Your Ideal Batting Order On April 6th

[s e n s i]

LF Inglett
2B Hill
CF Wells
RF Rios
3B Rolen
DH Snider
SS Scutaro
1B Overbay
C Barajas

I really liked Inglett when he led off last season. He always put the ball in play, and rarely got k'd. Scutaro and Hill could arguably be switched. Of course, this is likely to change depending on how players progress in Dunedin, but as of now and in terms of talent and prior performance, that's what my order looks like.

[PowerHouse]

SS- Scutaro
2B- Hill
CF- Wells
RF- Rios
LF/DH- Lind
DH/LF- Snider
1B- Overbay
C- Barajas
3B Inglett

OR

3B Inglett
SS- Scutaro
CF- Wells
RF- Rios
LF/DH- Lind
2B- Hill
DH/LF- Snider
1B- Overbay
C- Barajas

[CR Reina]

Though none of the lead off options are going to excite anybody, I agree that Inglett is the best option.

[Modern_epic]

Screw the best leadoff option; if Inglett is in the opening day starting lineup over Snider, Lind or Rolen, I may not watch a Jays game all year after that.

[s e n s i]

Screw the best leadoff option; if Inglett is in the opening day starting lineup over Snider, Lind or Rolen, I may not watch a Jays game all year after that.

You do realize that last year, Inglett's batting avg. and OBP was higher than any of Snider, Lind, and Rolen right? And hopefully you also know that after he was given the full time leadoff spot, the team went 45-29. Not to mention putting up a fielding percentage of .984 which is pretty freakin good for an infielder.

Not watching a Jays game all year shouldn't be a problem for you, since it seems like you never even watched the team to begin with.

[kelso]

Rios- RF
Hill- 2nd
Rolen- 3rd
Wells- CF
Snider- LF
Overbay- 1st
Inglett- SS
Barajas- C
Lind- DH

I know this is different, but I think it would work. Rolen will see more fastballs in the 3-spot ahead of Wells and with those 3 guys ahead of him, Wells will get the chance to earn his money. Snider will also get up with guys on base and he has 2 good situational hitters behind him.

[Modern_epic]

Screw the best leadoff option; if Inglett is in the opening day starting lineup over Snider, Lind or Rolen, I may not watch a Jays game all year after that.

You do realize that last year, Inglett's batting avg. and OBP was higher than any of Snider, Lind, and Rolen right? And hopefully you also know that after he was given the full time leadoff spot, the team went 45-29. Not to mention putting up a fielding percentage of .984 which is pretty freakin good for an infielder.

Not watching a Jays game all year shouldn't be a problem for you, since it seems like you never even watched the team to begin with.

You do realize that Lind and Snider are 25 and 21 respectively, and both key parts of the future of the franchise? And that Joe Inglett is 30 and not?

And you realize that Scott Rolen had a higher OPS than Inglett last season? And that, in fact, he has only had a lower OPS than what is undoubtedly Inglett's peak three times in his career? In case you didn't realize this, one of the seasons was the first 37 games he came up for, and the others ended in shoulder surgery.

And you do realize that fielding % is a crappy statistic, right? (That being said, I agree that Inglett is a better fielder than Rolen is these days.)

And hopefully you realize that Joe Inglett being given the leadoff spot happened slightly after switching managers, and that that probably had more to do with our success than Joe F'n Inglett? (Yeah, I capitalized the f. It's his middle name now.)

It's not that I don't watch the games, it's that I have some understanding of baseball. If the teams decides Snider needs some time in AAA, or Rolen gets injured, or Hill still isn't ready, than I'm probably fine with Inglett being a somewhat regular starter. As is, saying he should be the opening day starter over Rolen is asinine, and playing him over Lind or Snider in some vain hope that he can help the team make the playoffs next year is even more so. Not because we can't, but because if we were to, a large part of it would have to be because those two had break out years.

[Modern_epic]

Kelso, I haven't watched the few games he's played there, but people don't seem to think Inglett can cut it at SS

Since chocolateSens1 caused me to take a look at some statistics, you want to know where it makes the most sense to start Inglett if you think he will keep up last year's numbers? I've got some blasphemy for you: 2B (though this shouldn't be surprising, really, considering it is his natural position).

I mean, it doesn't really makes sense still, because Hill's best year is a fair bit better than Inglett's last year, and Hill is still young. But unless Aaron Hill is looking like 2007 Aaron Hill, this is the best place to get Inglett ABs.

[kelso]

Kelso, I haven't watched the few games he's played there, but people don't seem to think Inglett can cut it at SS

Since chocolateSens1 caused me to take a look at some statistics, you want to know where it makes the most sense to start Inglett if you think he will keep up last year's numbers? I've got some blasphemy for you: 2B (though this shouldn't be surprising, really, considering it is his natural position).

I mean, it doesn't really makes sense still, because Hill's best year is a fair bit better than Inglett's last year, and Hill is still young. But unless Aaron Hill is looking like 2007 Aaron Hill, this is the best place to get Inglett ABs.

Yah, you are right...in hindsight Inglett at 2nd and Hill at SS makes more sense- I dont like the idea of Scutaro being our fulltime SS though.

[evilRyu]

Since the Jays aren't really going anywhere this season, I would try to somehow pencil in Snider a position on defense (as opposed to having him DH'ing). The time is now to develop his defensive skills (while he is still young). I don't think I want a career DH, not that it's a bad thing, but I'd like to see versatility in the player.

[s e n s i]

You do realize that Lind and Snider are 25 and 21 respectively, and both key parts of the future of the franchise? And that Joe Inglett is 30 and not?

Realized. But as far as I'm concerned, we're trying to win as many ball games as we can. How though, can you neglect the fact that Inglett had a better OBP than both Lind and Snider, and had a better avg than Lind and barely less than Snider (Inglett had 4 times as many at bats), and just use age as your primary reasoning? With Hill's return, Inglett most likely will not see as many at-bats or starts at the 2 bag, but his play last year should be taken into account when considering who should be the primary lead-off man. Not to mention he's probably the fastest guy on the team.

And you realize that Scott Rolen had a higher OPS than Inglett last season? And that, in fact, he has only had a lower OPS than what is undoubtedly Inglett's peak three times in his career? In case you didn't realize this, one of the seasons was the first 37 games he came up for, and the others ended in shoulder surgery.

Why though, does Joe Inglett's OPS have to be equal or higher than Rolen's to warrant leading off? The way I see it, OBP is and has been the most important stat when looking at the production a lead-off hitter. He's supposed to get on base, that's it. If he does that, he's done his job. In addition, last year Rolen's AB/K ratio was 6-1 whereas Inglett's was 8-1.

And you do realize that fielding % is a crappy statistic, right? (That being said, I agree that Inglett is a better fielder than Rolen is these days.)

Fielding % is the only way to gauge a players efficiency on the field. But you agree that Inglett is a better fielder than Rolen anyway, so there's nothing to argue about here.

And hopefully you realize that Joe Inglett being given the leadoff spot happened slightly after switching managers, and that that probably had more to do with our success than Joe F'n Inglett? (Yeah, I capitalized the f. It's his middle name now.)

Don't you think that part of Cito's success had to do with the decision to plug Inglett in at the lead off spot? Or are you assuming that had Scutaro or Eckstein or Rios led off we would have been just as successful?

Who do you suggest leads off then?

[Modern_epic]

Before I start, I want to make clear that I think you're crazy if you think Joe Inglett will hit .300 again next year. I expect pitchers are going to figure him out. But even if you ignore that, here we go.

Realized. But as far as I'm concerned, we're trying to win as many ball games as we can. How though, can you neglect the fact that Inglett had a better OBP than both Lind and Snider, and had a better avg than Lind and barely less than Snider (Inglett had 4 times as many at bats), and just use age as your primary reasoning? With Hill's return, Inglett most likely will not see as many at-bats or starts at the 2 bag, but his play last year should be taken into account when considering who should be the primary lead-off man. Not to mention he's probably the fastest guy on the team.

The reason I can use age is because it means those two are likely to get better. 21 and 25-year-olds who are as highly touted as them often do. And if the two of them do get better, then even if their OBP doesn't exceed Inglett's, it's going to be better for our offense to have them at LF and DH.

Also, why are you trying to win as many games as you can this season? I mean, I know that's the goal ever year, but the odds are that unless Lind and Snider have break out seasons, as many games as we can win isn't going to be more than two of the Yanks, Sox and Rays. So if that is the case, you might as well gamble on Lind and Snider, and at the very worst have them better prepared for '10.

Why though, does Joe Inglett's OPS have to be equal or higher than Rolen's to warrant leading off? The way I see it, OBP is and has been the most important stat when looking at the production a lead-off hitter. He's supposed to get on base, that's it. If he does that, he's done his job. In addition, last year Rolen's AB/K ratio was 6-1 whereas Inglett's was 8-1.

Joe Inglett's OPS doesn't have to be higher than Rolen's to warrant leading off. It has to be higher to warrant playing 3rd base over him. 3rd base isn't where you put slap hitting 2B. It's where you put guys who can drive in runs.

Fielding % is the only way to gauge a players efficiency on the field. But you agree that Inglett is a better fielder than Rolen anyway, so there's nothing to argue about here.

I'm seeing a problem in our discussion here. Do you also judge pitchers by wins or ERA? I'm figuring you know nothing about non-old-fogey-baseball-writer stats.

I am no expert on fielding stats, but I would suggest you at least take a look at range factor. It's not even really sabermetrics. It's putouts + assits / innings played at a position. Fielding % discounts the defensive value of guys like Johnny Mac, by not giving them credit for getting to more balls. Range factor, on the other hand, allows you to compare (within a position) based on the number of plays a player gets involved in. It's biased by pitching staff and park, of course, but looking at it along with fielding % is better than not. Zone rating is an even better stat, but I don't understand it well enough to really explain it.

Don't you think that part of Cito's success had to do with the decision to plug Inglett in at the lead off spot? Or are you assuming that had Scutaro or Eckstein or Rios led off we would have been just as successful?

I think the vast majority of Cito's success was that everyone started hitting better under him. But yeah, Inglett was among those players.

Look, I want less to do with Scutaro and Eckstein than I do with Inglett. For last years team, he was the best option at 2nd, and, because of that, probably the best option to lead off. But I also think, for reasons people better at stats than I have demonstrated, that it is almost always a bad idea to put a worse hitter into your lineup just because they fit the mold of a certain spot in the order.

But if you really want to do that, consider this:
Out of the four guys Inglett can replace (Lind, Snider, Rolen and Hill), if all 5 players hit to their full potential, which hitter is Inglett likely to be closest to? The answer is Aaron. So again, if you want him in the lineup, then you should put him at second.

Who do you suggest leads off then?

I would suggest you experiment by making your batting order based on descending OPS, but I don't expect Cito to do that.

If OBP is the most important thing in your lead-off guy, you should try Lyle Overbay. As crappy of a season as he had, he did lead the team in it last year. Not that I think he should lead off, but he's not as horrible of an option as it sounds.

I would suggest Hill, though Scutaro actually draws a lot of walks (seriously, his OPB is more than .100 higher than his avg. I was shocked seeing this.), and since he's got to go somewhere, you could throw him there if you're worried Hill mentally can't cut it leading off.

[ninja416]

2B Inglett (the best lead off hitter we have IMO)
RF Rios
SS Hill
CF Wells
DH Lind
3B Rolen
1B Overbay
LF Snider
C Barajas

Scooter can play the utility role filling in as a leadoff guy, SS, 2B and 3B whenever needed.

[s e n s i]

Before I start, I want to make clear that I think you're crazy if you think Joe Inglett will hit .300 again next year. I expect pitchers are going to figure him out. But even if you ignore that, here we go.

Realized. But as far as I'm concerned, we're trying to win as many ball games as we can. How though, can you neglect the fact that Inglett had a better OBP than both Lind and Snider, and had a better avg than Lind and barely less than Snider (Inglett had 4 times as many at bats), and just use age as your primary reasoning? With Hill's return, Inglett most likely will not see as many at-bats or starts at the 2 bag, but his play last year should be taken into account when considering who should be the primary lead-off man. Not to mention he's probably the fastest guy on the team.

The reason I can use age is because it means those two are likely to get better. 21 and 25-year-olds who are as highly touted as them often do. And if the two of them do get better, then even if their OBP doesn't exceed Inglett's, it's going to be better for our offense to have them at LF and DH.

Also, why are you trying to win as many games as you can this season? I mean, I know that's the goal ever year, but the odds are that unless Lind and Snider have break out seasons, as many games as we can win isn't going to be more than two of the Yanks, Sox and Rays. So if that is the case, you might as well gamble on Lind and Snider, and at the very worst have them better prepared for '10.

Why though, does Joe Inglett's OPS have to be equal or higher than Rolen's to warrant leading off? The way I see it, OBP is and has been the most important stat when looking at the production a lead-off hitter. He's supposed to get on base, that's it. If he does that, he's done his job. In addition, last year Rolen's AB/K ratio was 6-1 whereas Inglett's was 8-1.

Joe Inglett's OPS doesn't have to be higher than Rolen's to warrant leading off. It has to be higher to warrant playing 3rd base over him. 3rd base isn't where you put slap hitting 2B. It's where you put guys who can drive in runs.

Fielding % is the only way to gauge a players efficiency on the field. But you agree that Inglett is a better fielder than Rolen anyway, so there's nothing to argue about here.

I'm seeing a problem in our discussion here. Do you also judge pitchers by wins or ERA? I'm figuring you know nothing about non-old-fogey-baseball-writer stats.

I am no expert on fielding stats, but I would suggest you at least take a look at range factor. It's not even really sabermetrics. It's putouts + assits / innings played at a position. Fielding % discounts the defensive value of guys like Johnny Mac, by not giving them credit for getting to more balls. Range factor, on the other hand, allows you to compare (within a position) based on the number of plays a player gets involved in. It's biased by pitching staff and park, of course, but looking at it along with fielding % is better than not. Zone rating is an even better stat, but I don't understand it well enough to really explain it.

Don't you think that part of Cito's success had to do with the decision to plug Inglett in at the lead off spot? Or are you assuming that had Scutaro or Eckstein or Rios led off we would have been just as successful?

I think the vast majority of Cito's success was that everyone started hitting better under him. But yeah, Inglett was among those players.

Look, I want less to do with Scutaro and Eckstein than I do with Inglett. For last years team, he was the best option at 2nd, and, because of that, probably the best option to lead off. But I also think, for reasons people better at stats than I have demonstrated, that it is almost always a bad idea to put a worse hitter into your lineup just because they fit the mold of a certain spot in the order.

But if you really want to do that, consider this:
Out of the four guys Inglett can replace (Lind, Snider, Rolen and Hill), if all 5 players hit to their full potential, which hitter is Inglett likely to be closest to? The answer is Aaron. So again, if you want him in the lineup, then you should put him at second.

Who do you suggest leads off then?

I would suggest you experiment by making your batting order based on descending OPS, but I don't expect Cito to do that.

If OBP is the most important thing in your lead-off guy, you should try Lyle Overbay. As crappy of a season as he had, he did lead the team in it last year. Not that I think he should lead off, but he's not as horrible of an option as it sounds.

I would suggest Hill, though Scutaro actually draws a lot of walks (seriously, his OPB is more than .100 higher than his avg. I was shocked seeing this.), and since he's got to go somewhere, you could throw him there if you're worried Hill mentally can't cut it leading off.

I really don't see a lot of sacrifice in the growth of Snider or Lind's careers if Inglett gets more time than one of the two. Like I said, Inglett likely won't see as much time with Hill's return, but I still think he is the best option to lead off come opening night, when taking into account his speed and OBP last year.

Ideally, I'd actually prefer moving Hill to SS, keeping Inglett at 2B, platooning Lind and Snider over in LF, the other player getting the DH spot. I'd make Scutaro the primary utility man.

You don't want Inglett getting more time than Lind or Snider, that's fine. But even if it's still by default, it's hard to come up with a more suitable option to lead off than Inglett, granted he has a solid spring.

[kelso]

Rios led the team in hits, runs, total based and stolen bases. Time to try Rios at lead off IMO. Inglett is a decent player, but his good numbers vs rest of the roster was more of an indication that the team overall had a brutal offensive year then he being a superior offensive threat on this roster. I am not taking anything away from him- he made the best of his opportunity- but Wells, Rolen, Overbay, Hill...all those guys need to show up this year. Snider will win ROY and be the everyday LF by game 60 IMO.

[Relentless88]

2B: Suctaro/Inglett
SS: Hill
RF: Rios
CF: Wells
LF: Snider
DH: Lind
3B: Rolen
1B: Overbay
C: Barajas

[Holmes]

Some of you must be kidding yourselves with the thought of switching Aaron Hill to SS. Just because he's there before doesn't mean he should. The last time Hill played SS was in 2006 for a small part of the season and it didn't turn out well at all. Hill doesn't have the range or arm to be a MLB level SS. However, he's managed to be a solid defensive 2B.

Granted, our SS outlook doesn't look that appealing with the two headed monster of John McDonald and Marco Scutaro. But you don't downgrade defensively at both middle infield positions just so that you can squeeze in a slap hitting utility guy into the starting lineup.

[Schad]

My line-up, with the caveat that I'm too lazy to consider lefty/righty splits:

RF: Rios.
1B: Overbay.
3B: Rolen.
CF: Wells.
LF: Snider.
2B: Hill.
DH: Lind.
C: B.A. Barajas.
SS: Does it matter?

[kelso]

Some of you must be kidding yourselves with the thought of switching Aaron Hill to SS. Just because he's there before doesn't mean he should. The last time Hill played SS was in 2006 for a small part of the season and it didn't turn out well at all. Hill doesn't have the range or arm to be a MLB level SS. However, he's managed to be a solid defensive 2B.

Granted, our SS outlook doesn't look that appealing with the two headed monster of John McDonald and Marco Scutaro. But you don't downgrade defensively at both middle infield positions just so that you can squeeze in a slap hitting utility guy into the starting lineup.

If you`re suggesting that Marco Scutaro has a better arm and range than Hill, then you`re the one kidding yourself. John McDonald is on another level defensively and no one even comes close.

[Mustard_Tiger]

Joe Inglett isn't going to be in the starting lineup, don't be ridiculous people. I suspect it will look just like last year's (at first, anyway), only with Hill replacing Inglett.

SS Scutaro
2B Hill
RF Rios
CF Wells
1B Overbay
3B Rolen
LF Lind
DH Snider
C Barajas