SOMers - Stratomatic Baseball

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Optimizing Lineups - Revisited
«First  <  1 2 3 4 5 | Page of 5  sorted by


Luxury Box Season Ticket Holder

Status: Offline
Posts: 806
Date: Mar 12, 2016
RE: Optimizing Lineups - Revisited
Permalink  
 


This from Optimizing Order, Part 1: How To Build The Ideal Lineup

The #1 hitter has a 0.02 RE advantage on D's, T's and BB's. The #2 hitter holds a 0.02 advantage on HR's only. The #1 hitter should have a higher OBP whereas the #2 hitter should have an equally balanced OBP and SLG with a slightly better SLG.
The #5 hitter has a 0.03 RE advantage on S's, D's, T's and BB's whereas the #3 hitter has a 0.02 RE advantage on HR's. All outs for the #5 hitter are more costly than the same outs from the #3 hitter. From this, we can see that the #5 hitter should be of more value than the #3 hitter though the hitter with the better AB/HR ratio should be slotted 3rd.
The #3 hitter comes to bat with 2 outs more frequently so has less chance to create runs unless by.

0.02 - 0.03 runs per PA is no doubt minimal, however, as I've said before...over the course of an entire season considering between 475 to 600 plus PA's at the top half of the order that equates to 10 to 15 runs production over that of the standard formulaic batting order.
Another interesting article for reference is...Which Teams Are Optimizing Their Lineups

__________________

I'd wake up at night with the smell of the ball park in my nose, the cool of the grass on my feet...The Thrill of the Grass...Heck, I'd play for free!



VIP Season Ticket Holder

Status: Offline
Posts: 414
Date: Mar 13, 2016
Permalink  
 

Nitrous Oxide wrote:

So I like to look at what I see what is actually happening. Here are the runs leaders in the Swinging 60s and where they bat in the order (if split its lefty/righty)

------RUNS SCORED------
M.Mantle NYA      78 3rd
C.Yastrzemski BOA 77 3rd
L.Brock SLN       77 1st
R.Maris NYA       72 4th
D.Buford BAA      66 1st
Z.Versalles MNA   65 1st/5th
W.Mays SFN        64 3rd
T.Oliva MNA       60 7th/1st
O.Cepeda SLN      60 4th
T.Agee NYN        56 1st/3rd
C.Jones NYN       56 2nd/4th
M.Wills LAN       55 1st

Now the same exercise for RBIs.

-----RUNS BATTED IN----
R.Maris NYA       91 4th
O.Cepeda SLN      85 4th
W.Mays SFN        71 3rd
Z.Versalles MNA   67 1st/5th
M.Mantle NYA      64 3rd
C.Yastrzemski BOA 63 3rd
B.Powell BAA      61 4th/3rd
T.Davis LAN       61 3rd/4th
B.Skowron NYA     61 5th
L.Brock SLN       61 1st
T.Oliva MNA       60 7th/1st
W.McCovey SFN     58 4th


 3rd, 4th and 1st seems to be most represented. Brock's RBI total out off lead-off is impressive. You must not be using Tango as besides a split Jones, there is no other #2s.



__________________


VIP Season Ticket Holder

Status: Offline
Posts: 414
Date: Mar 13, 2016
Permalink  
 

Nitrous Oxide wrote:

Here is the breakdown by RBIs and OPS for each spot in the lineup. Strat doesn't allow me the run breakdown.

Team Batting
City            Avg  OPS    G    R  RBI 1OPS 1RBI 2OPS 2RBI  3OPS 3RBI 4OPS 4RBI 5OPS 5RBI 6OPS 6RBI 7OPS 7RBI 8OPS 8RBI 9OPS 9RBI
-------------  ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Minnesota      .270 .740  103  479  450 .934   72 .790   60  .681   43 .777   70 .759   48 .703   52 .665   48 .751   35 .534   22
Boston         .265 .733  103  463  439 .681   38 .870   54  .932   63 .790   59 .808   70 .755   61 .652   44 .478   31 .525   19
St. Louis      .264 .707  103  457  436 .853   61 .788   44  .757   55 .894   89 .713   36 .595   49 .738   48 .449   26 .475   28
New York (AL)  .235 .698  103  449  420 .557   29 .845   53 1.022   67 .918   91 .680   70 .466   22 .702   45 .571   22 .428   21
Pittsburgh     .270 .709  103  436  414 .856   51 .689   36  .699   49 .766   67 .685   49 .644   35 .743   43 .701   57 .557   27
Baltimore      .246 .697  103  426  398 .758   38 .700   52  .848   66 .758   64 .650   54 .728   33 .621   35 .581   30 .531   26
New York (NL)  .232 .622  103  383  353 .621   23 .706   49  .664   54 .802   54 .638   43 .597   38 .541   34 .494   36 .468   22
Los Angeles    .241 .645  103  383  359 .670   23 .751   42  .729   63 .857   71 .586   32 .574   43 .540   27 .639   37 .389   21
San Francisco  .233 .652  103  356  333 .744   42 .651   36  .890   72 .871   61 .577   31 .482   21 .576   34 .526   21 .469   15
Chicago        .228 .630  103  332  308 .679   35 .622   28  .970   70 .590   44 .560   42 .580   30 .433   17 .580   24 .568   18
------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Sum            .249 .684 1030 4164 3910  ---  412  ---  454   ---  602  ---  670  ---  475  ---  384  ---  375  ---  319  ---  219
Avg            .249 .684  103  416  391  ---   41  ---   45   ---   60  ---   67  ---   48  ---   38  ---   38  ---   32  ---   22

 You gave us detailed Batting Order slot splits in FW, but those didn't have runs either. But it did break down OPS into OBP and SLG which sometimes is better for analysis.



__________________


VIP Season Ticket Holder

Status: Offline
Posts: 414
Date: Mar 13, 2016
Permalink  
 

scorpio rising 2 wrote:

This from Optimizing Order, Part 1: How To Build The Ideal Lineup

The #1 hitter has a 0.02 RE advantage on D's, T's and BB's. The #2 hitter holds a 0.02 advantage on HR's only. The #1 hitter should have a higher OBP whereas the #2 hitter should have an equally balanced OBP and SLG with a slightly better SLG.
The #5 hitter has a 0.03 RE advantage on S's, D's, T's and BB's whereas the #3 hitter has a 0.02 RE advantage on HR's. All outs for the #5 hitter are more costly than the same outs from the #3 hitter. From this, we can see that the #5 hitter should be of more value than the #3 hitter though the hitter with the better AB/HR ratio should be slotted 3rd.
The #3 hitter comes to bat with 2 outs more frequently so has less chance to create runs unless by.

0.02 - 0.03 runs per PA is no doubt minimal, however, as I've said before...over the course of an entire season considering between 475 to 600 plus PA's at the top half of the order that equates to 10 to 15 runs production over that of the standard formulaic batting order.
Another interesting article for reference is...Which Teams Are Optimizing Their Lineups


 This is the same site (Optimizing Order, Part 1) that I have been referencing (http://www.bluebirdbanter.com/2012/10/12/3490578/lineup-optimization-part-1-of-2). It contains some of the exact passages and charts that are in Tango's The Book. All the tables included are in The Book, though the article does leave a few out. The conclusions on slots seem to be word for word - though RE run exceptency is substituted for RV run values - not that it really matters.

 Tango is (or at least was) a consultant for the Cubs, so it would be interesting to take the 2015 club and see if his ideas were used in their batting order decisions.



__________________


Umpire

Status: Offline
Posts: 9221
Date: Mar 13, 2016
Permalink  
 

Grey Eagle wrote:

 3rd, 4th and 1st seems to be most represented. Brock's RBI total out off lead-off is impressive. You must not be using Tango as besides a split Jones, there is no other #2s.


 I didn't use Tango or any other formula other than my own (with heav emphasis on useage). One thing I find interesting is that the team that started this (65 Twins) leads the league in runs and OPS. What I've been doing has worked pretty well.



__________________


VIP Season Ticket Holder

Status: Offline
Posts: 414
Date: Mar 18, 2016
Permalink  
 

Tall Tactician wrote:

         ...

The one point that sticks out to me which was hammered away in Moneyball was that best predictor as to whether a team would score a run was if the leadoff batter got on base.  Studies show the two positions that lead of an inning the most are the #1 and the #4 position.  Just something for you to think about.


 Bringing back a comment from TT about leading off inning %s. Just found a "conversation" that Tango had about this. Here is the blue excerpt (Tango responds to a member who posts the # of times each BOP leads off an inning):

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/experience_over_counting_for_things_that_are_easily_countable/#comments

Data Desc: number of times lineup position was leadoff in an inning by League 

Source: Retrosheet data 2002 through 2011

LINEUP_POS, AL CNT, NL CNT 

1: 41,669, 49,695 

4: 24,360, 26,339 

5: 21,697, 24,171 

7: 20,361, 22,632 

8: 20,072, 22,596 

6: 19,878, 22,344 

9: 19,718, 20,649 

2: 17,530, 20,214 

3: 17,275, 19,266

 

#3    Tangotiger      (see all posts) 2012/09/11 (Tue) @ 11:24

Michael: excellent, thanks.

This is why you prefer your better all-round hitter at #4 and your HR hitter at #3.  You don’t want your power hitter hitting HR while leading off an inning.

There’s alot of interactive things to worry about, and it’s detailed extensively in The Book.  But, that’s the basic idea.

It could happen though that based on your team makeup that your better all-round hitter would hit #1.  I can see that maybe if you have two .400 OBP hitters, maybe your best hitter will be #3. 

I don’t know, really, which is why you want a simulator so you can test various combinations.

-------

Of interest is Tango pointing out that under certain (high OBP that is high in the order) circumstances that "maybe your best hitter will (should) be #3." Or at least that is the way I read it.

Note that my analysis of Tango's Batting Order Recommendations came after doing a lot of playing around with the FW teams. All FW teams have the luxury of having extremely high OPS batters. So, you have a lot more options than your normal team. And in optimizing the batting orders for those "all-star" type teams you have a lot of flexibility. So when looking at Tango's recommendations, I was thinking about what I did for FW. I am a big fan of OBP. Especially trying to get high OBP in the 1 and 2 slots if possible. Therefore my FW teams' makeup would align with the "two .400 OBP hitters" and I also try to make the #3 batter the best hitter.



__________________


Third Base Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 6286
Date: Mar 18, 2016
Permalink  
 

A few comments about the above:

1. If you were to eliminate the first inning from the above, the leadoff position would not be so much higher, but in the mix.

2. If I am not mistaken, Tango placed a lot of emphasis on the #2 hitter, but that batter has the second fewest leadoff at bats. 

3. I saw other data performing a similar analysis whose results were consistent with what is presented above.



__________________

Baseball ... this field, this game ... It is part of our past.  It reminds us all of what once was good -- and could be again.



Luxury Box Season Ticket Holder

Status: Offline
Posts: 806
Date: Mar 19, 2016
Permalink  
 

To be entirely honest...one of the reasons I posted this thread was to get the various opinions from the knowledgeable folks here on the creditability of...Lineup Optimization as compared to the standardized format. Everyone whom has posted has brought to light some very profound points that both...support and debunk said creditability. We can all safely assume at this point that any improvements in run production are minimal at best, however, as I've read and pointed out, over the course of an entire season, in spite of the minimal spread, pennants have been won or lost in the final week or even day of the season.
Another reason is simply this: I do challenge the theory of the #3 hitter's comparative lack of importance even though Tango's explanations make sense...somewhat! I firmly subscribe to the three best hitter's batting 1, 4 and 2 with OBP higher and SLG lower amongst those 3 batters and all 3 having a team's best OPS numbers. I struggle with that #3 slot though, the cleanup guy should have more TB but the 3 slot guy should have a better AB/HR ratio. I've also always believed that the #5 slot should be the 2nd choice for cleanup. Also, the 6 - 8 slots should have the same format as the 1, 2, and 4 hitters in that OBP is higher and slugging lower as 6 - 8 descends. In other words...1 - 4 begins a rotating shift and is continued with 6 - 8, the #5 hitter being the catalyst between both sections.
I realize that train of thought may be challenged and I accept those challenges for that is what makes this topic interesting aside from the priority reason which is to conclude what works best and what does not!
I do not place as much emphasis on how often each slot bats leadoff as much as I do upon the best run production hitter's receiving the most PA's.
It makes sense to me that the #2 guy have a balanced OBP/SLG and of course the leadoff guy having the best, or very close to the best OBP to open the door for the #4 and #5 hitter's to clear the bases if the 3 slot did not go yard. Then, starting with #6, the process begins again albeit to a lesser extent of course.


__________________

I'd wake up at night with the smell of the ball park in my nose, the cool of the grass on my feet...The Thrill of the Grass...Heck, I'd play for free!



Third Base Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 6286
Date: Mar 19, 2016
Permalink  
 

Scorps, my apologies.  I see how you concluded from what I wrote that you may have thought I was trying to "debunk" the book's theory on lineups.  Not the case.  I am trying to understand Tango's reasoning for the number 2 hitter, especially now that I see it is a batting position that (surprisingly) does not lead off that often. 

I view this an opportunity to learn from you, Grey Eagle and others on the topic and hope to glean some insight that might be useful to me.  I appreciate your response and explanation for the #2 batter position.  And by the way, you did a nice job of it.  I had forgotten Tango looked for a balanced OBP/SLG in the number 2 hitter.



__________________

Baseball ... this field, this game ... It is part of our past.  It reminds us all of what once was good -- and could be again.



Luxury Box Season Ticket Holder

Status: Offline
Posts: 806
Date: Mar 20, 2016
Permalink  
 

Tall Tactician wrote:

Scorps, my apologies.  I see how you concluded from what I wrote that you may have thought I was trying to "debunk" the book's theory on lineups.  Not the case.  I am trying to understand Tango's reasoning for the number 2 hitter, especially now that I see it is a batting position that (surprisingly) does not lead off that often. 

I view this an opportunity to learn from you, Grey Eagle and others on the topic and hope to glean some insight that might be useful to me.  I appreciate your response and explanation for the #2 batter position.  And by the way, you did a nice job of it.  I had forgotten Tango looked for a balanced OBP/SLG in the number 2 hitter.


 TT...Apologies? I made no such conclusion from what you wrote...no need for an apology at all. It is I who am trying to debunk certain aspects of Tango's theories! Particularly of the 3-slot. After reading everyone's posts herein...I am not so conclusive to "some" of the theories Tango is selling. I think I will maintain that I wrote in my very last post with a experimental twist to the 3 and 5 slots however.

 



__________________

I'd wake up at night with the smell of the ball park in my nose, the cool of the grass on my feet...The Thrill of the Grass...Heck, I'd play for free!



Third Base Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 6286
Date: Mar 20, 2016
Permalink  
 

When I finish my Q4B II project, I intend to delve into this topic further and run some more tests using different teams.



__________________

Baseball ... this field, this game ... It is part of our past.  It reminds us all of what once was good -- and could be again.

«First  <  1 2 3 4 5 | Page of 5  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard