The Brian Dozier dilemma

[stringer bell]

Another example--Cespedes hit #2 for the Tigers (with Miggy out). I will go this far, if there is a right side of the field guy (as pronounced the other way as Dozier and Mauer) and he was a good hitter, it would be good to have a guy like that hit #2. In addition to reaching base a lot and advancing anybody on base by that, there also is a better chance of productive outs. Productive outs are better than unproductive ones, and in this example, I'm not saying the batter should "give himself up", rather when outs are made, they incidentally advance the base runner(s).

[Mike Sixel]

 

Show me a MLB manager who consistently bats his best overall hitter in the # 2 spot and I'll show you a manager who will be unemployed in 2 years.  Your best overall hitter should bat third.  Your number 2 guy should be someone adept at advancing your leadoff guy to second or third base whether by bunting or hitting to right field increasing the chances of the runner advancing to third.  A better case could be made for putting your best overall hitter in the leadoff spot giving him a couple dozen more at bats over the course of a season which theoretically could translate into 2 or 3 extra wins.  Bobby Bragen tried this with the Pirates in the late 50's and Whitey Herzog toyed with it, batting George Brett & Hal McRae 1,2 in the late 70's.

 

that's not what the math says......we used to "KNOW" that a walk was a weakness in a hitter, and it was all the pitcher's fault, for example. We were certain of it.....

[Mike Sixel]

 

Based on this reasoning, wouldn't the same apply (on a slightly different scale) to moving the best hitter from #3 to #2?

 

The NL and AL are slightly different scenarios because of the pitcher. There is logic in not having your best hitter within 2 spots of a black hole, which is why Maddon probably bats his pitcher 8th and his best hitter #2.

 

I think the era of a #2 hitter whose primary responsibility is to advance the leadoff hitter is over.

 

it should be, but some people don't want to change.

[Zachary]

Now this dilemma is under the assumption that Buxton is going to be exactly what we want/expect him to be. Meanwhile, Dozier, has earned that spot. Buxton doesn't kick out Dozier until he deserves it (if ever). AT WHICH POINT I would dabble between those two in the first and second hole and see what works

[AlwaysinModeration]

And announcers like Blyleven further the myth of the utility of the "productive out."

 

I'm with Chief. Hit the ball. Quit giving away your outs.

[DaveW]

Bunting before the 7th inning is a terrible mistake, but making productive outs against tough pitchers should continue to be stressed.

[USAFChief]

Bunting before the 7th inning is a terrible mistake, but making productive outs against tough pitchers should continue to be stressed.

I think the gains made from a hit or a walk, while accepting the non productive outs, outweigh the gains made from intentionally trying to move a runner up a base while also making outs most of the time.

 

Except in very specific and limited circumstances, I'd tell all my hitters to try NOT to make an out. Particularly one good enough to hit second in my lineup. If you get two strikes on you, and you think all you can do is roll a grounder to the right side instead of strike out...ok. One run situation late in a game...ok.

 

Otherwise...hit away.

 

Just my opinion.

[DJSim22]

We construct our line up with our 15 old team as:

 

1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1 instead of 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9

 

3 lead off hitters, 2 #2 hitter ect. 

 

So for the Twins it might be more like:

 

1. Dozier

2. Mauer

3. Rosario

4. Sano

5. Hicks

6. Suzuki

7. Plouffe

8. Hunter

9. Santana

 

 

 

 

 

[DJSim22]

 

 

And announcers like Blyleven further the myth of the utility of the "productive out."

I'm with Chief. Hit the ball. Quit giving away your outs.

 

The majority of the time that a player is making a "productive out" they are just going the other way.  And it generally is when a batter already has 2 strikes. 

[twinsnorth49]

I like Dozier in the 2 hole, if Hicks keeps things up the way he has for another month it might be worth considering him at leadoff again, even if it's only until Buxton is ready, which I don't think will be this season.

 

There are way more good reasons than not for Dozier batting 2nd, and no, none of them should involve bunting.

 

Nothing wrong with Mauer at 3 if he keeps hitting the way he has of late.

[SwainZag]

 

The majority of the time that a player is making a "productive out" they are just going the other way.  And it generally is when a batter already has 2 strikes. 

 

I'll add on.  The majority of the time guys are going the other way isn't to hit a grounder to move the runner up, it's because they are in a 1-2, 2-2 count and protecting the plate.  Sitting back on a breaking pitch, while still being able to hit a fastball the other way. No batter gets in the box solely to move the runner over, especially one from 1st to 2nd, unless it's a sac bunt type situation.

[dxpavelka]

 

I can think of a couple examples:

 

The A's bat Vogt 2nd
The Blue Jays bat Donaldson 2nd

The Cubs bat Rizzo 2nd
 

I don't see anything wrong with batting your best hitter 2nd, especially if your second/third best hitters are as solid as Bautista/Encarnacion/Bryant

3 out of 30.  My premise was that in 2 years those managers would be looking for work.  2 of those 3 have losing records and the other could make a pretty good case tha Kris Bryant is his best hitter.

[dxpavelka]

 

Just so we're clear, you're stating that the difference in wins that comes from batting your best hitter third instead of second is enough to get a manager fired in two years?

 

That's some mighty chunky claim chowder there, my friend.

Actually, not being smart enough to bat your best hitter 3rd instead of 2nd is what will get him fired.

[dxpavelka]

 

Based on this reasoning, wouldn't the same apply (on a slightly different scale) to moving the best hitter from #3 to #2?

 

The NL and AL are slightly different scenarios because of the pitcher. There is logic in not having your best hitter within 2 spots of a black hole, which is why Maddon probably bats his pitcher 8th and his best hitter #2.

 

I think the era of a #2 hitter whose primary responsibility is to advance the leadoff hitter is over.

And yet a clear majority of big league managers still construct their lineup in that fashion.

 

[dxpavelka]

 

that's not what the math says......we used to "KNOW" that a walk was a weakness in a hitter, and it was all the pitcher's fault, for example. We were certain of it.....

show me the math

 

[DJL44]

The Twins don't bat their best hitter 3rd, they bat Mauer there...

[Willihammer]

Fire Molitor!

[Mike Sixel]

 

show me the math

 

It was referenced a page back, or you can search the internet. Or not, either way, no skin off my nose.

[gocgo]

 

But if you have a high OBP guy leading off, a guy who hits a lot of extra base hits from your 2 hole is ideal.  Your leadoff hitter is statistically only going to leadoff an inning once per game.

Yeah, but look at the stats for wins for the team that scores first.

[gocgo]

 

This is a dated mode of thinking

LOL!  The politically correct way of calling me old!

[RealTwinsFan357]

3 out of 30. My premise was that in 2 years those managers would be looking for work. 2 of those 3 have losing records and the other could make a pretty good case tha Kris Bryant is his best hitter.

I don't see Bob Melvin being fired any time soon, and the Blue Jays are only one game under 500, which makes them contenders in the AL east.

 

Also just pulled up Rizzo's and Bryant's stats...Rizzo leads in almost every category: hr, avg, obp, slg, wRC+, etc. Sure Bryant leads in some (rbi, bb%), but Rizzo is clearly the better offensive player

[Brock Beauchamp]

Yeah, but look at the stats for wins for the team that scores first.

Uh... The better team usually scores first. That's a poor metric from which to base a team.

[Thrylos]

Unless Buxton can prove that he can hit better than Butera, he belongs to AAA.

 

I don't see a dilemma here.   He is not a MLB-caliber player with the stick right now.  He needs to work on pitch recognition.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Buxton has less than 40 MLB PAs. We don't know much of anything about him at this point.

[DocBauer]

So glad I stuck with this topic. A lot of great debate and discussion. And I don't think anyone us wrong, which is part of the whole " Dilema" aspect.

 

IMHO, I do believe uber talent/prospect Buxton will be the lead off hitter sooner rather than later. And I also believe Dozier would be productive wherever you hit him. I've always held to the belief that you attemp to "deepen" your lineup. For example, I never felt your #2 hitter should be a sacrifice machine. (Though it's nice to know that he actually can perform such an act if called upon). I have always believed in the double lead off hitter theory, meaning your #2 can also hit, get OB, have some speed and XB power to MAKE THINGS HAPPEN, just like the leadoff hitter. Simply; he can knock guys around and in,mans beging or perpetuate an inning, helping set things up for the next few hitters. We're he to continue the offensive trend he has shown the past three seasons, Polanco, or his type, to me, would be a perfect example of a do it all hitter in the 2 hole. (Santana of last season, probably with a smaller AVG but higher OB would be another great example). Exactly what makes one guy vs another a better fit in the 1 hole vs the 2 hole is also debatable, and surely would come down to the players themselves.

 

(And the whole, just make contact and sacrifice hitter in the 2 hole is very old fashioned, and really reflects no better option IMO)

 

I have believed, and maintain still, that a team's best overall hitter should be in the 3 hole. He can lock the guys in ahead of him, but also get OB and keep things going by helping set up the boppers in the 4 and 5 hole. When Mauer is Maur, or when Mauer is close to being Mauef, this works really, really well. Unfortunately for a lot of Mauer's career, he hasn't always had the OB guys in front of him. Interesting that now, despite Mauer struggling at times to be Mauer, he is having some of his best RBI production with quality hitters in front of him. I think it's an easy arguement to put Dozier in the 3 spot. Except, what if Mauer really isn't toast yet?

 

Your 4-5 hitters can hit, mash, and drive in runs. The difference being the 4 hitter is just a little better overall AVG and OB and contact guy. Think Puckett, Hrbek and Gaetti for an almost textbook example of 3-4-5 in a lineup. (Mauer-Dozier-Sano maybe?)

 

6-7are good but slightly lesser versions if 3-4. 6 might be a better AVG-contact-OB hitter than your 7hitter. Once again, not hard to think of a Bush-Harper-Smalley hitter before a Brunansky at 7.

 

8-9 you look for the best overall production of run drivers and run creators you can find. Lesser versions of 6-7 or 1-2, but guys who can bring something helpful and help flip the lineup.

[USAFChief]

"When Mauer is Maur, or when Mauer is close to being Mauef, this works really, really well."

 

Sorry, don't mean to be nitpicky...but this made me laugh.

[gocgo]

 

Uh... The better team usually scores first. That's a poor metric from which to base a team.

The better team usually scores first?  Really?  Show me that stat.

[jimbo92107]

The day Buxton gets back, I'm assuming the OF will be Rosario RF, Buxton CF, Hicks RF. I also assume Molitor will bat Buxton 9th for awhile to get his feet wet. If things pan out well, eventually a good baseball tactics lineup would be

 

1. Buxton

2. Mauer

3. Dozier

4. Sano

5. Plouffe/Arcia

6. Hicks

7. Rosario

8. Suzuki/Fryer

9. Santana

 

Three main factors. Getting runners on, batting them in, protecting Sano. Buxton, Mauer, Dozier gives you a great chance to get runners on base, in scoring position. Against RH pitchers you bat Arcia behind Sano; against lefties you bat Plouffe behind Sano. Hicks backs up your backup, with Rosario to finish. Finally, you have a reverse #1 with Santana to get on base before Buxton, with Dozier now in cleanup position and Sano protecting Dozier.

 

The DH position becomes a complete musical chairs, depending who plays the field with Arcia behind Sano. Since Rosario and Arcia both bat lefty and both corner OF's, who plays corner OF depends on finer details of Molitor's game day strategy.

 

You can see I'm leaving Torii Hunter out of this lineup. Hunter's place on this team has always been assumed to be mentor/transitional fill-in for rising young stars. He will continue in that role, filling in when the younger players falter at the plate, get injured, etc. That was always the plan. If things go well, Hunter will get lots of rest in the second half.

[bird]

 

We construct our line up with our 15 old team as:

 

1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1 instead of 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9

 

3 lead off hitters, 2 #2 hitter ect. 

 

So for the Twins it might be more like:

 

1. Dozier

2. Mauer

3. Rosario

4. Sano

5. Hicks

6. Suzuki

7. Plouffe

8. Hunter

9. Santana

 

 

I don't know diddly about "lineup optimization", but I've forever wondered if maybe the whole lineup order angst is over the top in a way. If the order remained the same inning to inning, fine. But in reality, the leadoff guy bats first once or twice each game. But isn't the real secret to optimizing a group of hitters about the relationship among them within the order?

[bird]

 

Buxton has less than 40 MLB PAs. We don't know much of anything about him at this point.

 

Well, almost everyone knows at least one thing about him. He's proven he can hit better than Butera.