Why is the first spot of the batting order so important?

[Zagi-CRO]

I'd like to know why is the first spot of the batting order so important?
Or, which spot of the batting order is more valuable then other?
Is the last spot less valuable and why?

thanks!!

[SamtheBravesFan]

The first batter of the order, at least in theory, should be able to get on base so that the two, three and four hitters can drive him in. Of course, the first batter doesn't always lead off an inning, but it is best to have a person who can get on base at the top of the order. Personally, I think the middle of the order is the most important, the 3-4-5-6 area, because they need to be the most reliable to keep the offense going.

The 7-8-9 area isn't necessarily unimportant, in the NL at least.

[sturg1dj]

i think the idea is that your 3-4 hitters are your best so you want people ahead of them to be able to get on base.

[Erik Bedard]

The #1 spot is important because the person in that spot will always come up to the plate the most times in each game (assuming they aren't substituted for). That's why you'd want a high-OBP guy with speed in that spot. The #9 spot will always come up to the plate the least, which is why in the NL, pitchers bat there. In the AL, the best use for the #9 spot (in my opinion) is a fast guy who doesn't get on base well. That way they don't do too much damage by making all their outs, but when they do get on base, you can rely on the #1 hitter to advance them by getting on base himself. Then you've got your high-slugging guys at 3-4-5 to knock them in.

[Jermz]

#1 spot is the table-setter, nuff said. I always liked Rickey Henderson hitting leadoff, even though he would have been a great 2, 3 or even 4 hitter on most clubs, his walks/steals were so valuable in the leadoff spot.

The ideal 1st inning is to load the bases for the #4 hitter, and he would hit a grand slam. So you gotta make your lineup that way. 1-3 should be guys that have the highest OBP, and 4-6 have the most power. 7-9 are the least valuable. That is all theoretically of course

[cardsfanatic]

Well, the fact they are going to get more plate appearances than anyone else on your team matters a lot. Do you really wish to give your lions share of PA's to a guy who constantly makes outs? I don't.

[Pere]

Do you really wish to give your lions share of PA's to a guy who constantly makes outs?

It's not a "lion's share." The #1 slot gets more PA's, but not vastly more.

Lion's share, all, or nearly all; the best or largest part;
-- from Aesop's fable of the lion hunting in company
with certain smaller beasts, and appropriating to himself
all the prey.

But, the number of PA's is still the most significant thing about position in the batting order. A lot of the other things that are said about specific "holes" in the order, are nonsense.

[Zagi-CRO]

#1 spot is the table-setter, nuff said. I always liked Rickey Henderson hitting leadoff, even though he would have been a great 2, 3 or even 4 hitter on most clubs, his walks/steals were so valuable in the leadoff spot.

The ideal 1st inning is to load the bases for the #4 hitter, and he would hit a grand slam. So you gotta make your lineup that way. 1-3 should be guys that have the highest OBP, and 4-6 have the most power. 7-9 are the least valuable. That is all theoretically of course

Super! The best way of explanation!

[digglahhh]

Super! The best way of explanation!

Not really.

Why is the ideal not for all four hitters to hit solo homers? Even, assuming the grand slam, what's the ideal following - presumably three more baserunners and another, right?...

The importance of the #1 slot is that it is the spot in the order that will get the most ABs over the course of the season. That's the totality of it, right there.

[Zagi-CRO]

The importance of the #1 slot is that it is the spot in the order that will get the most ABs over the course of the season. That's the totality of it, right there.

hmmm... Torii Hunter had 600 ABs, Chone Figgins only 442 ABs although Figgins is the first spot?

Ok, the Tigers 1st spot Granderson had 612 ABs /max/, then Sizemore had 628 ABs... J.Reyes had 681 ABs... yes, it's ok.

[SamtheBravesFan]

hmmm... Torii Hunter had 600 ABs, Chone Figgins only 442 ABs although Figgins is the first spot?

Ok, the Tigers 1st spot Granderson had 612 ABs /max/, then Sizemore had 628 ABs... J.Reyes had 681 ABs... yes, it's ok.

Figgins was out for a little more than a month with two broken fingers. He played in 115, which would explain why he only got 503 plate apperances.

[digglahhh]

Figgins was out for a little more than a month with two broken fingers. He played in 115, which would explain why he only got 503 plate apperances.

Not to mention the fact that they weren't on the same team!

[DodgerBlue8188]

It's always good to start off a game with a base hit or a walk which a lead off hitters should be able to do at least 40% of the time. Probably more than that for a good lead off hitter.

[Erik Bedard]

Which is why a guy like Juan Pierre should never, under any circumstances, bat leadoff. Unless the rest of the team is eight Johnny Estradas.

[Zagi-CRO]

Not to mention the fact that they weren't on the same team!

oh my God! it was my fault... Hunter joined the Angels AFTER...ok
But Vlad had 574 ABs.

[Erik Bedard]

Again, Figgins was injured. That explains it.

However, a flaw in your calculations is that you're using AB. The #1 spot is not guaranteed the most ABs, only the most PA, since walks are not counted in AB.

[SamtheBravesFan]

Again, Figgins was injured. That explains it.

However, a flaw in your calculations is that you're using AB. The #1 spot is not guaranteed the most ABs, only the most PA, since walks are not counted in AB.

Yep.

Guerrero had 660 plate appearances, which is pretty much a full season.

[Jermz]

Not really.

Why is the ideal not for all four hitters to hit solo homers?

First of all, that would be fine too, but it would still really amount in 4 runs (same as a grand slam), so it's a moot point.

Second, there is a lot better chance at loading the bases and hitting one big shot, than there is of hitting back-to-back-to-back-to-back homers. Tigers aside, how many teams have enough power hitters to stack at the top of your lineup and bat them 1-4? It seems that would be a waste of their power. If I had 4 guys capable of 30-40 HR's on my team, they would bat 4-6. I would use the 1-3 guys to get on base for the big boys.

The importance of the #1 slot is that it is the spot in the order that will get the most ABs over the course of the season. That's the totality of it, right there.

I don't believe that is right. The reason you want Curtis Granderson or Jose Reyes to get a lot of at-bats, is because they have the best chance of getting on base, keeping the inning alive, and getting into scoring position for the Big Boys. The REAL guy you want to get the MOST AT-BAT's is the HOMER guy. But you want him to get the at-bats with men on base.

I would want Prince Fielder or Ryan Howard to have the most at-bat's, because they have a better chance of giving my team a single run with one swat of the bat. However, I wouldn't bat them leadoff, because there are "table-setters" that you want on base for them, so the solo homer becomes a 3-run homer or even a grand slam.

[Go Cardinals]

first hitter needs to get the pitcher to throw all / a lot of his pitches, so the rest of the hitters can take a good look. Especially the #3 hitter who will be facing the pitcher in the first inning.

[sturg1dj]

its really kind of important for only one inning.

think of it in terms of the Tigers

Granderson gets on steals second Polanco moves him to third and Sheffield hits a sac fly.


in terms of the 1990 A's

Henderson walks....steals second....Lansford gets him to 3rd and Canseco hits a sac fly


I don't think its done with the best case scenario in mind of 4 runs...instead I think its done for the cheap 1st run to get on the board first.

so leadoff someone fast you gets on base

second hitter is someone good with the bat, who can lay one down

third is your best hitter, preferably someone who doesn't strikeout too often

__________________________________

someone like Juan Pierre could be a decent leadoff hitter if he was good at bunting because (and I have no facts for this) it would seem easier to bunt for a hit as a leadoff hitter (less ready)

on the other hand...I would bat him #2


here is a scary thought though

someone like Juan Pierre will probably break Rose's hit record. Someone who doesn't walk and gets 200 hits a year but is around a .295 hitter

[Mattingly]

I think that a good leadoff batter sets the tone for the team's offense. I don't care if your staff is filled with punch and Judy guys or heavy timbered sluggers, you have to see pitches. This is especially important for a pitcher that's unfamiliar to the team.

If in the first inning, the leadoff guy can get players to foul off many pitches, force the pitcher to throw pitches he was saving for later on as a "surprise", then batters will get a better look at those pitches, including his pitch speed, arm angles and positioning of the hand in the glove.

To me, the finest thing a leadoff hitter can do is not just get on base (which can simply be luck), but to pull off a hitting clinic and frustrate the pitcher a little bit. If he works out a walk or a single, that's all the better. If he can add some "gravy" in there and get the pitcher off his balance by faking moves to 2B, that would be all the better!

[stejay]

First off, the first batsmen can test out the pitcher, and wear him out very early. Also, he can get the ball running when it comes to runs.

[cardsfanatic]

It's not a "lion's share." The #1 slot gets more PA's, but not vastly more.



But, the number of PA's is still the most significant thing about position in the batting order. A lot of the other things that are said about specific "holes" in the order, are nonsense.

Always someone wanting to argue semantics no matter where you go; even baseball forums. Look, even with that definition you provided my usage was still correct. "best or largest part". I know a few things to be true in baseball every single year. I'm going to play 162 games with 27 outs. With tiebreakers and extra-inning games, that number can increase but I can't bank on that. I know before the year begins how many outs I'm alloted. Why on earth would I give the most at-bats to anyone other than one of my three best hitters since they are going to either A) accumulate the most outs for me or B) increase my at-bats and delaying my accumlation of outs. A good hitter accomplishes B, a bad hitter accomplishes A. Wonder which guy I want in the 1-hole, eh?

[digglahhh]

First of all, that would be fine too, but it would still really amount in 4 runs (same as a grand slam), so it's a moot point.

Second, there is a lot better chance at loading the bases and hitting one big shot, than there is of hitting back-to-back-to-back-to-back homers. Tigers aside, how many teams have enough power hitters to stack at the top of your lineup and bat them 1-4? It seems that would be a waste of their power. If I had 4 guys capable of 30-40 HR's on my team, they would bat 4-6. I would use the 1-3 guys to get on base for the big boys.



I don't believe that is right. The reason you want Curtis Granderson or Jose Reyes to get a lot of at-bats, is because they have the best chance of getting on base, keeping the inning alive, and getting into scoring position for the Big Boys. The REAL guy you want to get the MOST AT-BAT's is the HOMER guy. But you want him to get the at-bats with men on base.

I would want Prince Fielder or Ryan Howard to have the most at-bat's, because they have a better chance of giving my team a single run with one swat of the bat. However, I wouldn't bat them leadoff, because there are "table-setters" that you want on base for them, so the solo homer becomes a 3-run homer or even a grand slam.

The four homer thing was facetious.

But, I will concede slightly. There is a bit of a balancing act. Still, the most important skill for a lead off hitter is getting base. You want to make sure that the guy getting the most ABs is efficient at not making outs. Other things play into it too, but that is the single most important characteristic of a quality lead off hitter.

[Zagi-CRO]

I think that a good leadoff batter sets the tone for the team's offense. I don't care if your staff is filled with punch and Judy guys or heavy timbered sluggers, you have to see pitches. This is especially important for a pitcher that's unfamiliar to the team.

If in the first inning, the leadoff guy can get players to foul off many pitches, force the pitcher to throw pitches he was saving for later on as a "surprise", then batters will get a better look at those pitches, including his pitch speed, arm angles and positioning of the hand in the glove.

To me, the finest thing a leadoff hitter can do is not just get on base (which can simply be luck), but to pull off a hitting clinic and frustrate the pitcher a little bit. If he works out a walk or a single, that's all the better. If he can add some "gravy" in there and get the pitcher off his balance by faking moves to 2B, that would be all the better!

And who could be the most decent leadoff hitter in the AL and the NL??