Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bryanbuckley 3306 days ago
Does it suggest that leadoff guys will be cheaper in the future? The next moneyball trend will be fast guys who can accurately place hits?
3 comments

Possibly. My guess is that only the exceptionally good leadoff guys will make it to a team, making them more expensive. Other teams might rather have a slugger hitting first than an average fast guy. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
> Other teams might rather have a slugger hitting first than an average fast guy.

I remember seeing a Red Sox-Blue Jays game at Fenway Park last year where the Blue Jays had Jose Bautista hitting first, which definitely fits this description.

If I remember correctly, that was actually Bautista's idea when the team was in a slump. The manager decided to give it a try, and the team started winning so Bautista saw quite a few games batting leadoff.
That's really cool! Honestly, it seemed really weird to me at first, but I guess if you don't have a tradional leadoff type guy, putting someone who gets on a base a lot is the next best thing, and Bautista certainly walks a lot.
There's been a trend recently to put high OBP bats at leadoff regardless of their speed (see Kyle Schwarber)
I mean, it's not a terrible idea to put someone like Votto or Belt even at the top spot. These guys have very high OBPs who can work the count and coax out tons of walks. If they can get on base, that's really all that matters so the next guy in line can try to get them in.
The theory has always been that those sluggers would be the ones driving people in, rather than counting on the guys behind to drive them in. So it's an interesting tradeoff - more people on base with worse hitters behind them who may not get them in or great hitters who are great at driving people in, but there might not be anyone on.
I remember earlier last year when the Red Sox were batting Betts, Pedroia, Bogaerts, and Ortiz as their first four and Betts was hitting a ton of home runs, my father and I thought that they go Pedroia, Bogaerts, Betts, Ortiz since Bogaerts had little power and Pedroia kept hitting into a lot of double plays. A few weeks later, they started doing Pedroia, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Betts, which was actually even better since then opposing pitchers couldn't safely walk Ortiz.
And Schwarber as leadoff was a horrendous failure. See his .162 avg and .289 obp this year.
Sure this year he has been terrible. But he was also the leadoff hitter much of the year he was healthy on the WS-winning Cubs last year.

Other examples are Carlos Santana, George Springer, etc

http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/79308/leadoff-h...

Yet he's still in the top 5 for the All Star pick; meh.
All Star voting doesn't mean anything other than popularity
Exactly. That then means actual performance doesn't matter to many fans, which is unfortunate considering how interesting this kind of data is and how players use it to improve their game.
Of course performance matters, just not for voting for a meaningless game (that was stupidly given meaning). Schwarber isn't going to be suddenly become thrilled with how well his season is going just because he finishes fifth in ASG voting.
Fast guys that can place hits have always been extremely rare (and will always be), even when they were considered a lot more valuable. There may be ten guys in the last 50 years that could do that at a high level, consistently, for a career.
Ichiro, Clemente, Rose who else? Gwynn (who was small and fast in the beginning of his career)? Henderson had a lot of pop and wasn't notably fast. Edgar Martinez had no speed at all but could hit for an insane average.