What’s with the Lineup?

Some twitter conversation from a few days ago got me thinking. I’ve seen some banter about the Diamondbacks’ lineup construction and people questioning where individual guys hit within it. We know that Kirk Gibson likes to tinker with things, at least he does when the lineup is struggling to score runs. Is this because he’s looking for the “perfect” order of hitters or is he simply looking for a spark? That we may never know, but one thing’s for sure: lineup construction doesn’t matter.

Yeah, I went there, and if you’ve read this all before, perhaps you’re already privy to these notions. But if you’re like the millions of baseball fans that insist that Player X hits leadoff, Player Y hits second and so on, then you might be in for a surprise. This topic gets people falsely riled up like no other I can think of. I say “falsely” because the numbers just don’t support the idea that lineup construction is important on a game-to-game basis.

From studies in The Book by Tom Tango, James Click’s piece in Baseball Between the Numbers, to countless articles on Fangraphs and Beyond the Boxscore, the importance of lineup construction has been effectively minimized. That, however, does not mean that it is without some key principles.

The most obvious principle is that you want your best batters receiving as many at-bats as possible. For every spot that a batter moves down the lineup, he will see approximately 18 fewer at-bats over the course of the season simply due to the lineup turning over (Click). If you want to maximize your production, you’d want your best hitters getting the most chances (at-bats) to do damage. Why doesn’t AJ Pollock hit in front of Paul Goldschmidt? You wouldn’t want to allocate more plate appearance to the light-hitting outfielder than your MVP-caliber first baseman.

But that’s not the only reason not to participate in the scenario above. You also want to have runners on base when your best hitters are up. AJ Pollock doesn’t get on base at a good clip, so when Goldy hits those doubles and dingers, there would be less of a chance to cash in additional base runners. Enter: Gerardo Parra. His latest slump has been horrendous, but the guy draws walks and gets on base. His OBP is almost 40 points higher than Pollock’s and was nearly 50 points higher before his recent drought. Parra in front of Goldschidt provides the DBacks with ample run-scoring opportunities. If you’ve heard Brian Kenny rant about Zack Cozart hitting second in the Cincinnati lineup this year, you know where I’m coming from.

Another issue that gets tossed around, though not so much regarding Arizona, is hitter protection. “You need a great hitter behind your number three hitter to ‘protect’ him.” Raise your hand if you’ve heard that before. Now, go ahead and put your hand down. This notion is false. There is no numerical data to suggest that good hitters get more or better pitches to hit when another good hitter follows him in the lineup. Don’t believe me? Ask Jeff Sullivan who examined the Miguel Cabrera-Prince Fielder effect in Detroit. If you were going to see “protection” pay off, you’d expect to see it in that scenario.

Another bit of griping I hear is that “players like to know where they’re gonna hit before they get to the ballpark.” Harold Reynolds and others espouse this all of the time, suggesting that a hitter is more comfortable in one spot than another even though the spot in which a hitter hits in the lineup has little to no effect on the pitches he sees (the one exception to this may be the number eight hitter in the National League since the drop off from number eight hitter to pitcher is so large that it can actually change some things). Pitchers are going to rely on  avoiding the individual hitter’s strengths and attack the individual hitter’s weaknesses far more than worrying about who’s batting next. After all, the pitcher’s job is to get outs and avoid allowing runners on base. This means that every hitter should receive nearly the same treatment no matter where they hit in the lineup.

I do realize that hitters are people and people have preferences and idiosyncrasies, even if those preferences are illogical. There might be some personal feelings associated with hitting second rather than first even though there isn’t a measurable difference in the opportunities per plate appearance. Seattle experienced this when they inked Chone Figgins back in ’09 and he complained about having to hit second behind franchise icon Ichiro. As a Mariner fan, I’d rather stay away from anything related to Chone Figgins, but the point is that while some batters may feel more “comfortable” in one spot, it’s just that personal preference is simply that, a preference that should be tabled for the benefit of the team. Are you telling me that a guys is going to have worse results on fastballs over the plate because he’s batting seventh instead of fifth? I don’t buy it and neither should you. A hitter’s job is to hit the ball, no matter what, period. It’s batter versus pitcher. That’s all.

The last point I’d like to bring up is that the leadoff batter is only guaranteed to leadoff the game once. After that, it’s a mashup of whatever plays out. This idea that the leadoff guy has to fit a certain mold (e.g. speedy, base-stealer, etc) is ludicrous. Have you seen Shin-Soo Choo? Does he look like Adam Eaton? No, but the guy gets on base like nobody’s business and gives guys like Joey Votto, Brandon Phillips and Jay Bruce someone to drive in. Why did Brandon Phillips make the All-Star team? RBI’s, plain and simple. And who was he driving in all the time? Shin-Soo Choo, who didn’t make the All-Star team. While I would honestly like to see Choo wear Adam Eaton’s mustache, the point is that you need a guy who gets on base in front of your best hitters. It doesn’t matter if he’s the fastest player on the team or not. The notion of the prototypical leadoff man is overstated because the guy is only guaranteed to leadoff once per game and the leadoff physique that’s so often preached doesn’t necessarily mean the guy can get on base and keep the train moving. We were swept off our feet watching Rickey Henderson swipe bags and get driven in by a sac fly, but that’s definitely the exception, not the rule.

So where does this leave us with our beloved, even though they’re scuffling, Diamondbacks? Well, to be honest, I started tinkering with things before realizing that I was falling into the same trap that started this mess. It doesn’t really matter if Aaron Hill hits third or fifth. Parra can lead off or hit seventh. Goldy might as well hit third, but do you think much would change if he hit second or clean up? Over 100 games, it won’t change anything on a measurable wins-scale. Tinkering with “this guy” here or “that guy” there doesn’t really matter.

Put your best or near-best OBP guys at the top and descend the hitters from there. That’s good enough. The rest is execution. No lineup is going to account for Parra’s slump, Montero’s cold streak, Prado’s first-half woes, Hill’s injuries or Pollock and Eaton’s light-hitting. Folks can blame the lineup as much as they’d like, but it’s a matter of making quality contact with regularity. I’m not saying hit Pennington third, but be reasonable and execute. The rest  accounts for such a small difference that you’ll never notice.

The evidence is overwhelming. A consensus of some of the brightest baseball minds, which clearly doesn’t include my own, have crunched the numbers and concluded that lineup construction is the least of our, or anyone else’s, problems. The Diamondbacks’ struggles are a strange period of career lows coinciding with one another.

Next time you’re frustrated with the offensive production blame slumps, poor plate discipline, whatever. Just don’t blame the lineup as it’s constructed.