How the Three-Batter Rule Could Affect More Than the Twins Bullpen

[Nate Palmer]

Lots has been discussed about how the new three-batter rule will effect the pitching side of the game. What hasn't been discussed as much is how it could effect hitting strategies as the new rule is implemented in 2020. So just how could it affect the Twins 2020 lineup?The Minnesota Twins and the rest of the MLB will soon see how the new three-batter minimum rule for relief pitchers will affect in-game strategy. This past weekend Jayson Stark put out an interesting article on how managers may use different strategies in reaction to this rule moving into 2020.

 

Something I hadn’t considered seriously enough was how the three-batter rule may affect lineup construction outside of how valuable being able to alternate lefties and righties might become. Stark explains that there is the potential that intentional walks may be utilized more often to avoid bad matchups. This would allow the continuation of the same-handed batter/pitcher matchup. This is where a new strategy Stark calls a “stack” might become a valuable strategy in regard to lineup construction.

 

A stacked lineup would move managers to construct lineups in a way that would put right-handed or left-handed bats in bunches. Better ensuring that one of their top hitters wouldn’t be intentionally ushered to first base simply because of a bad matchup based on handedness. Shortly after Stark posted said article and strategy we saw a Twins spring training lineup that would fit the stack mold.

 

 

One of the many strengths of the Twins lineup we have been able to marvel at has been its pretty remarkable strength from both sides of the plate. Because of that, projected lineups for the Twins often have more of the traditional lefty-righty mix. Something like:

 

LH Luis Arraez

RH Josh Donaldson

RH Nelson Cruz

LH Max Kepler

S Jorge Polanco

RH Miguel Sano

LH Eddie Rosario

RH Mitch Garver

RH Byron Buxton

 

By no means am I saying this is my Opening Day lineup. It is simply for illustrative purposes and one way the lineup could be constructed. I would guess most of the season the Twins will use this sort of lineup construction. What could a stacked lineup look like if the Twins do face a team who tries to beat the three-batter rule by using intentional walks? Say, Terry Francona and the Cleveland Indians.

 

S Jorge Polanco

RH Josh Donaldson

RH Nelson Cruz

RH Miguel Sano

LH Max Kepler

LH Eddie Rosario

LH Luis Arraez

RH Mitch Garver

RH Byron Buxton

 

This lineup, in the event intentional walks begin to be utilized more, helps to protect some of the big bats from getting skipped if teams attempt to avoid bad matchups with a good hitter all from a handedness stand point.

 

Only in playing the games will we truly see if this becomes a thing. With a manager like Francona and his history of using his bullpen creatively in the division, it seems that much more likely the Twins could see some unique scenarios this season. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, Rocco counters with.

 

Can you see this becoming a thing in the MLB this season? Listing out these lineups does continue to reinforce one thing. This Twins lineup is deep and should be very fun to watch in 2020!

 

Please share your thoughts in the comments below. Not registered? Click here to create an account. To stay up to date, follow Twins Daily on Twitter and Facebook.

 

MORE FROM TWINS DAILY

— Latest Twins coverage from our writers

— Recent Twins discussion in our forums

— Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email

 

Click here to view the article

[Jimv]

In the case of the second lineup you posted, isn't the intentional walk concern moot anyway?  Wouldn't they just bring in a righthander to face Donaldson, a lefty to face Kepler, and a righty to face Garver?

[Nate Palmer]

 

In the case of the second lineup you posted, isn't the intentional walk concern moot anyway?  Wouldn't they just bring in a righthander to face Donaldson, a lefty to face Kepler, and a righty to face Garver?

That would be the point of the stack is to eliminate the intentional walk and ensure that your big bats get pitched too. Even if it is no longer that opposite hand matchup that might be preferred. 

[Dantes929]

I like the outside the box thinking but seems like all we have are big bats and some of them have pretty good splits..    Stacking means there will be times the other team can bring in a righty when you have three right handed batters in a row and then bring in a lefty to face three lefties in a row and you never have a favorable matchup.    I never mind our guys being intentionally walked.    Its an automatic 1.00 OBP and OPS.     

[PDX Twin]

 

I like the outside the box thinking but seems like all we have are big bats and some of them have pretty good splits..    Stacking means there will be times the other team can bring in a righty when you have three right handed batters in a row and then bring in a lefty to face three lefties in a row and you never have a favorable matchup.    I never mind our guys being intentionally walked.    Its an automatic 1.00 OBP and OPS.     

 

And beyond this, apart from first-base-open situations, intentional walks work best when you have one threatening hitter in the middle of a bunch of weaklings. The Twins' lineup, if healthy, has no weaklings. If they decide to walk Cruz or Donaldson, the next hitter (who might even be Cruz or Donaldson) is likely to make them pay.

[WallySzczerbiak]

In the traditional lineup your hitters get intentionally walked when they have the platoon advantage... meaning there's likely to be a runner on base when one of the platoon-disadvantaged guys comes up.

 

In the "stack" lineup you still have the platoon disadvantage, but this time without the benefit of a free baserunner.

[Ruven]

My bet is lineups will be constructed to counter the starter and alternating left/right hitters will continue to predominate.

 

Stacking could be utilized against teams with only one left-handed reliever so as to “get that over with” early on in hopes that the left-handed hitting stretch will get a second whack at the bullpen later in the game. This could be a strategy used against teams like the Twins with a mostly right-handed bullpen, Clippard and the closer notwithstanding.

[Trov]

I am more of a fan of having good bats off the bench than stacking.  The stacking can backfire just as much as it helps.  First, I am fine with intentional walks from time to time, more runners on base and all.  However, think about this.  You have normal set up of say Kepler, Polanco, Cruz, I see no one walked if you bring in lefty, which doubt you would to just face Kepler.  So change it up, Cruz, Eddie, Donaldson, not sure if that is order just giving example.  They bring in top righty, pitcher to Cruz, walk Eddie, then Donaldson, I am fine with that, Donaldson gets to hit with runner on.  

 

I would not want a 3 side stacked, maybe 2 in a row but 3 I think will backfire, assuming they do not have good splits. 

[BodieInSD]

Assuming the Twins' lineup is as (relatively) productive as last year's (lets see how the ball flies throughout baseball), there isn't much of a reason to fiddle with the structure of the lineup.  

 

With a healthy(ish) everyday lineup,  the weakest spot in the lineup would be Buxton(!!!) assuming he is healthy) and I don't think that is exactly the kind of hitter that teams walk a guy to get to (what a grammatical nightmare)!

[gagu]

This question highlights the beauty of baseball. The ever-evolving chess game. New rules force changes on one side that are countered by the other.I don't particularly see this strategy becoming "a thing" for constructing line-ups this season, but it certainly seems to have to legs as an option to consider in some scenarios. The argument is valid. An idea that hasn't been discussed much. Nate offers as a hypothetical and leaves it as an open question.

First blush reasons why this will be mainly a secondary factor in setting lineups; I think the new rule will effect the 26-man roster as much or more than the starting lineups. There will be more relief pitchers rostered this season that are more evenly effective to batters on both sides of the plate. On offense, managers more place more emphasis on filling a last roster spot with a stronger pinch-hitter over a better defensive fielder. In any case, aside from and sometimes including walk-off win situations, managers will still understand the potential danger of giving out intentional walks. 

In short, IMO, this is an interesting counter for managers to consider when the stars align. 

[jimbo92107]

Regardless how teams stack their lineups, the 3 batter rule will prompt hitters to become more rounded in their approach. If somebody walks Cruz, the next guy better be pretty good at putting the ball in play, at least. There should be plenty of situations that don't call for swinging from the heels. Twins already have power hitters. Can these same guys tone it down to punish the intentional walks? Whatever side of the plate you stand on, contact hitting is going to become more important. 

 

This could also boost the value of subs like Astudillo, who can barrel up on almost any pitcher. El Cherubo might just wind up being a very important chess piece.

[Jimv]

 

That would be the point of the stack is to eliminate the intentional walk and ensure that your big bats get pitched too. Even if it is no longer that opposite hand matchup that might be preferred. 

Ok.  I viewed the intentional walk strategy as something that might partially mitigate the effect of the 3 batter minimum.  And the 3 batter stack puts us right back to where we were.  But if you think the intentional walk strategy more than mitigates, but is a better strategy than matchups, that's fine.  But if that's the case, why hasn't the intentional walk strategy been used more often than the changing pitcher to get a better matchup?

[Nate Palmer]

 

This question highlights the beauty of baseball. The ever-evolving chess game. New rules force changes on one side that are countered by the other.I don't particularly see this strategy becoming "a thing" for constructing line-ups this season, but it certainly seems to have to legs as an option to consider in some scenarios. The argument is valid. An idea that hasn't been discussed much. Nate offers as a hypothetical and leaves it as an open question.

First blush reasons why this will be mainly a secondary factor in setting lineups; I think the new rule will effect the 26-man roster as much or more than the starting lineups. There will be more relief pitchers rostered this season that are more evenly effective to batters on both sides of the plate. On offense, managers more place more emphasis on filling a last roster spot with a stronger pinch-hitter over a better defensive fielder. In any case, aside from and sometimes including walk-off win situations, managers will still understand the potential danger of giving out intentional walks. 

In short, IMO, this is an interesting counter for managers to consider when the stars align. 

Love seeing you in the comments gagu! Miss being able to chat baseball as much as we once did!  

[Nate Palmer]

 

Ok.  I viewed the intentional walk strategy as something that might partially mitigate the effect of the 3 batter minimum.  And the 3 batter stack puts us right back to where we were.  But if you think the intentional walk strategy more than mitigates, but is a better strategy than matchups, that's fine.  But if that's the case, why hasn't the intentional walk strategy been used more often than the changing pitcher to get a better matchup?

 

I do want to be clear that this isn't my idea or just from my brain. Stark found this as he spoke with a number of managers around how strategy will adjust with the three-batter rule. The question managers will ask if this plays out as outlined is do I prefer one of my best bats to potentially be walked or that he gets to hit with a potentially less favorable matchup. 

 

There is no certainty in how any of it will play out. Maybe managers will just ask their lefty to pitch to righty and see what happens. The Twins may be one of the better lineups assembled to absorb whatever comes their way, but teams with only one or two clear cut impact bats won't want that guy consistently skipped over in big moments. It ultimately sounds like enough managers are asking the question so we may see something come out of it this season. 

[jkcarew]

New rules make people think. And sometimes they think too much.

 

There will be more IBB, because it's now mandated that pitchers will be forced to stay and face match-ups that they wouldn't have in the past.

 

Meanwhile, it makes little sense for offenses to 'stack' in response. Do you want to see extra base-runners, or do you want to see more instances of where the left-handed reliever is 'forced' to pitch to your left-handed stud? If you actually 'want' the lefty-lefty matchup, you're literally throwing away the advantage the offense gains with the new rule...just so that you can say the IBB isn't mitigating that advantage. A small advantage is better than none.

 

Stacking is going to remain as risky as it's always been. Just like before, there are going to be scenarios where it could work to your advantage. But, getting to that scenario will be hard to predict and a bad bet. IMO, much more likely that the new rule...combined with the extra roster spot...results in us seeing a slight uptick in mid-to-late inning pinch-hitting as a strategy to exploit the rule.

[Nine of twelve]

Here's something I just thought of, but something that I'm sure most managers have considered. There's nothing in the new rule about inserting pinch hitters. This to me is an unfair advantage for the batting team. To negate this I think that if the offensive team pinch hits during the first three batters the pitcher should no longer be required to face a minimum of three batters.