Article: Who's Up First?

[Nick Nelson]

Studies in recent years have shown that lineup construction has less of a practical impact on overall scoring than many had previously believed. Still, it's hard to downplay the significance of the choice for that first spot in the batting order.

 

Though he only leads off once per game, the No.1 hitter sets the tone for the offense, bats in front of the team's best run producers, and stands to receive more plate appearances than any other player.

 

Who will step into the batter's box to start the season in Detroit on April 6th? As I see it, there are three primary candidates. Paul Molitor's choice among this trio might provide us with some deeper insights on his priorities and philosophies.Candidate 1: Danny Santana

 

Santana jumped from the bottom of the lineup to the top one month after being called up last year, and never looked back. He consistently led off for the Twins over the final four months and did a terrific job, batting over .300 with tons of steals and surprising power. When he's performing like he did in his rookie season, he's almost an ideal leadoff man.

 

However, most are not expecting him to replicate that performance. Santana's .319 batting average was propped up by a .405 BABIP, and when his average returns to a more standard level (he's a .275 career hitter in the minors) his lack of patience will leave him with a mediocre on-base percentage.

 

He still offers some intriguing perks as a leadoff choice -- most notably his outstanding speed on the base paths -- but I believe Santana will create too many outs to be a good option at the top of the lineup.

 

Candidate 2: Brian Dozier

 

He was the team's leadoff man on Opening Day last year, and held that post for much of the first half before sliding down to the No. 2 spot after Santana's emergence.

 

Dozier has some qualities that make him a very good fit at the top. He's a good base runner: last season he stole 21 bases and was thrown out only seven times. Between the steals and the extra-base power, he frequently puts himself in scoring position. And his propensity for taking walks -- he ranked third in the AL with 89 -- enables him to maintain a strong OBP without depending on his batting average to drive it. (Last year his average was 75 points lower than Santana's and his OBP was eight points lower.)

 

Dozier was hitting home runs at a crazy pace in the first half last year, and the decision to move him down in the lineup was born partially out of a desire to give him the chance to knock in more runners with the long ball, but I would expect fewer home runs and a higher average from him this year.

 

Candidate 3: Joe Mauer

 

This is an idea that fans have long thrown around, but Ron Gardenhire never gave it a try. In his 1,298 career games, Mauer has never been written into the lineup as leadoff hitter. That's not surprising; he is an unconventional choice and Gardy was very much a conventional mind. But now there's a new manager in charge -- one with a reputation for seeing things in a different way.

 

Mauer lacks the pure speed that you'll find in most No. 1 hitters, but he's a good bet to lead the team -- if not the league -- in on-base percentage. He'll always give the rest of the lineup a good long look at the opposing pitcher with lengthy at-bats. And assuming he rebounds from last year's struggles, he's likely to be one of the best hitters on the team and a guy whose plate appearances you want to maximize.

 

What do you think? Do you prefer one of these three as leadoff hitter, or is there another sleeper candidate you'd like to see in the spot?

 

Click here to view the article

[Brock Beauchamp]

I lean toward Dozier. I think he'll continue to be a .730-.750 OPS second basemen but have a nagging feeling that many of those homers will turn into doubles this season. You don't want a leadoff guy jacking a bunch of solo shots but doubles are a good way to set the table. Plus, he can take a walk and his lack of BA won't hurt as much if there's nobody on base in front of him (ie. missed opportunities to advance runners on base).

[Mike Sixel]

Santana

Mauer

Dozier

Hunter (i anticipate a higher OBP for him than the remaining players)

Arcia

Vargas

who cares after that?

[Shane Wahl]

Santana

Mauer

Dozier

Hunter (i anticipate a higher OBP for him than the remaining players)

Arcia

Vargas

who cares after that?

 

I probably flip Dozier and Arcia against righties, but yeah.

[Dantes929]

Santana

Mauer

Dozier

Hunter (i anticipate a higher OBP for him than the remaining players)

Arcia

Vargas

who cares after that?

Two encouraging things about that comment.   First is that 6 guys that you DO care about is probably an increase over the prior three years.   2nd is that one of the names you omitted led the team in RBI last year by a pretty healthy margin and only trailed Hunter by 3.   A lineup that has Plouffe in the bottom of the order is probably a threat to score some runs. 

[Mike Sixel]

In retrospect, I somehow forgot Plouffe. Plouffe should probably be 6th or 5th or maybe 4th. 

[Mike Sixel]

Two encouraging things about that comment.   First is that 6 guys that you DO care about is probably an increase over the prior three years.   2nd is that one of the names you omitted led the team in RBI last year by a pretty healthy margin and only trailed Hunter by 3.   A lineup that has Plouffe in the bottom of the order is probably a threat to score some runs. 

 

Ha, nice cross post!

[Dantes929]

I have always considered Mauer to be a nearly ideal #2 guy even in his MVP year.   I would be ok with him at leadoff if the situation merited but the spot should be Santana's to lose..   Hopefully it is just place holding until Buxton arrives.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Hopefully it is just place holding until Buxton arrives.

Given Buxton's toolset, I'm hoping he forces his way into the 2 or 3 spot, not leadoff.

[Willihammer]

I'd lean Dozier over Mauer but only barely. As Mauer hit last  year he had only a ~.020 point advantage in OBP, I imagine Dozier's superior baserunning skill makes up for that. If Mauer gets back to a ~.400 OBP I would flip em.

[lightfoot789]

Not sure what people want?

 

Aaron Hicks held a .341 OBP for the Twins last year while displaying a horrible BA.  That said:   If we want a guy who gets on base as much as anyone in the lineup and has the speed to steal bases - Why not Hicks?   Ask yourself how many guys had a higher OBP last year?   Of those guys - Who has more leadoff qualities once they reach base?

 

The popular answer is that his BA is not sexy enough to justify putting him in the leadoff spot.  However, If he hit ..290  with a .315 OBP people would be extremely excited.    I understand that some of those hits might be doubles, but that is not the role of a leadoff guy.   His job is to get on base.  SO WHY NOT AARON HICKS?

[Brock Beauchamp]

Not sure what people want?

 

Aaron Hicks held a .341 OBP for the Twins last year while displaying a horrible BA.  That said:   If we want a guy who gets on base as much as anyone in the lineup and has the speed to steal bases - Why not Hicks?   Ask yourself how many guys had a higher OBP last year?   Of those guys - Who has more leadoff qualities once they reach base?

 

The popular answer is that his BA is not sexy enough to justify putting him in the leadoff spot.  However, If he hit ..290  with a .315 OBP people would be extremely excited.  I understand that some of those hits might be doubles, but that is not the role of a leadoff guy.  His job is to get on base.  SO WHY NOT AARON HICKS?

I agree that if Hicks can maintain a .341 OBP, that's a good leadoff guy.

 

I'm more than a little skeptical Hicks can maintain a .341 OBP in regular appearances.

[Boom Boom]

I lean toward Dozier. I think he'll continue to be a .730-.750 OPS second basemen but have a nagging feeling that many of those homers will turn into doubles this season. You don't want a leadoff guy jacking a bunch of solo shots but doubles are a good way to set the table. Plus, he can take a walk and his lack of BA won't hurt as much if there's nobody on base in front of him (ie. missed opportunities to advance runners on base).

I would think having your lead-off guy jacking solo shots would be a good thing. It's the best possible outcome for any at-bat.

[Mike Sixel]

Not sure what people want?

 

Aaron Hicks held a .341 OBP for the Twins last year while displaying a horrible BA.  That said:   If we want a guy who gets on base as much as anyone in the lineup and has the speed to steal bases - Why not Hicks?   Ask yourself how many guys had a higher OBP last year?   Of those guys - Who has more leadoff qualities once they reach base?

 

The popular answer is that his BA is not sexy enough to justify putting him in the leadoff spot.  However, If he hit ..290  with a .315 OBP people would be extremely excited.    I understand that some of those hits might be doubles, but that is not the role of a leadoff guy.   His job is to get on base.  SO WHY NOT AARON HICKS?

 

I don't think Hicks will maintain that OBP, but if he does, I agree, put him at 9 or 1.

[Mike Frasier Law]

I'd like to see this

 

Mauer

Dozier

Hunter

Arcia

Plouffe

Vargas

Pinto

Santana

Hicks

[lightfoot789]

I agree that if Hicks can maintain a .341 OBP, that's a good leadoff guy.

 

I'm more than a little skeptical Hicks can maintain a .341 OBP in regular appearances.

 

He holds a .377 OBP throughout his minor league career.  Isn't that what most of these posters put their money on?  Minor league OBP numbers.   Nothing to argue with when standing at .377

 

OBP - Speed = Runs Scored

Hitting can only get better too.  Nothing to lose.

Edited February 23, 2015 by lightfoot789

[Mike Sixel]

I'd like to see this

 

Mauer

Dozier

Hunter

Arcia

Plouffe

Vargas

Pinto

Santana

Hicks

 

Mike saying "no way Santana is that good this year"......

[Monkeypaws]

People assume Santana will regress, but I'd keep him there until he actually does regress.

[Willihammer]

People assume Santana will regress, but I'd keep him there until he actually does regress.

I admit if I were manager, I'd have a hard time telling Santana he's going to bat 8th or 9th because of his BABIP. Its definitely one of those areas where Molitor's commitment to analytics will be tested.

 

If the overall impact of lineup construction is negligible, my guess is he'll stick with what Gardy did last year (that worked). Santana-Dozier-Mauer, etc.

 

But as to the question who *should* leadoff, Santana comes in 3rd for me.

[stringer bell]

Not sure what people want?

 

Aaron Hicks held a .341 OBP for the Twins last year while displaying a horrible BA.  That said:   If we want a guy who gets on base as much as anyone in the lineup and has the speed to steal bases - Why not Hicks?   Ask yourself how many guys had a higher OBP last year?   Of those guys - Who has more leadoff qualities once they reach base?

 

The popular answer is that his BA is not sexy enough to justify putting him in the leadoff spot.  However, If he hit ..290  with a .315 OBP people would be extremely excited.    I understand that some of those hits might be doubles, but that is not the role of a leadoff guy.   His job is to get on base.  SO WHY NOT AARON HICKS?

Because he won't make the team (and shouldn't).

[Brock Beauchamp]

I would think having your lead-off guy jacking solo shots would be a good thing. It's the best possible outcome for any at-bat.

Sure, but in a perfect situation you'd rather have that guy batting 3-5 when it's more likely that runners are on base when it happens.

[lightfoot789]

Santana should be the leadoff, but I wouldn't be scared to put Hicks there over Dozier and Mauer.  Much rather have Dozier's pop with runner on batting second or third OR Mauer batting second or third moving runners over and taking a bunch of pitches to allow for steal attempts.

[Dantes929]

Given Buxton's toolset, I'm hoping he forces his way into the 2 or 3 spot, not leadoff.

Every evaluation I have seen of Buxton is top of the order.    With his toolset I don't really want him behind Mauer.   I see Mauer as a table setter but blazing speed should be ahead of him rather than behind him IMO.  Power should be behind him.

[Boom Boom]

Sure, but in a perfect situation you'd rather have that guy batting 3-5 when it's more likely that runners are on base when it happens.

This could be part of why lineup construction has very little correlation with scoring runs.

 

1. Your leadoff hitter is only guaranteed to lead off once per game.

 

2. If he hits a home run, your 2, 3, and 4 hitters are less likely to hit into a double play.

 

3. If he hits a home run, you've already got one on the board when your "big knockers" come up- a bird in the hand vs. two in the bush.

 

4. He gets more at-bats than anyone.

Edited February 23, 2015 by Boom Boom

[Dantes929]

I have always defended Hicks value at getting on base but have also said it is likely his true value is as a platoon player.   Hicks batted .279 and had an OBP of .410 as a right handed batter last year.   He hit .171 with a .302 OBP last year from the left side.  His career shows similar gaps between right hand and left.   I acknowledge that there are more right handed pitchers but being a late inning upgrade defensively in the corner spots would also have value.   .410 OBP plays very well in the leadoff spot.   .302 not so much.   In his entire career I have only seen one AA season that argues he has any talent at all as a left handed hitter.

[Dave T]

You guys are fixing something that's not broken.  Santana is the best leadoff hitter we've had since Span was traded.  He has shown the ability to wait on a pitch and hit it hard.  He has outrun the throw to first on many infield grounders.  My regression candidate for 2015 is Dozier, because most pitchers have learned not to throw him a high fast ball.  In his second season, I expect Santana to improve, not regress.

[nicksaviking]

If you're leadoff hitter his prone to hitting long balls, isn't the simple solution to make the 8th or maybe even 7th spot the blackhole of the team?   I'm expecting regression, but if Suzuki is still putting up a .330 OBP, put him in the 9 hole instead of Hicks, Schaffer or whoever is struggling to put it together.  Even with only minor regression, if Santana only ends up with a .320 OBP, there's a decent chance Hicks, Suzuki and Escobar can top that batting at the bottom of the order anyway.  Dozier doesn't have to bat #2, if we're only doing it for the sake of his pop.

Edited February 23, 2015 by nicksaviking

[Brock Beauchamp]

This could be part of why lineup construction has very little correlation with scoring runs.

 

1. Your leadoff hitter is only guaranteed to lead off once per game.

 

2. If he hits a home run, your 2, 3, and 4 hitters are less likely to hit into a double play.

 

3. If he hits a home run, you've already got one on the board when your "big knockers" come up- a bird in the hand vs. two in the bush.

 

4. He gets more at-bats than anyone.

I agree that lineup construction isn't a huge factor in scoring runs but saying the leadoff hitter only leads off once and therefore power doesn't matter is a bit misleading. Hitting homeruns out of the leadoff spot is also impacted by the probability of the 7-9 hitters being on base during the leadoff hitter's plate appearance versus the probability of the 9-2 hitters being on base during the leadoff hitter's plate appearance.

 

Obviously, any properly constructed lineup will see the 9-2 hitters being on base more often than the 7-9 hitters.

[Dantes929]

This could be part of why lineup construction has very little correlation with scoring runs.

 

1. Your leadoff hitter is only guaranteed to lead off once per game.

 

2. If he hits a home run, your 2, 3, and 4 hitters are less likely to hit into a double play.

 

3. If he hits a home run, you've already got one on the board when your "big knockers" come up- a bird in the hand vs. two in the bush.

 

4. He gets more at-bats than anyone.

Sorry.  If the premise is he is gong to hit a home run one way or the other there is at least one bird in hand no matter what.   Having possibilities of runners on makes it a bird in the hand vs a bird in the hand that has brought a couple of his friends from the bush.

[Brock Beauchamp]

If you're leadoff hitter his prone to hitting long balls, isn't the simple solution to make the 8th or maybe even 7th spot the blackhole of the team?

Sure, but then you're sacrificing 50-70 plate appearances in a season by taking one of your better hitters and moving them to the ninth spot in the order.