational status then?…

The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.

by Stephen Higdon on Mar 26, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions  

probably not much education

by joeljr on Mar 27, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions  

If you could get the ball players to understand you could get past this problem. There are some smart guys in the league. I would bet that most aren’t very smart. You are usually given some gifts in life rarely are you given all the gifts. Looks/Brains/Brawn. ie A-rod is missing brains hence why feel in love with a hooker/was tottaly over matched by Gammons and why most guys can lose productivity by moving them in the lineup.

by joeljr on Mar 27, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Crawfishboxes, the SBNation blog for the Houston Astros.

TCB Tweets!

    

Current Series

3 game series vs Rockies @ Minute Maid Park

Sat 04/07 6:05 PM CDT
Sun 04/08 1:05 PM CDT

NL Central Standings

W L PCT GB STRK
Chicago 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Cincinnati 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Houston 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Milwaukee 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Pittsburgh 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
St. Louis 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0

(updated 2.9.2012 at 6:00 PM CST)


Managing Editors

Tcb_icon_small Timothy De Block

Old_school_dome_logo_small David Coleman

Editors

Nsapcs13_large_small clack

H_astros_small Subber10

Astrobritrs2_small AstroB

Small conroestro

Small native_astro

Small CRPerry13

Authors

Astros_logo121009_small OremLK

This-is-my-boom-stick_small allphilla

Th_houston-astros-logo-3_small Will Bonn