Sox hitting??

[Station 13]

I'd trade 50 less lead off/start clean PA for Betts if it means he sees 25 more PA with actual runners on.

[moonslav59]

I'd trade 50 less lead off/start clean PA for Betts if it means he sees 25 more PA with actual runners on.

I doubt it's that high a differential.

If our 1 and 2 hitters get on base at a .360 mark compared to our 8 and 9 hitters at a .260 mark, it might not come close to 25 over the rest of the season with more chances with men on base.

[OH FOY!]

Mr. Bellhorn still has it right. I'm not looking an entire season, but the extra at bat in 1 game, that might be the difference.

[cp176]

Mr. Bellhorn still has it right. I'm not looking an entire season, but the extra at bat in 1 game, that might be the difference.

This isn't really an arguement I hope. i respect the fact that people have something tangible that they can point to to emphasize their ideas and thoughts. Now that being said - It is also possible that Betts could get fewer at bats and drive in more runs. It can work both ways. If it makes someone happy that they have statistical data to support their idea, good fro them. i believe that you can find statistical data to support most things that you really feel strongly about.

[oldtimer]

Not at all thinking traditionally. Betts batting leadoff would be fine if we had lineups from past years that were strong 1 through 9, but that is not the case this year. If he bats 3rd, he will lose very few ABs, so we will still be maximizing his PAs. However, the guy's batting in front of him get on base at a very low rate so that diminishes his opportunities to do run producing damage. I think if you bat him behind Pedroia and XB his opportunities to produce runs will increase tremendously. It has nothing to do with traditional thinking, but probabilities and math.

Yes, Betts is guarnteed to be up with no one on base during his first AB when batting first. While our 8 and 9 hitters have gotten on base recently, it is usually the case that our lower OBP guys hit in those holes so Mookie will have a lesser chance of getting up with men on base when batting 1st than 3rd. That cannot be the best approach. The 1st and 2nd hitters in the lineup are usually guys that find ways to get on base at a higher rate than the 8 and 9 hitters.

My takeaway is I would rather have Mookie up with a higher chance of driving runs in, even if it costs a few plate appearances a month. No one would have suggested we put Papi up first last year because he was our best hitter and the same should apply to Mookie.

[Bellhorn04]

Yes, Betts is guarnteed to be up with no one on base during his first AB when batting first. While our 8 and 9 hitters have gotten on base recently, it is usually the case that our lower OBP guys hit in those holes so Mookie will have a lesser chance of getting up with men on base when batting 1st than 3rd. That cannot be the best approach. The 1st and 2nd hitters in the lineup are usually guys that find ways to get on base at a higher rate than the 8 and 9 hitters.

My takeaway is I would rather have Mookie up with a higher chance of driving runs in, even if it costs a few plate appearances a month. No one would have suggested we put Papi up first last year because he was our best hitter and the same should apply to Mookie.

There's a big difference between Mookie and Papi. Mookie has speed.

[S5Dewey]

These are good points as well. It's been said "as Betts go, we go"... and it's sorta' true. But with batting Betts lead-off we have to rely on our 7-8-9th hitters for Betts to do what he's capable of doing. The last week or so Lin and Marrero have been playing out of their minds good. I hope that continues, but I have my doubts it will for anything long term. What then?

That's an easy question. Then we change things up!

I often subscribe to the old philosophy of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

I just don't want to mess with this lineup as long as we're scoring runs. When we're not scoring runs anymore is the time to fix the problem. Until then it's not a problem.

[Kimmi]

No, not necessarily.

And I just want Betts out of the lead-off spot, so 2nd, 4th, or yes..3rd would be fine with me. It also depends on how good the batters are before him and you're ignoring that. You're taking it as gospel. I've read the same articles you have. I agree with some of it, not all of it. Additionally, I've had some of the same observations years and years before I even read them.

Is it a coincidence Lin's line of 9 games .348 OBP batting mostly 8th and 9th, Also batting either 8th or 9th is Marrero who in the last 7 games has a .483 OBP, both setting up Betts to do some damage? Those are numbers you can't argue with either. How long does this last though?

No, I'm not ignoring how good the batters before Betts are. That is all taken into account. The #1 and #2 guys are your highest OBP guys and 2 of your 3 best hitters, and that still leaves some of Betts' talent being 'wasted' in the 3 spot.

Anyway, it really doesn't make much of a difference.

[Kimmi]

I appreciate everything you are saying and the way that you are saying it. if this team is winning, I honestly don't care where JF has them hitting. As a player, i liked hitting first, second, and third. It was always explained to me why I was where I was. that helped.

Within certain limits, I really don't care where Farrell has them hitting either. He knows his players better than the rest of us. I trust his judgment, and we are winning.

[Kimmi]

But but but but ...according to Kimmi and those studies of randomness, this doesn't exist!!!!!!!!!!!! You can't have it both ways!

Goodness, I don't know where this came from all of a sudden.

[Kimmi]

Not at all thinking traditionally. Betts batting leadoff would be fine if we had lineups from past years that were strong 1 through 9, but that is not the case this year. If he bats 3rd, he will lose very few ABs, so we will still be maximizing his PAs. However, the guy's batting in front of him get on base at a very low rate so that diminishes his opportunities to do run producing damage. I think if you bat him behind Pedroia and XB his opportunities to produce runs will increase tremendously. It has nothing to do with traditional thinking, but probabilities and math.

No matter how good the #1 and #2 hitters are, the #3 guy still comes up the most often with 2 outs and no men on base. That is not the situation where you want your best hitter. I have said many times that I'd put Mookie 4th. But if the choice is between 1st or 3rd, I'm leaving him in the lead off spot.

You also have to keep in mind that it's not just about maximizing Mookie's production, but it's about maximizing the entire line up. Moving Mookie from 1st to 3rd has an effect on several other spots and hitters.

[Kimmi]

Its not the Stolen base, its the threat of one that screws up The Defense. Pitchers, focus too much on baserunner, Catchers cheat with more fastballs, Infielders cheat to open holes, then Outfielders have to field cleanly, and possibly hit the Cut-off man perfectly.
Lot to speed besides Stolen base.

This is another one of those notions that is largely untrue.

[Kimmi]

Except that the idea of a disruptive runner having a significant impact on pitching has been debunked.

I am confused.

Somebody has been paying attention!!!

[Kimmi]

Batting 3rd instead of 1st costs about 35 PA's over a season, and obviously those missed PA's come at the end of the game so that needs to be considered as well.

Every move has an almost equal counter effect.

[Kimmi]

I think that would be a disastrous mistake.

A guy like Benintendi who comes from the college ranks has a lot more reps under his belt at a semiprofessional level. He can abstract that into skills required to jump up a level of ball, after all he's already done so a few times.

High school guys like Middlebrooks and IFA's like Devers I really do feel you can't be nearly as aggressive with because they don't have that semiprofessional experience. Thre are fundamental things they don't know about being full time baseball players that they have to learn in the minors, unlike college draftees who learned a lot of that stuff on their baseball scholarships.

Rushing these high school kids and IFAs as if they'd had that college experience and already handled the transitions college players have to master to thrive in school, disrupts their schedule on learning skills that have nothing to do directly with the sport of baseball.

I guess what I'm saying is you put Devers in the slow cooker and let him marinate until he's done, you're going to wind up with a far better product then if you take the same ingredients and literally throw them in the fire. you can't manage primary franchise assets like Devers as if this year is the only one that matters. He's here to save the franchise in 2020, not this year.

FTR, I was against calling Vazquez back up so quickly after his injury, and I was against calling up Beni and Moncada so early last year. I am a big advocate of a team having patience, both with benching players that are not doing well and with calling up players who are doing well.

I hope that the FO does not go into 'panic mode'. As many have said, I'll have to trust their judgment in knowing whether Devers is ready or not.