I agree with that, but also it's not just as simple as changing a number.  For example, if you're batting 7th it's pretty likely the guys on base when you're up aren't trying to steal bases which might be distracting e.g. throws over to first.  And if you bat 2nd you might be pitched differently e.g. more fastballs if the leadoff guy is trying to steal.  In the NL or interleague games if you're batting 8th there's a black hole up next which adds a bit of pressure if there's 2 out and men on.  And so on.  These guys aren't robots, and, further, a lot are creatures of habit and some even superstitious.  A big part of a manager's job is to get them comfortable so they can perform their best. 

And yes, I am talking some radical split differentials with some of these guys like Salty, Victorino, Gomes, Nava and to some extent Papi, Naps, Drew and Midd (small sample size noted).

Salty, Gomes, and Nava are straight platoon situations, or should be.  The difference between flipping Papi and Napoli is de minimus.  And there really isn't a compelling reason to move Victorino up to 2nd, since he would be hitting ahead of players with better OPS' against lefties, and Drew should always be 8th or 9th with this lineup.

i like moon's approach for putting a lineup together numbers 1-9 but i would not jump players around simply based on splits...i think players do need a comfort zone and if they are a #2 hitter, then their job is to make contact...3 is to drive in runs and so on - these are the roles for the most part and they need to be clear....variations of this are Ok but same the big moves for pinch hitters...and that means keeping a starter on his day off to bat when needed...

I agree with that, but also it's not just as simple as changing a number.  For example, if you're batting 7th it's pretty likely the guys on base when you're up aren't trying to steal bases which might be distracting e.g. throws over to first.  And if you bat 2nd you might be pitched differently e.g. more fastballs if the leadoff guy is trying to steal.  In the NL or interleague games if you're batting 8th there's a black hole up next which adds a bit of pressure if there's 2 out and men on.  And so on.  These guys aren't robots, and, further, a lot are creatures of habit and some even superstitious.  A big part of a manager's job is to get them comfortable so they can perform their best. 

Well said Sonics.  Also, when you change spots in the line up, you may strengthen one spot, but in doing so it weakens another.  They talk about the line up being a continuous loop.  After the first inning, the lead off guy usually isn't the lead off guy anymore.  Any benefit that you might get from moving a guy with good splits up to the #2 hole becomes negligible due to other counter effects.

In response to moonslav59's comment:

I agree with that, but also it's not just as simple as changing a number.  For example, if you're batting 7th it's pretty likely the guys on base when you're up aren't trying to steal bases which might be distracting e.g. throws over to first.  And if you bat 2nd you might be pitched differently e.g. more fastballs if the leadoff guy is trying to steal.  In the NL or interleague games if you're batting 8th there's a black hole up next which adds a bit of pressure if there's 2 out and men on.  And so on.  These guys aren't robots, and, further, a lot are creatures of habit and some even superstitious.  A big part of a manager's job is to get them comfortable so they can perform their best. 

Well said Sonics.  Also, when you change spots in the line up, you may strengthen one spot, but in doing so it weakens another.  They talk about the line up being a continuous loop.  After the first inning, the lead off guy usually isn't the lead off guy anymore.  Any benefit that you might get from moving a guy with good splits up to the #2 hole becomes negligible due to other counter effects.

While the leadoff hitter may not lead off an inning after the 1st, you still want your OBP guys up right in front of your big sluggers throughout the rest of the game.

Let's take the example of moving Victorino up from 9th to 2nd vs LHPs and Pedey from 2nd to 4th, Naps from 4th to 5th and everyone else pretty much the same, except for the platoon positions of C and LF.

You might weaken the 9 slot, but improve the 2 slot immensely while giving SV many more PAs as the differential between the 2 and 9 slot vs LH'd starters might be 30-45 more PAs over a season. Very significant

vs RHPs   OBP '11-12  SLG11-12  Career OPS

1) L Ellsbury  .365/       .521/     .803

2) R Pedey     .345/       .443/     .821

3) L Ortiz       .405/       .572/    .972

4) R Napoli    .387/       .569/    .845

5) S Nava      .390/       .414/    .768

6) R Midd       .312/      .486/     .798

7) S Salty      .301/       .481/      .774

8) L Drew       .328/      .386/      .784

9) R Victorino  .319/    .410/      .730

Notes:

1) As you can see, we are much worse vs RHPs than LHPs. Any line-up adjustment that helps can make a big difference in these games.

2) One could argue moving Nava to the 1 or 2 slot if he can keep up his .390 OBP-- 2nd best on the team over the last 2 years!

3) This line-up is a perfect L-R-L set up with the switch hitters helping.

vs LHPs

1) L Ellsbury  .338/       .436/      .762

2) R Victorino .410/      .587/      .881

3) L Ortiz       .404/       .584/      .824

4) R Pedroia  .424/       .510/      .853

5) R Napoli    .316/       .563/      .911

6) L Gomes   .411/        .530/      .894

7) R Midd      .350/        .556/      .906

8) R D Ross   .320/        .362/     .784

9) L Drew      .278/       .335/      .699

Notes:

1) Wow! The 2-7 hitters have all had SLG%s higher than .500 over the last 2 years! We should kill lefties this year.

2) One could argue that leaving Pedey 2nd and putting Victorino 4th or 5th vs LHPs makes more sense, but I like his speed more than Pedey's.

3) The 2 year numbers argue to move Ellsbury down and Gomes up, but Ellsbury has been pretty good vs LHPs upo to 2011.

4) My guess is Naps' OBP vs LHPs the last 2 years is a fluke. 

5) No 2 lefties in a row, so LOOGY Go Home!

I could go with this vs LHPs after watching 2013 trends:

1) L Gomes

2) R Pedey

3) L Papi

4) R Napoli

5) S Victorino

6) R Midd

7) L Ells

8) R Ross

9) L Drew/Ciriaco

(Again, a perfect L-R set up without even trying to do it.)

In response to southpaw777's comment:

In response to moonslav59's comment:

I agree with that, but also it's not just as simple as changing a number.  For example, if you're batting 7th it's pretty likely the guys on base when you're up aren't trying to steal bases which might be distracting e.g. throws over to first.  And if you bat 2nd you might be pitched differently e.g. more fastballs if the leadoff guy is trying to steal.  In the NL or interleague games if you're batting 8th there's a black hole up next which adds a bit of pressure if there's 2 out and men on.  And so on.  These guys aren't robots, and, further, a lot are creatures of habit and some even superstitious.  A big part of a manager's job is to get them comfortable so they can perform their best. 

Well said Sonics.  Also, when you change spots in the line up, you may strengthen one spot, but in doing so it weakens another.  They talk about the line up being a continuous loop.  After the first inning, the lead off guy usually isn't the lead off guy anymore.  Any benefit that you might get from moving a guy with good splits up to the #2 hole becomes negligible due to other counter effects.

While the leadoff hitter may not lead off an inning after the 1st, you still want your OBP guys up right in front of your big sluggers throughout the rest of the game.

Let's take the example of moving Victorino up from 9th to 2nd vs LHPs and Pedey from 2nd to 4th, Naps from 4th to 5th and everyone else pretty much the same, except for the platoon positions of C and LF.

You might weaken the 9 slot, but improve the 2 slot immensely while giving SV many more PAs as the differential between the 2 and 9 slot vs LH'd starters might be 30-45 more PAs over a season. Very significant

vs RHPs   OBP '11-12  SLG11-12  Career OPS

1) L Ellsbury  .365/       .521/     .803

2) R Pedey     .345/       .443/     .821

3) L Ortiz       .405/       .572/    .972

4) R Napoli    .387/       .569/    .845

5) S Nava      .390/       .414/    .768

6) R Midd       .312/      .486/     .798

7) S Salty      .301/       .481/      .774

8) L Drew       .328/      .386/      .784

9) R Victorino  .319/    .410/      .730

Notes:

1) As you can see, we are much worse vs RHPs than LHPs. Any line-up adjustment that helps can make a big difference in these games.

2) One could argue moving Nava to the 1 or 2 slot if he can keep up his .390 OBP-- 2nd best on the team over the last 2 years!

3) This line-up is a perfect L-R-L set up with the switch hitters helping.

vs LHPs

1) L Ellsbury  .338/       .436/      .762

2) R Victorino .410/      .587/      .881

3) L Ortiz       .404/       .584/      .824

4) R Pedroia  .424/       .510/      .853

5) R Napoli    .316/       .563/      .911

6) L Gomes   .411/        .530/      .894

7) R Midd      .350/        .556/      .906

8) R D Ross   .320/        .362/     .784

9) L Drew      .278/       .335/      .699

Notes:

1) Wow! The 2-7 hitters have all had SLG%s higher than .500 over the last 2 years! We should kill lefties this year.

2) One could argue that leaving Pedey 2nd and putting Victorino 4th or 5th vs LHPs makes more sense, but I like his speed more than Pedey's.

3) The 2 year numbers argue to move Ellsbury down and Gomes up, but Ellsbury has been pretty good vs LHPs upo to 2011.

4) My guess is Naps' OBP vs LHPs the last 2 years is a fluke. 

5) No 2 lefties in a row, so LOOGY Go Home!

I could go with this vs LHPs after watching 2013 trends:

1) L Gomes

2) R Pedey

3) L Papi

4) R Napoli

5) S Victorino

6) R Midd

7) L Ells

8) R Ross

9) L Drew/Ciriaco

(Again, a perfect L-R set up without even trying to do it.)

That one line I underlined says it all. Set your high OBP guys up in front of the big boppers. No matter who leads the inning off, they will be in ther proper spot in the lineup.

I think having a good OBP or contact guy in the lower half of the lineup is important as well to turn the lineup over. Drew would be good against RHP and SV against LHP (the 2 hole would also be a good spot as well but I think Pedey should stay put no matter who pitches). Both have some speed and wouldnt clog up the basepaths in front of Ells and Pedey like Gomes or salty would...

While the leadoff hitter may not lead off an inning after the 1st, you still want your OBP guys up right in front of your big sluggers throughout the rest of the game.

Let's take the example of moving Victorino up from 9th to 2nd vs LHPs and Pedey from 2nd to 4th, Naps from 4th to 5th and everyone else pretty much the same, except for the platoon positions of C and LF.

You might weaken the 9 slot, but improve the 2 slot immensely while giving SV many more PAs as the differential between the 2 and 9 slot vs LH'd starters might be 30-45 more PAs over a season. Very significant.

All of the arguments you are making have validity.  They all make sense to me intuitively.  About 4-5 years ago, I would have been (and was) in complete agreement with you. 

However, the research that has been done on the importance of batting order just does not support the claim that changing the batting order will have a significant impact over the course of a season.

One study (on the Retrosheet site) found that the difference between the worst lineup and the best lineup in the NL amounted to 28.5 runs, or about 3 games over a season.  In the AL, without a weak hitting pitcher batting, the difference was even less, 17.5 runs, less than 2 games a season.  The reality is, no manager uses either the worst or the best lineup in any game, so the difference in runs over a season is even less than that.

As I've mentioned before, the benefit of moving a #9 hitter to the #2 spot is offset by weakening other spots in the lineup.  Another poster referred to this as the concept of "opportunity cost", an economics term.  Just about any move a manager makes to gain some advantage also has some downside to it that at least partially offsets the gain.

A good example of opportunity cost that was cited is when an NL manager intentionally walks the #8 hitter with 2 outs to get to the pitcher.  The gain is that the team likely gets out of the inning with no runs scored.  The cost is that the team doesn't get to face the pitcher as the leadoff batter the next inning, and it turns the lineup over.  How many runs may have scored in subsequent innings because of the intentional walk?

The gain is usually obvious.  The cost is often more subtle.  So, while one move may be better than another, the overall gain usually turns out to be smaller than people expect.

While the leadoff hitter may not lead off an inning after the 1st, you still want your OBP guys up right in front of your big sluggers throughout the rest of the game.

Let's take the example of moving Victorino up from 9th to 2nd vs LHPs and Pedey from 2nd to 4th, Naps from 4th to 5th and everyone else pretty much the same, except for the platoon positions of C and LF.

You might weaken the 9 slot, but improve the 2 slot immensely while giving SV many more PAs as the differential between the 2 and 9 slot vs LH'd starters might be 30-45 more PAs over a season. Very significant.

All of the arguments you are making have validity.  They all make sense to me intuitively.  About 4-5 years ago, I would have been (and was) in complete agreement with you. 

However, the research that has been done on the importance of batting order just does not support the claim that changing the batting order will have a significant impact over the course of a season.

One study (on the Retrosheet site) found that the difference between the worst lineup and the best lineup in the NL amounted to 28.5 runs, or about 3 games over a season.  In the AL, without a weak hitting pitcher batting, the difference was even less, 17.5 runs, less than 2 games a season.  The reality is, no manager uses either the worst or the best lineup in any game, so the difference in runs over a season is even less than that.

As I've mentioned before, the benefit of moving a #9 hitter to the #2 spot is offset by weakening other spots in the lineup.  Another poster referred to this as the concept of "opportunity cost", an economics term.  Just about any move a manager makes to gain some advantage also has some downside to it that at least partially offsets the gain.

A good example of opportunity cost that was cited is when an NL manager intentionally walks the #8 hitter with 2 outs to get to the pitcher.  The gain is that the team likely gets out of the inning with no runs scored.  The cost is that the team doesn't get to face the pitcher as the leadoff batter the next inning, and it turns the lineup over.  How many runs may have scored in subsequent innings because of the intentional walk?

The gain is usually obvious.  The cost is often more subtle.  So, while one move may be better than another, the overall gain usually turns out to be smaller than people expect.

 the research that has been done on the importance of batting order just does not support the claim that changing the batting order will have a significant impact over the course of a season.

1) I'm not sure the study you cited is rock-solid gospel truth.

There are numerous studies on the subject. Probably the most notable studies are the one conducted by the guys at Baseball Prospectus, published in Baseball Between the Numbers, and the one conducted by Tango et al, published in The Book. The findings are the same - batting order does not make much of a difference.

I've already posted a link summarizing the findings published in The Book.

Here are a couple of quotes from the guys at BP:

"Managers tinkering with lineups so rarely shun convention that most of their changes would affect their teams' output by only a few runs over the course of a season. "

"So was Billy Martin crazy? Not, at least, with regard to his batting order. He understood that who is in the lineup is much more important than where they bat. Were it not that the conventional wisdom has become self-fulfilling prophecy—batting order is important because everybody thinks it's important—Martin could have pulled his lineups out of a hat all year long and hardly lost a game in the standings."

2) 2 games can make a difference, so why not try and make a difference rather than have a lottery every game, or follow the old paradigm that all player have comfort slots, when the evidence in Pedey's case (the biggest flipped player in my line-ups) shows otherwise.

Yes, two games can absolutely make a difference. However, 2 games is the difference between the best and worst line ups. The difference in the types of moves you're talking about will likely be less than 5 runs a year.

That said, your point about trying to win every game is valid.

3) Put the OBP guys upearly. Keeping .900+ hitters way down in the line-up, so .700 hitters can stay comfy is not winning baseball.

Yes, as a general rule you want to put the OBP guys at the top of your lineup. I'm not arguing that point. But again, the effect of doing so is offset by other other factors, to the extent that we are realistically talking about 3 runs difference over a season.

Maybe for someone like Pedroia, it doesn't matter where he bats. I tend to think that many ballplayers are superstitious and are creatures of habit who prefer consitency.

Unless a manager is willing to go all out against conventional wisdom in creating a lineup, I'm not sure that the line up changes (based on splits) are worth any disruption they might cause.

I agree with flipping a couple spots in the lineup to take advantage of the huge splits, but i think having stability is also good.

I think 1-4 could remain the same all year and be very productive.

So, you think this is too "unstable"?

vs RHPs   OBP '11-12  SLG11-12  Career OPS

1) L Ellsbury  .365/       .521/     .803

2) R Pedey     .345/       .443/     .821

3) L Ortiz       .405/       .572/    .972

4) R Napoli    .387/       .569/    .845

5) S Nava      .390/       .414/    .768

6) R Midd       .312/      .486/     .798

7) S Salty      .301/       .481/      .774

8) L Drew       .328/      .386/      .784

9) R Victorino  .319/    .410/      .730

vs LHPs

1) L Ellsbury  .338/       .436/      .762

2) R Victorino .410/      .587/      .881

3) L Ortiz       .404/       .584/      .824

4) R Pedroia  .424/       .510/      .853

5) R Napoli    .316/       .563/      .911

6) L Gomes   .411/        .530/      .894

7) R Midd      .350/        .556/      .906

8) R D Ross   .320/        .362/     .784

9) L Drew      .278/       .335/      .699

In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

1) I'm not sure the study you cited is rock-solid gospel truth.

There are numerous studies on the subject. Probably the most notable studies are the one conducted by the guys at Baseball Prospectus, published in Baseball Between the Numbers, and the one conducted by Tango et al, published in The Book. The findings are the same - batting order does not make much of a difference.

I've already posted a link summarizing the findings published in The Book.

Here are a couple of quotes from the guys at BP:

"Managers tinkering with lineups so rarely shun convention that most of their changes would affect their teams' output by only a few runs over the course of a season. "

"So was Billy Martin crazy? Not, at least, with regard to his batting order. He understood that who is in the lineup is much more important than where they bat. Were it not that the conventional wisdom has become self-fulfilling prophecy—batting order is important because everybody thinks it's important—Martin could have pulled his lineups out of a hat all year long and hardly lost a game in the standings."

2) 2 games can make a difference, so why not try and make a difference rather than have a lottery every game, or follow the old paradigm that all player have comfort slots, when the evidence in Pedey's case (the biggest flipped player in my line-ups) shows otherwise.

Yes, two games can absolutely make a difference. However, 2 games is the difference between the best and worst line ups. The difference in the types of moves you're talking about will likely be less than 5 runs a year.

That said, your point about trying to win every game is valid.

3) Put the OBP guys upearly. Keeping .900+ hitters way down in the line-up, so .700 hitters can stay comfy is not winning baseball.

Yes, as a general rule you want to put the OBP guys at the top of your lineup. I'm not arguing that point. But again, the effect of doing so is offset by other other factors, to the extent that we are realistically talking about 3 runs difference over a season.

Maybe for someone like Pedroia, it doesn't matter where he bats. I tend to think that many ballplayers are superstitious and are creatures of habit who prefer consitency.

Unless a manager is willing to go all out against conventional wisdom in creating a lineup, I'm not sure that the line up changes (based on splits) are worth any disruption they might cause.

Sorry, but I don't buy it. I think keeping a .900+ OPS guy up 6th or 7th just to keep harmony and stability is borderline insanity.

I was also one of the few who claimed that not only should CC not bat 1st, 2nd or 3rd vs LHPs in 2011, but he should have been benched vs most of them. (Maybe Billy Martin would have done just that.)

Line-ups do matter. I'm sure there are studies that show they make a bigger difference than the ones you cite. I also remember a few years back where softy and I posted our daily line-ups before gametime, and it seemed like the guys we had in different slots did better overall in that game-- I know- unscientific and speculative since situational hitting is not really comparable, but still...

Mayeb arguing so much over this, if it does only amount to 5-10 runs over a year is going overboard, but I can't help but think that a much higher OBP and 35-40 more PAs over a full season by a different guy up before Papi and Napoli will make more than a 5 un difference.

Perhaps you should cite one or two of those studies....

First of all, any study is highy conjecture in nature. It's easy for a computer to flip slot 7 with slot 2 and see what the likely run differential might be, but in real life there is a lot of situational hitting and other factors that come into play. 

Let's take the biggest extreme example: both Victorino and Gomes have an over 70 point margin in OBP over Ellsbury. That's like getting on base one more time every 14 PAs, so roughly every 3 games if we are not a big scoring team. Say we face a LH'd starter 66 games this year, we're talking about maybe 22 more times a guy gets on base, doesn't make an out, and keeps the inning going for at least one more 3-6 slot hitter. It also gives that player  afew more PAs over the season vs the handed pitcher he is better at, and the other guy less PAs ve the handed pitcher he is not as good against. 

I'd guess the minimum amount of differential it might be is about 5 runs, but maybe Ellsbury's speed makes up some of that 9although he runs into a lot of outs as well- more than his fair share).

We lost in 2011 by one game. It can make a difference even if the studies cited by limmi are true.