How the Three-Batter Rule Could Affect More Than the Twins Bullpen

I like the outside the box thinking but seems like all we have are big bats and some of them have pretty good splits..    Stacking means there will be times the other team can bring in a righty when you have three right handed batters in a row and then bring in a lefty to face three lefties in a row and you never have a favorable matchup.    I never mind our guys being intentionally walked.    Its an automatic 1.00 OBP and OPS.     

In the traditional lineup your hitters get intentionally walked when they have the platoon advantage... meaning there's likely to be a runner on base when one of the platoon-disadvantaged guys comes up.

In the "stack" lineup you still have the platoon disadvantage, but this time without the benefit of a free baserunner.

My bet is lineups will be constructed to counter the starter and alternating left/right hitters will continue to predominate.

Stacking could be utilized against teams with only one left-handed reliever so as to “get that over with” early on in hopes that the left-handed hitting stretch will get a second whack at the bullpen later in the game. This could be a strategy used against teams like the Twins with a mostly right-handed bullpen, Clippard and the closer notwithstanding.

I am more of a fan of having good bats off the bench than stacking.  The stacking can backfire just as much as it helps.  First, I am fine with intentional walks from time to time, more runners on base and all.  However, think about this.  You have normal set up of say Kepler, Polanco, Cruz, I see no one walked if you bring in lefty, which doubt you would to just face Kepler.  So change it up, Cruz, Eddie, Donaldson, not sure if that is order just giving example.  They bring in top righty, pitcher to Cruz, walk Eddie, then Donaldson, I am fine with that, Donaldson gets to hit with runner on.  

I would not want a 3 side stacked, maybe 2 in a row but 3 I think will backfire, assuming they do not have good splits. 

Assuming the Twins' lineup is as (relatively) productive as last year's (lets see how the ball flies throughout baseball), there isn't much of a reason to fiddle with the structure of the lineup.  

With a healthy(ish) everyday lineup,  the weakest spot in the lineup would be Buxton(!!!) assuming he is healthy) and I don't think that is exactly the kind of hitter that teams walk a guy to get to (what a grammatical nightmare)!

This question highlights the beauty of baseball. The ever-evolving chess game. New rules force changes on one side that are countered by the other.I don't particularly see this strategy becoming "a thing" for constructing line-ups this season, but it certainly seems to have to legs as an option to consider in some scenarios. The argument is valid. An idea that hasn't been discussed much. Nate offers as a hypothetical and leaves it as an open question.

First blush reasons why this will be mainly a secondary factor in setting lineups; I think the new rule will effect the 26-man roster as much or more than the starting lineups. There will be more relief pitchers rostered this season that are more evenly effective to batters on both sides of the plate. On offense, managers more place more emphasis on filling a last roster spot with a stronger pinch-hitter over a better defensive fielder. In any case, aside from and sometimes including walk-off win situations, managers will still understand the potential danger of giving out intentional walks. 

In short, IMO, this is an interesting counter for managers to consider when the stars align. 

Regardless how teams stack their lineups, the 3 batter rule will prompt hitters to become more rounded in their approach. If somebody walks Cruz, the next guy better be pretty good at putting the ball in play, at least. There should be plenty of situations that don't call for swinging from the heels. Twins already have power hitters. Can these same guys tone it down to punish the intentional walks? Whatever side of the plate you stand on, contact hitting is going to become more important. 

This could also boost the value of subs like Astudillo, who can barrel up on almost any pitcher. El Cherubo might just wind up being a very important chess piece.

New rules make people think. And sometimes they think too much.

There will be more IBB, because it's now mandated that pitchers will be forced to stay and face match-ups that they wouldn't have in the past.

Meanwhile, it makes little sense for offenses to 'stack' in response. Do you want to see extra base-runners, or do you want to see more instances of where the left-handed reliever is 'forced' to pitch to your left-handed stud? If you actually 'want' the lefty-lefty matchup, you're literally throwing away the advantage the offense gains with the new rule...just so that you can say the IBB isn't mitigating that advantage. A small advantage is better than none.

Stacking is going to remain as risky as it's always been. Just like before, there are going to be scenarios where it could work to your advantage. But, getting to that scenario will be hard to predict and a bad bet. IMO, much more likely that the new rule...combined with the extra roster spot...results in us seeing a slight uptick in mid-to-late inning pinch-hitting as a strategy to exploit the rule.

Here's something I just thought of, but something that I'm sure most managers have considered. There's nothing in the new rule about inserting pinch hitters. This to me is an unfair advantage for the batting team. To negate this I think that if the offensive team pinch hits during the first three batters the pitcher should no longer be required to face a minimum of three batters.