#2 following a #1

[frog17]

Maybe this is a silly question, but what the hell...
Say I want to use a #2 hitter who has more gbA's than preferred. Is this fact incrementally less important depending on the quality of base stealer I have in the #1 spot?

[worrierking]

Quality in general yes, but even more important is the frequency with which the leadoff man [i:5c294e2d47]attempts[/i:5c294e2d47] to steal.

[frog17]

Thanks for the response. I was trying to think of different ways to build a lineup in a small ball park. I just had a draft where I missed out on my first three picks (all hitters). I would have had a devastating team. Now I need to improvise.

[durantjerry]

My understanding is that the speed of the lead off hitter has no effect on the GbA results from the hitters card. However, if the runner is being held on, the defense is affected in a negative manner, lessening your chances overall of hitting into a DP. So, it doesn't really matter if you steal, it matters if you are held on. Again, my understanding is that any runner with an "*" near his steal rating is always held on.

[LANCEBOUSLEY]

I'm pretty sure one needs a 15 on the successful with a * to be "guaranteed" to be held on.

[Mean Dean]

[quote:89f28adffc]#2 following a #1[/quote:89f28adffc]
Should this topic be merged with the "I need to take a crap" topic in the Bullpen??

But seriously, folks. If the gbA is off the hitters' card, then it's going to be a GIDP no matter who the runner is. So yes, it absolutely would matter whether the steal was attempted or not. That'd be the only way to avoid the GIDP: either with the successful steal that advances the runner to 2nd, or with the caught stealing that wipes him off the bases altogether. If the runner is held on and the hitter rolls a gbA off his own card, that is still a GIDP.

It's true that holding the runner on decreases the chance of the DP off the gb(X). But, that's going to be the same effect for every player. It wouldn't affect the question of what to do with a high-gbA card hitting 2nd. Which is still probably not a good idea, unless you have a [i:89f28adffc]really[/i:89f28adffc] big basestealer 1st. (The Mets pretty much did it with Reyes and Lo Duca.)

[frog17]

So as long as the leadoff hitter is stealing often enough and getting to 2nd base, the gbA will be negated for the #2 hitter (provided on that particular at bat, the #1 is already at 2nd base), or do I have this wrong?

[Mean Dean]

Yeah, as you would expect, a gbA doesn't result in a GIDP if there's a man on 2nd and not 1st. (It results in the baserunner advancing if the gbA is hit "behind the runner" to 1B or 2B, or holding if it's hit to SS or 3B.)