Gardy Needs a Refresher Course in Lineup Construction

[SoCalTwinsfan]

Over at Yahoo! Sports, I discuss Gardy's recent lineup change:

 

Apparently, the Twins losing 11 of 12 games was just too much for Gardenhire. The poor manager must have lost his mind because he dropped Mauer to third in the order in a Tuesday, May 27 game against the Brewers in Milwaukee. This meant the rest of the lineup had to be lower in the lineup as well so Brian Dozier could bat second.

 

Go ahead and read the rest of Minnesota Twins' Ron Gardenhire Needs a Refresher Course in Lineup Construction. Do you agree that Gardy has lost his sense of logic? Does it really matter?

[Top Gun]

Don't tell Gardy how to do his job, he won!

[launchingthrees]

Maybe start a thread and plug all your articles in it? Seem over the top to start a new thread every time you write an article for a non-twinsdaily site.

[IdahoPilgrim]

Really? We're going to be critical of the manager when, post-change, we've won 3 straight?

[Gernzy]

Dozier batting second, and he's had a few good games. And yes the team has won 3 straight. It must be Gardy's fault now that the team is playing good...

[Mike Sixel]

Two things:

 

1. The best companies/teams fix things when things are going well, rather than waiting for them to go badly. There is nothing wrong, indeed there is much right, in looking at how the team can be better even when they are winning.

 

2. Just because something "works" does not mean: a: that it was the actual cause of success; b: it was the right thing to do.

 

that said, it would be great to just celebrate some wins around here, given how rare they've been lately. I do find it odd that people that would be annoyed by an article, took time to read and comment on the article.

[nicksaviking]

I haven't been to positive with Gardy lately but if your lineup is broke of course you need to try something new. Obviously batting Mauer 3rd wasn't his first choice seeing as Mauer has been batting 2nd all year and stayed that way for an entire 10 game losing streak but he had to try something.

 

When the Yankees were slumping Billy Martin used to create his lineups by pulling the names out of a hat. There was no rhyme or reason to it other than to mix things up and hopefully to create a spark with the players.

[gunnarthor]

I like Mauer batting second but I wonder if Mauer was getting upset himself with his lack of RBIs. Players like those things even if we don't think they matter.

 

Lineup construction doesn't really matter and maybe certain players feel better hitting 4th rather than 3rd or 3rd rather than 2nd. I do think a bad hitter with pop can surprise a pitcher if he's batting low in the order (think Craig Monroe for the Tigers in 06) and I think there is some studies that suggest a guy with some pop at #8 (in the AL) is a good idea but I have no idea where that link would be now.

[Mike Sixel]

Good point, gunnarthor.....sometimes we (I?) forget these guys are humans......or at least I've been accused of that here....

[DaveW]

Lineup construction is the most over-rated thing ever, with that said, when you are in a slump it makes sense to just "shake things up" for the hell of it. Mauer batting 2nd is nice if you have a guy who can get on base in front of him, but up until now that hasn't been the case.

[IdahoPilgrim]

Two things:

 

1. The best companies/teams fix things when things are going well, rather than waiting for them to go badly. There is nothing wrong, indeed there is much right, in looking at how the team can be better even when they are winning.

 

2. Just because something "works" does not mean: a: that it was the actual cause of success; b: it was the right thing to do.

 

I agree with these points completely, and I don't know enough about lineup construction to know whether the points in this article are valid or not.

 

That said, I did find the title, of the article and the thread, to be a little condescending. Phrasing it this way made it seem to me like just another "dogpile on Gardy" thread, and IMO those have gotten old.

[Mike Sixel]

I agree with these points completely, and I don't know enough about lineup construction to know whether the points in this article are valid or not.

 

That said, I did find the title, of the article and the thread, to be a little condescending. Phrasing it this way made it seem to me like just another "dogpile on Gardy" thread, and IMO those have gotten old.

Ya, agreed.

[Craig Arko]

I concur with the previous two posts, so no I won't click on the article. If I want poor headlining the mainstream news media is always there.

[Aaron Cross]

Due to the fact this team doesn't have a true leadoff hitter, why not bat Mauer first? He's not an rbi guy. His greatest strength is getting on base. I guess it just makes too much sense. Batting first will also get him more atbats over the course of the season. More atbats for Mauer translates to more wins for the Twins. But batting him behind Carroll and Dozier? Really? Maybe we should bring Matt Tolbert back and bat him third and drop Mauer to cleanup?

[Boom Boom]

When the Twins weren't scoring runs, it never occurred to me that the reason could be that Dozier wasn't getting enough at-bats.

[nicksaviking]

That said, I did find the title, of the article and the thread, to be a little condescending. Phrasing it this way made it seem to me like just another "dogpile on Gardy" thread, and IMO those have gotten old.

 

That goes to show that some of us that are critical of the coaching staff or the front office don't see everything only in black and white. We don't blindly critique. There are plenty of us here who have dogpiled in the past but know this isn't an issue to take umbrage with.

 

Good point, gunnarthor.....sometimes we (I?) forget these guys are humans......or at least I've been accused of that here....

 

Though the idea of the Twins drafting and developing a team of androids does have me intregued.

[Riverbrian]

I read the article... I have no problem with the expression of opinion and I personally agree that Mauer should be slotted #2.

 

However... I laugh and laugh and laugh when I think about how Gardy gets attacked from all directions.

 

Im willing to bet that there is a group of TD'ers who think Parmelee plays too much and a group of TD'ers who think Parmelee plays too little and groups inside those groups who are pissed at Gardy over it.

[a-wan]

Lineup construction is the most over-rated thing ever, with that said, when you are in a slump it makes sense to just "shake things up" for the hell of it. Mauer batting 2nd is nice if you have a guy who can get on base in front of him, but up until now that hasn't been the case.

 

Since the Twins have about half a lineup of hitters who can't steal first base it doesn't really matter who bats where? It would just be nice to give the few guys who can get on base more AB's than the slugs who can't.

[mcrow]

I always like it when people knock Gardy for the lineups as if they have any clue what's going on behind the scenes. The fact of the matter is that there are likely multiple lineups that could be correct for any given game depending on the oppenent and what is happening with the team and some of that stuff we are not likely to be aware of.

[Oxtung]

Though the idea of the Twins drafting and developing a team of androids does have me intregued.

 

This explains SOOOOOOO much. The Twins aren't cheap, they're spending the extra payroll money on R&D! I for one will welcome our new android baseball overlords.

[Shane Wahl]

Lineup construction is the most over-rated thing ever, with that said, when you are in a slump it makes sense to just "shake things up" for the hell of it. Mauer batting 2nd is nice if you have a guy who can get on base in front of him, but up until now that hasn't been the case.

 

So two guys in front of him who can't get on base is better?

[Shane Wahl]

Lineup construction is not nonsense. It means a few games a year if you do it right. If you don't think a few games matter, you are insane.

[jokin]

Lineup construction is the most over-rated thing ever, with that said, when you are in a slump it makes sense to just "shake things up" for the hell of it. Mauer batting 2nd is nice if you have a guy who can get on base in front of him, but up until now that hasn't been the case.

 

Unfortunately, as the sample grows larger, Dozier will inevitably regress and prove to be a poor long-term option batting 2nd in front of Mauer. Hopefully, Gardy has learned from the past and will juggle the lineup before he has another 2 week stretch of Hick-like production from the top of the order. Shaking it up is a decent strategy in the short-term, but Mauer is the perfect choice in the 2-hole over the long-term.

[jokin]

So two guys in front of him who can't get on base is better?

 

Exactly. Dave himself would be the first to say (and has posted) that Dozier is not a legit choice for a major league 2nd baseman's job long-term, to further that thought, his career batting numbers don't support him batting 2nd long-term.

[jokin]

So two guys in front of him who can't get on base is better?

 

Everyone knows that two is better than one! I get why you don't see this...it's math, not philosophy:roll:

[Shane Wahl]

Everyone knows that two is better than one! I get why you don't see this...it's math, not philosophy:roll:

 

Haha, good call. It is clear that Gardy is obsessed with the Platonic Form of the no. 2 hitter.

[Alex]

Lineup construction is the most over-rated thing ever, with that said, when you are in a slump it makes sense to just "shake things up" for the hell of it. Mauer batting 2nd is nice if you have a guy who can get on base in front of him, but up until now that hasn't been the case.

 

The irony with this lineup, of course, is that if he's batting third, he's likely got two guys in front of him that can't get on base so he comes up with two outs. IMO, it never makes sense to give your worst hitters more at bats by placing them at the top of the lineup.

 

I don't mind Carroll at the top, though, and hopefully Dozier continues to hit.

[Nick Nelson]

Dozier could just as easily be the No. 9 hitter as the No. 2 hitter, so the only difference made by moving Mauer down (in AL parks) is that you potentially rob him of at-bats in favor of Dozier. Or whichever suspect is hitting leadoff.

 

Maybe there's some validity to the idea that Dozier's confidence will be jump-started by the nod and he'll get going. I doubt it, but maybe.

[jay]

Dozier could just as easily be the No. 9 hitter as the No. 2 hitter, so the only difference made by moving Mauer down (in AL parks) is that you potentially rob him of at-bats in favor of Dozier. Or whichever suspect is hitting leadoff.

 

This exact situation was manifested last night. Bottom of the 8th, bases loaded, 2 outs. Brian Dozier up to bat as the #2 hitter instead of Joe Mauer. Dozier flies out on a flare to right, Mauer doesn't bat again.

 

Thankfully the Twins hung on to win and I'll concede that lineup construction does generally get blown out of proportion, but we can't pretend like these little things don't matter at all.

[Nick Nelson]

This exact situation was manifested last night. Bottom of the 8th, bases loaded, 2 outs. Brian Dozier up to bat as the #2 hitter instead of Joe Mauer. Dozier flies out on a flare to right, Mauer doesn't bat again.

 

Thankfully the Twins hung on to win and I'll concede that lineup construction does generally get blown out of proportion, but we can't pretend like these little things don't matter at all.

Well said.