Fantasy Baseball Cafe Forums

by 5 » Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:29 am

pokerplaya wrote:Not the first time...LaRussa used to do this a few years ago regularly...

Joaquin Andujar?

by **A Fleshner Fantasy** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 10:34 am

RynMan wrote:
Noggy wrote:
RynMan wrote:Then why not just slot that guy in at the top of the order and slide everyone down a spot? It's doing exactly the same thing, only:

a) you get to put this plan into attack straight away in the first inning
b) this part of the order will theoretically have more times at the plate over the course of the season (and mathemtically, in one game)

Because it makes no sense to give the worst hitter on the team (sans the pitcher) up to 162 plate appearances more than he would get batting 9th over the course of the season.

I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. I was asking why you wouldn't just use the guy that you are going to hit 9th behind the pitcher, in the leadoff or number 2 spot.

He got exactly what you are saying. You don't want that #9 hitter to get all those extra plate appearences, which he would hitting 1st instead of 9th.

For whatever reason, managers like to have an 2nd leadoff hitter of sorts at #9, although I don't really see the advantage of this.

by **willy-t** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 11:30 am

The idea of sliding everybody down a spot and putting the other leadoff type hitter in the 2 hole or 3rd doesn;t hold so much, because you need Pujold hitting as high as possible, cos just like the #8 gets more AB than the #9, the #3 gets more AB than the #4.

I can see the logic for this, definately.

by **Bloody Sox** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:50 pm

The only sense I can see in this is that it lets you put a fast guy (who is also a better hitter than your pitcher) up 9th - he's much more likely to get on base and can to steal to get into scoring position more often, which in turn would give the top of the order more RBI chances. Of course, the big drawback is that you are now hurting your #7 hitter who will see nothing to hit. If you have a relatively good hitting pitcher up 8th and a fast OBP guy up 9th, I think it can make sense.

by **Another Blown Save** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 1:42 pm

You probably could make a case that Adam Kennedy is worse then any other pitcher that would be hitting for the Cardinals

by **AussieDodger** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 4:58 pm

Another Blown Save wrote:You probably could make a case that Adam Kennedy is worse then any other pitcher that would be hitting for the Cardinals

That's right.
La Russa probably thought since he has Molina/Kennedy/pitcher/Eckstein in a row that he has 4 pitchers hitting and he might as well juggle them for the hell of it.
Also I would think that the St Louis pitchers as a group would have a slightly higher OPS then Kennedy's .572. If they don't it would be mighty close.

by **hot4tx** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:52 pm

If the guy hitting 9th is a fast guy, basically a good leadoff hitter except for OBP, then think of it as using him as a leadoff hitter, but not giving him the extra ABs he'd get if he hit 1st (low OBP). And all it costs you is giving the pitcher the extra ABs from 9th spot to 8th spot.

by **Snakes Gould** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 6:04 pm

AussieDodger wrote:
Another Blown Save wrote:You probably could make a case that Adam Kennedy is worse then any other pitcher that would be hitting for the Cardinals

That's right.
La Russa probably thought since he has Molina/Kennedy/pitcher/Eckstein in a row that he has 4 pitchers hitting and he might as well juggle them for the hell of it.
Also I would think that the St Louis pitchers as a group would have a slightly higher OPS then Kennedy's .572. If they don't it would be mighty close.

i doubt any manager does things "for the hell of it" but .572 is atrocious. at least miles' OPS is a more respectable .667 but still...

by **buffalobillsrul2002** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 2:36 am

Haha. Good points about Kennedy... If the Cardinals actually used a guy who fit the "second leadoff man" mold well, I could understand this. But flipping Kennedy and P doesn't seem to do much of anything really. I also like the point about the PH/P combo being better than Kennedy. One more point: Does this durastically change double-switching during the game? It seems that doing this makes it more likely to double-switch your better hitters (6 and 7 guys) out of the lineup.....

by **tinfoilxtouch** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 8:10 am

This follows my thought in the other thread. Most leadoff guys are the 1st/2nd most likely to get a hit of anyone on the team. Having little chance of anyone being on base for them doesn't make good sense.