"The stat thread" doesn't entirely seem like the right place for this. Or the wrong place. I don't know. So if any of our more powerful members want to move this thread to a better location...by all means.

Anyhow, stemming from the massive tangent in the hot stove "what moves are most important" thread...I present you with 9 imaginary players. You put them into the batting order that you think makes most sense.

Included is each player's OBP, extra base hit % (% of PAs with an XBH), and batting average with RISP. I've given them each names so that they seem more real.

Steve Balboni -- .427 / 10.9% / .338
Rusty Kuntz -- .398 / 11.5% / .331
Pussy Tebeau -- .396 / 11.3% / .302
Cum Posey -- .369 / 14.2% / .273
Chief Bender -- .351 / 10.9% / .302
Antonio Bastardo -- .348 / 9.1% / .304
Johnny Dickshot -- .345 / 7.3% / .267
BJ Surhoff -- .345 / 10.9% / .279
Mike Blowers -- .333 / 8.5% / .298

Give me your lineup, 1-9.

No OPS??? I need OPS to make a decision, man. :blink:

I would have Steve Balboni leading off, though. After that, need more data.

No. That would make it less fun.

I'm basing this game on the "OBP vs. RBI Man" model, rather than the OPS model.

I'll watch the fun from the sidelines, then. :toocool:

Aww.

If I get more votes for OPS, I'll add OPS. I'm kind of curious to see the results this way first, though.

OK, I'll play.

We don't know whether these guys run like the wind or molasses in January, so speed is eliminated from the decision making, eh?

This lineup is constructed on the premise that lineup order may not matter much over the long haul but it does matter once per game - and there's a lot to be said for first blood.

1. Cum Posey -- .369 / 14.2% / .273 - because he gets on base enough, might start the game 1-0, no outs, but at least he's likely to be in scoring position if he gets on base, and there are apparently others better at driving in runs.

2. Rusty Kuntz -- .398 / 11.5% / .331 - because if Posey doesn't get on, he will and he has as good a chance to be on second as anybody else. And if Posey is on base, we have another good chance at scoring first.

3. Steve Balboni -- .427 / 10.9% / .338 - because he likes RBI opps, doesn't make outs, and has some pop.

4. Pussy Tebeau -- .396 / 11.3% / .302 - if the opposing pitcher shuts down the first three the first time around, this guy will at least make him throw a few more pitches. And maybe he reaches second base.

6. Antonio Bastardo -- .348 / 9.1% / .304 - another RBI opp. if there's a runner on second or third.

5. Chief Bender -- .351 / 10.9% / .302 - another good chance to drive Tebeau in.

7. Johnny Dickshot -- .345 / 7.3% / .267 - can he run if he gets on? Before BJ sits down?

8. BJ Surhoff -- .345 / 10.9% / .279 - maybe he's on base for the top of the order.

9. Mike Blowers -- .333 / 8.5% / .298 - I hope he brought his glove.

Note: If Mr. Posey isn't a Ricky Henderson wannabe, this lineup may need revision. :rofl:

But I'm not putting his power in the key RBI spots unless he can use it when it counts.

Johnny Dickshot is probably the fastest guy on the team.

Cum Posey, not so much.

FYI.

Not a lot of team speed here in general.

So is BJ Surhoff really BJ Surhoff??? :huh:

All of the the names are real.

But none of them are the real names of the players associated with the stats here.

I also believe that lineups only matter once a game and agree that the psychological advantage of them (current psychology of baseball) makes first blood an advantage.

So:

Steve Balboni -- .427 / 10.9% / .338
Rusty Kuntz -- .398 / 11.5% / .331
Cum Posey -- .369 / 14.2% / .273
Pussy Tebeau -- .396 / 11.3% / .302
Chief Bender -- .351 / 10.9% / .302
Antonio Bastardo -- .348 / 9.1% / .304
Johnny Dickshot -- .345 / 7.3% / .267
BJ Surhoff -- .345 / 10.9% / .279
Mike Blowers -- .333 / 8.5% / .298

One change made, swapped Posey for Pussy. As all guys have done. :weg:

Schilling on the RBI thingie:

http://38pitches.weei.com/sports/boston/ba...rew-discussion/

"...First of all, I can tell you this. As someone who worships at the alter of statistics for baseball in preparation and approaching hitters, I can honestly tell you that not once in 19 years did I consider RBIs a relevant statistic in how I approached a hitter.

I think one of the more relevant statistics, and I think in the next five to six years it’s going to come into prominence, is RBIs per opportunities. There’s some guys that have driven in 110 runs and you can claim they had a horrific year, based on them driving in runs 35 percent of the time that they had runners in scoring position. You get guys in some offenses when literally half their at-bats in a season are with guys on second and third and less than two outs, and they should drive in 150 runs, and they end up driving in 102. And we say, ‘Oh, he had a good year – he drove in 102.’ But from an organizational standpoint, he failed far more than he succeeded.

They have statistical formulas to document everything, so that when Theo Epstein tells you he’s a tick above, I promise you, whether you like it or not or agree or not
..."

Literally half their at bats with runners on 2nd and 3rd and less than two outs? Has ANY hitter ever had that happen? :huh:

Not in 2009. Beltran led the majors with 12%

Which is basically the same thing Theo is quoted as saying in the Joe Posnanski article: if you're going to consider RBI at all, consider the rate, not the absolute number.

I did not discover that there was a baseball player named Johnny Dickshot just to get two lineups and one leadoff hitter.

Let's go, monsters. :duel:

Carrying Rominer's post over.

Try it it's fun!

It is fun ... and makes you think about what you value.

I've subjected myself to ridicule and I'm not even a wannabe GM. :confused: