Lind not keen on batting cleanup

[LittleOzzy]

Adam Lind's performance at the plate last year had manager Cito Gaston believing the budding slugger could have a future as the Blue Jays' cleanup hitter. Lind isn't so sure that he wants anything to do with that spot in the lineup.

"There's just something funky about that four-hole," Lind said with a nervous laugh recently.

Last year, Gaston made it no secret that he hoped to shift Lind into the fourth slot of the batting order for 2010. During December's Winter Meetings in Indianapolis, Gaston changed his tune. Gaston said he'd try Lind in the cleanup spot during Spring Training, but the young hitter might ultimately hit elsewhere come Opening Day.

The two obviously have talked.

"He's just never really hit well in the fourth spot," Gaston said. "If that's in his head, then it's not a good place to put him. We have to find somewhere else to put him."

Asked how long he's had issues as a cleanup hitter, Lind chuckled.

"Forever," he replied without hesitation.

http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/news/ar ... p&c_id=tor

[Hoopstarr]

That "something funky" is the fact that 4 hitters get less ABs. Your best hitter should bat 3rd, period. Whatever added pressure Lind is putting on himself is unnecessary because there isn't much a difference other than the ABs.

[Modern_epic]

That "something funky" is the fact that 4 hitters get less ABs. Your best hitter should bat 3rd, period. Whatever added pressure Lind is putting on himself is unnecessary because there isn't much a difference other than the ABs.

I've actually seen the pure ABs point of view statistically refuted in the past year. I can't remember where, sadly, but the study showed it makes most sense to hit your best hitter (by OPS) in either the 1 or the 4, depending on the balance of obp and slg, then your next best in the other of those, then 2, then ambivalence between 3 and 5. The standard 6, 7, 8, 9 follows after that.

From what I recall, they claimed the three is so unimportant because most of the time you are coming up in the exact same situation as the 2, but with one more out. I guess that is enough to make the 4 leapfrog it? I don't know why it was more important than the two, though. I'll look for it some other time and bump this.

[Hoopstarr]

I think I read that same blog. Here, I was just referring to the simple fact that 3 hitters are guaranteed an AB in the first inning. Otherwise, most people tend to overthink batting orders.

[youngLion]

I really have no sympathy for this mental block. He should hit wherever the roster dictates. He's virtually always going to be hitting 3 or 4, and if it's the four makes the most sense for the team, so be it.

[Hoopstarr]

Here's the blog I mentioned about optimizing lineups: http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/3 ... -lineup-by. I think it's the same one M_e is talking about since it mentions the same thing about 3 hitters.

While searching for that, I also found this study which ironically concludes that lineup tweaking ultimately has little effect: http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~mbodell/bat ... r2001.html. It uses the 2001 Jays lineup as an example.

[Modern_epic]

While searching for that, I also found this study which ironically concludes that lineup tweaking ultimately has little effect: http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~mbodell/bat ... r2001.html. It uses the 2001 Jays lineup as an example.

Yeah, thit one I knew. I haven't looked at the link, but as I recall the absolute worst lineup vs the best was like 4 wins. And no one comes close to putting out the worst lineups.

And ya, that blog is talking about the same study. It mentions it is from The Book, a book by three big names in the sabermetric community testing conventional baseball hypothesis, which makes sense, and makes me trust it more. And by the sounds of it, it is 2 or 4, and then 1, then 5, then 3. So Lind should really learn to suck it up... or not, because if he doesn't, his slump will probably make a way bigger difference than batting order.