Baseball lineup theory is ridiculous (and how it relates to the Detroit Tigers)

Recently I had a spirited baseball debate with two of my favorite baseball minds, Joe Devereaux and Matt Gajtka (senior writer and editor of the always well-written Pittsburgh blog City of Champions), about lineup order. In a previous article I said that I’d like to see Prince Fielder bat in front of Cabrera when Miggy comes back from injury in order to boost Fielder’s stats. This opened the floodgate, and before I knew it we were debating managerial tactics and conventional wisdom dating back to the Golden Age of baseball.

August 24, 2013; Flushing,NY,USA; Detroit Tigers manager Jim Leyland before baseball game against the New York Mets at Citi Field. Mandatory Credit: Noah K. Murray-USA TODAY Sports

Basically, one side of the baseball world adheres to conventional wisdom and follows a notion about every spot in every lineup serving a specific purpose and requiring specific players. On the other side is a growing number that thinks batting order should capitalize on hitters in positions that serve an immediate need.

For example, think about a prototypical leadoff man. Fast. Can spray the ball all over the field. Gets on base. Occasional pop. Now, think about this: In 2012 Rays manager Joe Maddon batted Carlos Pena in the leadoff spot in a stretch of nine games in May and June, and Tampa Bay had a 6-3 record with him batting first. The same Carlos Pena that has all the speed of frozen snot. Pena had a great OBP at that time, and Maddon wanted to capitalize on that; A team has a better chance of scoring more runs when it gets a man on with no outs.

Now, think about early Alex Rodriguez on the Mariners. In 1998 he hit 42 home runs, had an OBP of .360, and had an OPS+ of 136. Third hitter, right? Nope. He batted second most of the year, ahead of Ken Griffey Jr. Rodriguez eventually became viewed as a better (and far more juiced) player than Griffey and was eventually slotted third, where he would get fewer plate appearances than a second hitter.

In Fantasyland by Sam Walker, he asks Lou Piniella why he wouldn’t bat rookie BJ Upton as the designated hitter, and Piniella intimated that, “you feel kind of stupid as a manager putting a 20-year-old kid at designated hitter.” A professional manager was afraid of using his young phenom, who was as good a hitter as he was bad a defender, as a DH because he didn’t want to look stupid? A manager should look for any opportunity to get a hot-hitting player into the lineup, and eventually Piniella relented.

The problem with baseball, in my eyes at least, is that too many managers stick with conventional wisdom, which dictates far too many decisions than it should. Any Jonah Keri book can tell you that.

As Gajtka put it on my Facebook page, “Adapt or die.” Managers should be trying to catch the opposing manager off guard, like using a starter instead of a reliever in an important game, or batting the best hitter in the leadoff spot. Guys like Billy Beane and Andrew Friedman take advantage of “conventional wisdom” and put together teams that exploits areas of the game that other teams aren’t. They think outside the box, and it permeates the team culture.

Can the Tigers gain such an edge if Fielder bats before Cabrera? Would they catch an opponent completely flabbergasted if they batted Cabrera second, or even first in a lineup? Doesn’t a manager want his best hitter to get the most plate appearances? To squabble over the archaic notion that every player has to perfectly fit a lineup is an antiquated strategy, and one that any opposing manager can predict and counter.

Teams that do not adhere to rigid lineup expectations can use newfound knowledge and experience to gain the upper hand on opponents, and managers like Piniella and Charlie Manuel, and maybe even Jim Leyland someday, are eventually edged out of the game when it passes them by.

Topics: Detroit Tigers, Miguel Cabrera, Prince Fielder

Want more from Motor City Bengals?  
Subscribe to FanSided Daily for your morning fix. Enter your email and stay in the know.
  • louwhitaker

    I would put V Martinez fourth and Prince fifth behind Cabrera. A dangerous switch hitter behind your big power threat forces them to pitch to him. In 1961, Maris received not one single intentional walk. Mantle was batting behind him.

    • http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com Matt Snyder

      And then Maris was intentionally walked a career high 11 times the following season with Mantle still batting behind him.

      • louwhitaker

        In 1962, Mantle had an injury plagued season and missed 40 games…I wonder how many of those games coincided with Maris’s intentional walks.

        • http://tomaroonandgold.blogspot.com Matt Snyder

          Quick check looks like 5 came in front of Mantle.

          Point is though, that if you’re going to walk Miggy to get to Prince, you’re probably not going to get scared off by Victor. I understand the switch hitting thing, but the difference is small even if they go for the platoon advantage: Prince’s .350 career wOBA against LHP versus Victor’s .359 wOBA overall.

          • louwhitaker

            Possibly hoping for a double play with first base open and Mantle limping…anyway…

            I’m not sure in the case of a left handed pitcher. Then the prospect of facing V Martinez is much less enticing than the prospect of facing Prince. I know Prince hits lefties fairly well, for a left handed hitter. But it is a lot less attractive to pitch a lefty against either Miggy or VMart.

  • chrisHannum

    What you are discussing here is very different than your suggestion to bat Fielder 3rd, stat heads that study advanced lineup theory have not, to my knowledge, found much support for the idea that hitting is driven by lineup position or protection.

  • Steve Sabaugh

    I wish sports broadcasters and bloggers would stop using the word “prototypical” when they mean “typical” or “archetypical”. If using prototypical to describe the “early” or original form of a leadoff hitter in baseball’s infancy, then indeed, the prototypical leadoff hitter was usually the teams “best” hitter, not just a table setter. So, Miggy would be more of a prototypical leadoff hitter, than say Jacoby Ellsbury.

    • gstoye44

      I like your style, sir.

  • Pingback: Jim Leyland deserves a pat on the back - Motor City Bengals - A Detroit Tigers Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and More