Move Bonds Up The Line-up [Merged Threads]

gyb13 · 05-08-2002, 12:22 PM

BP's Joe Sheehan has a new article on why the Giants might want to try batting Bonds second
The 'batting order doesn't matter' argument might fall apart here because of Bonds' status as such a statistical outlier.
What's the best way to maximize his PA's?

tenkevcardinal · 05-08-2002, 12:29 PM

I think that actually would be a good idea.

SmedIndy · 05-08-2002, 12:43 PM

Just as long as the pitcher doesn't bat eighth, and they could move Aurilia to third or fourth...

poorme · 05-08-2002, 12:47 PM

I think it would be a good idea if the Giants got a halfway decent leadoff hitter. Even if they had to overpay in a trade or something.

moose · 05-08-2002, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by poorme
I think it would be a good idea if the Giants got a halfway decent leadoff hitter. Even if they had to overpay in a trade or something.

barry for ichiro and mike cameron

Gosfgiants · 05-08-2002, 02:30 PM

Actually you could move the pitcher's spot in this line-up depending on the pitcher. Russ Ortiz and Livian Hernandez are good enough hitters that they could be position players. Baker has already used Hernandez as a pinch hittter once this year (ironically enough for Ortiz).

I have to agree with Sheehan. Already several times this year I have seen Aurellia hit a double and then realize he has taken the bat out of Bonds hands by doing so. It's almost as if Aurellia has to stop at first despite hitting an extra bagger. On the other side of the coin though, other teams will walk Barry with any base open, not just first. I have never seen the league so afraid of one hitter.

If Jeff Kent would start getting more hits after they walk Barry this would all be moot.

calexpat · 05-08-2002, 02:48 PM

The problem with Sheehan's article is that batting Barry second doesn't bring him up more with a runner on first; you're more likely to have a guy on first with Bonds hitting third than second . Of course, you're also more likely to have runners on base; what you get by hitting him second is more times with the bases empty.

I do think that the Giants should put Snow second and Aurilia fifth. Snow has a .250 BA and a .343 SP. but a .354 OBA. Aurilia has a .272 BA and a .467 SP, but a .309 OBA. Not surpisingly, Snow has 18 RBIs and Aurilia has 6. Aurilia's RBI totals, by the way, give you an idea of what you give up by moving Bonds to second.

gyb13 · 05-08-2002, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by calexpat
Aurilia's RBI totals, by the way, give you an idea of what you give up by moving Bonds to second.

The issue there is that the Giants don't have a good leadoff man. If they had an Ichiro-type player leading off, they could hit Barry 2nd (with him coming up to bat 40% of the time with a guy most likely at 1B).

Fuzzy Bear · 05-08-2002, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gyb13

The issue there is that the Giants don't have a good leadoff man. If they had an Ichiro-type player leading off, they could hit Barry 2nd (with him coming up to bat 40% of the time with a guy most likely at 1B).

If the Giants has an Ichiro-type (or even a healthy Quilvio Veras type) player leading off, there would be no discussion about moving Barry Bonds.

Barry has hit #4 or #5 for just about all of his career. A radical change in his batting order role would be confusing to him, as if we suddenly moved him to 1B without warning.

The Expos did this kind of thing in reverse. They moved someone who could have been the greatest leadoff man in history, Tim Raines, to the #3 spot, on the theory that he would drive in runs. Raines was never quite the same player. I believe that he became confused about his role and made adjustments that reduced his effectiveness.

Tinkering with Bonds is probably counterproductive. He knows his role, and is good at it. The Giants need a leadoff guy WHO CAN GET ON BASE if they want to cut down the # of intentional walks Barry gets, and maximize his power.

gyb13 · 05-08-2002, 03:49 PM

First of all, Barry has been hitting #3.
But the point is not about tinkering with Bonds' role, but rather to minimize the number of times he'll be up with first base open.

Ytown Tribe fan · 05-08-2002, 04:02 PM

Bat him leadoff. Then follow him with the guy with the next-highest OBP, and so on down the list.

You would maximize the PA's for the guy who gets on base the most and the team would score more runs than any other lineup wouldgive them.

Sure, you'd see some funny runs and RBI totals for different players, but the Giants would have more baserunners AND more runs scored than ever before.

Scoring runs is the name of the game -- it's the ONLY game, and getting guys on base (and having them NOT make outs instead) is the way you do it.

sweaver · 05-08-2002, 04:11 PM

It is probably counterproductive to have your big power hitter batting leadoff, when he is less likely to bat with runners on base. I'd like to see a study on that, though.

Bonds as a #2 hitter has merit, although it would have more if the Giants had a good leadoff hitter. How would that lineup work?
Bell 3B
Bonds LF
Aurilla SS
Kent 2B
Sanders RF
Snow 1B
Shinjo CF
Santiago C

Has there ever been a team that batted its DP combo 3rd and 4th?

Bonds was a leadoff hitter for the Pirates when he came up, moved around a bit, hit mostly #5 for the Pirates' division winners 90-92 ( the story was he would be "uncomfortable" in the #3 or #4 spot), and mostly #3 since signing with the Giants.

poorme · 05-08-2002, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ytown Tribe fan
Bat him leadoff. Then follow him with the guy with the next-highest OBP, and so on down the list.

You would maximize the PA's for the guy who gets on base the most and the team would score more runs than any other lineup wouldgive them.

I'd be interested in hearing your theory on why extra base hits are irrelevant.

Just for reference your lineup would be

bonds
snow
bell
sanders
santiago
aurilia
kent
shinjo/pitcher
pitcher/shinjo

I don't think it would make much difference.

calexpat · 05-08-2002, 04:26 PM

Really, I did the math (I am not earning my salary today!) and Bonds comes up more with just a runner on first base if he bats third. That's not including steals, GIDP, or the runner advancing on hit-and-run ground balls, so that conclusion may not hold up, but it will still be close, so at the end of the day you're decreasing the number of times Bonds hits with two runners on base in exchange for more times with the bases empty. Don't do it, Dusty.

Do bat Snow at second and platoon Benard and Shinjo, though, so you've got:

Bell (as long as he keeps hitting like he's hitting)
Snow
Bonds
Kent
Aurilia
Sanders
Santiago
Shinjo/Benard
Pitcher

PS: To paraphrase Yogi Berra, if the pitchers don't want to pitch to Barry Bonds, no one's gonna stop 'em.

SmedIndy · 05-08-2002, 04:52 PM

In his managers book, James did a lot of studies of batting order, and basically said you could bat the pitcher cleanup and Bonds ninth, and the net change of runs scored is minimal. Almost not enough to trifle with.

05-08-2002, 12:22 PM	#1
gyb13 NS Omnipresent Brasilian Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Crazy George's playground Posts: 10,903	Batting Barry 2nd BP's Joe Sheehan has a new article on why the Giants might want to try batting Bonds second The 'batting order doesn't matter' argument might fall apart here because of Bonds' status as such a statistical outlier. What's the best way to maximize his PA's? __________________ Gustavo NDF Moderator Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

05-08-2002, 02:48 PM	#7
calexpat All-NetShrine Team Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: New Haven, CT Posts: 448	The problem with Sheehan's article is that batting Barry second doesn't bring him up more with a runner on first; you're more likely to have a guy on first with Bonds hitting third than second . Of course, you're also more likely to have runners on base; what you get by hitting him second is more times with the bases empty. I do think that the Giants should put Snow second and Aurilia fifth. Snow has a .250 BA and a .343 SP. but a .354 OBA. Aurilia has a .272 BA and a .467 SP, but a .309 OBA. Not surpisingly, Snow has 18 RBIs and Aurilia has 6. Aurilia's RBI totals, by the way, give you an idea of what you give up by moving Bonds to second. Last edited by calexpat : 05-08-2002 at 03:19 PM.

05-08-2002, 03:49 PM	#10
gyb13 NS Omnipresent Brasilian Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Crazy George's playground Posts: 10,903	First of all, Barry has been hitting #3. But the point is not about tinkering with Bonds' role, but rather to minimize the number of times he'll be up with first base open. __________________ Gustavo NDF Moderator Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Offseason stat package--BPA	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	5	12-15-2002 09:51 AM
Offseason stat package--TA	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	4	12-14-2002 01:48 PM
Offseason stat package--SEC	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	5	12-13-2002 11:56 AM
Offseason stat package--BB	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	5	11-25-2002 10:22 AM
Offseason stat package--BPA	nyy26wc	Around The Majors Reports	6	12-05-2001 02:23 PM

05-08-2002, 12:29 PM	#2
tenkevcardinal Guest Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Memphis Posts: 189	I think that actually would be a good idea.

05-08-2002, 12:43 PM	#3
SmedIndy NetShrine's Historian Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Zionsville, IN Posts: 10,569	Just as long as the pitcher doesn't bat eighth, and they could move Aurilia to third or fourth...

05-08-2002, 12:47 PM	#4
poorme Guest Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: washington dc Posts: 2,625	I think it would be a good idea if the Giants got a halfway decent leadoff hitter. Even if they had to overpay in a trade or something.

05-08-2002, 02:30 PM	#6
Gosfgiants NetShrine All-Century Team Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 1,136	Actually you could move the pitcher's spot in this line-up depending on the pitcher. Russ Ortiz and Livian Hernandez are good enough hitters that they could be position players. Baker has already used Hernandez as a pinch hittter once this year (ironically enough for Ortiz). I have to agree with Sheehan. Already several times this year I have seen Aurellia hit a double and then realize he has taken the bat out of Bonds hands by doing so. It's almost as if Aurellia has to stop at first despite hitting an extra bagger. On the other side of the coin though, other teams will walk Barry with any base open, not just first. I have never seen the league so afraid of one hitter. If Jeff Kent would start getting more hits after they walk Barry this would all be moot.

05-08-2002, 04:02 PM	#11
Ytown Tribe fan Guest Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Scrappers territory Posts: 2,515	Bat him leadoff. Then follow him with the guy with the next-highest OBP, and so on down the list. You would maximize the PA's for the guy who gets on base the most and the team would score more runs than any other lineup wouldgive them. Sure, you'd see some funny runs and RBI totals for different players, but the Giants would have more baserunners AND more runs scored than ever before. Scoring runs is the name of the game -- it's the ONLY game, and getting guys on base (and having them NOT make outs instead) is the way you do it.

05-08-2002, 04:11 PM	#12
sweaver Netshrine Cleanup Hitter Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Mountain State Posts: 8,883	It is probably counterproductive to have your big power hitter batting leadoff, when he is less likely to bat with runners on base. I'd like to see a study on that, though. Bonds as a #2 hitter has merit, although it would have more if the Giants had a good leadoff hitter. How would that lineup work? Bell 3B Bonds LF Aurilla SS Kent 2B Sanders RF Snow 1B Shinjo CF Santiago C Has there ever been a team that batted its DP combo 3rd and 4th? Bonds was a leadoff hitter for the Pirates when he came up, moved around a bit, hit mostly #5 for the Pirates' division winners 90-92 ( the story was he would be "uncomfortable" in the #3 or #4 spot), and mostly #3 since signing with the Giants.

05-08-2002, 04:26 PM	#14
calexpat All-NetShrine Team Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: New Haven, CT Posts: 448	Really, I did the math (I am not earning my salary today!) and Bonds comes up more with just a runner on first base if he bats third. That's not including steals, GIDP, or the runner advancing on hit-and-run ground balls, so that conclusion may not hold up, but it will still be close, so at the end of the day you're decreasing the number of times Bonds hits with two runners on base in exchange for more times with the bases empty. Don't do it, Dusty. Do bat Snow at second and platoon Benard and Shinjo, though, so you've got: Bell (as long as he keeps hitting like he's hitting) Snow Bonds Kent Aurilia Sanders Santiago Shinjo/Benard Pitcher PS: To paraphrase Yogi Berra, if the pitchers don't want to pitch to Barry Bonds, no one's gonna stop 'em.

05-08-2002, 04:52 PM	#15
SmedIndy NetShrine's Historian Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Zionsville, IN Posts: 10,569	In his managers book, James did a lot of studies of batting order, and basically said you could bat the pitcher cleanup and Bonds ninth, and the net change of runs scored is minimal. Almost not enough to trifle with.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)