Why does the pitcher have to bat 9th?

No, the odds are highest for the number 4 guy to have higher leverage situations. He isn't in line to get up with no one on and 2 outs in the first no matter what, and he has 3 good hitters in front of him in all other innings.

I wish more people would make a more balanced analysis of the saber stuff. It makes some bad assumptions sometimes, but it's not garbage, and it can be innovative.

"He isn't in line to get up with no one on and 2 outs in the first" That's where this saber stuff fails. This assumes the guy with the HIGHEST OBA and the second hitter will both be out. Biggest flaw in the whole theory.

"he has 3 good hitters in front of him"- This assumes they WON'T make outs.

I'm saying the 3rd and 4th hitters are BOTH important unlike saber which discounts #3.

but I can see that the #5 could be more important than the #3. I have long thought the 5 spot pivotal (and not just to put your clutch guy). 5 spot leads off more innings than any spot other than the leadoff spot. since this spot also comes up most in 2 out clutch situations, maybe a good spot to put a good hitter that has a lot of gbA's.

No, the odds are highest for the number 4 guy to have higher leverage situations. He isn't in line to get up with no one on and 2 outs in the first no matter what, and he has 3 good hitters in front of him in all other innings.

I wish more people would make a more balanced analysis of the saber stuff. It makes some bad assumptions sometimes, but it's not garbage, and it can be innovative.

"He isn't in line to get up with no one on and 2 outs in the first" That's where this saber stuff fails. This assumes the guy with the HIGHEST OBA and the second hitter will both be out. Biggest flaw in the whole theory.

"he has 3 good hitters in front of him"- This assumes they WON'T make outs.

I'm saying the 3rd and 4th hitters are BOTH important unlike saber which discounts #3.

but I can see that the #5 could be more important than the #3. I have long thought the 5 spot pivotal (and not just to put your clutch guy). 5 spot leads off more innings than any spot other than the leadoff spot. since this spot also comes up most in 2 out clutch situations, maybe a good spot to put a good hitter that has a lot of gbA's.

I agree 3-4-5 hitters are the run producers. old school

I would like to be able to bat the pitcher somewhere other than 9th also---it should be a simple change for the online guys to do-- a 5 or 8 hitting card is sometimes better than a position player--especially when injuries occur.

The sabre metric theories are fascinating, and worth experimenting with, but will take several teams to see what is best

Someone should do an experiment with the CD-rom version of the game and identical teams--make the lineups out old school and sabre metric--repeat the season about 200 times and report back. (I am too lazy at the moment, but may give it a go in a couple of months)

There is one other theory I like: (if you can put the team together) ---one switch hitter, and 4 RH/LH hitters--alternating L/R down the lineup----you are going to get a good matchup often, or the other manager is going to run through his specialist L/R relievers in a hurry.

I don't think it is 100% right, but I don't think it fails either. The 3 spot is still important, because you can't have a lesser hitter smack in the middle of the lineup. But it is not an assumption to say that about 40% of the time the 3 hitter will get at least one at-bat with 2 outs and no one on. It is simply a probability analysis to say that because of that definite possibility, and because of the fact that for the 4 and 5 hitters, having 3 good hitters in front adds some to the probability of getting big situations, for those reasons the 4 and 5 spots get somewhat better situations somewhat more often. I made no assumptions about guys getting on base or never getting on base; rather, just looking at the probabilities leads me to believe that a saber-optimized lineup will produce maybe 10 more runs in a season, and thus would perhaps make a difference for teams like the 2011 Red Sox.

The 6, 7, 8 SOM hitter values for pitchers are in the wrong order -- I can't remember which, but I believe either 6 or 7 actually has a better OPS than 7 or 8

I crunched the numbers a couple years ago, but all I remember is that either 6 or 7 should be higher based on OPS

I don't think it is 100% right, but I don't think it fails either. The 3 spot is still important, because you can't have a lesser hitter smack in the middle of the lineup. But it is not an assumption to say that about 40% of the time the 3 hitter will get at least one at-bat with 2 outs and no one on. It is simply a probability analysis to say that because of that definite possibility, and because of the fact that for the 4 and 5 hitters, having 3 good hitters in front adds some to the probability of getting big situations, for those reasons the 4 and 5 spots get somewhat better situations somewhat more often. I made no assumptions about guys getting on base or never getting on base; rather, just looking at the probabilities leads me to believe that a saber-optimized lineup will produce maybe 10 more runs in a season, and thus would perhaps make a difference for teams like the 2011 Red Sox.

"But it is not an assumption to say that about 40% of the time the 3 hitter will get at least one at-bat with 2 outs and no one on" -

The thing is 40% is damn good. (two hitters averaging about .370 oba). it is being used as some kind of negative statistic when it is actually a positive. the saber people as being misleading if not dishonest. We all would take a lineup of .370 or .360 oba.

The fact that a 3rd hitter will have no one on base with 2 out means nothing. Whoever wrote that fails to understand that 40% is way above average.

I value the hitting cards from best to worst as --8-5-7-4-3-6-2-1

The ob + slg is

8--73.2
5--72.1
7--50.9
4--47.15
3--29.2
6--25.4
2--15.4
1---3.0

an 8 hitting card is similar in value to Chad Tracy in the 2012 set,

And the 6 card is usually better than the 3 overall due to always n-power, but some 1,2,3,4,5 pitchers do have N power

Richard Clayton is 1N in 2012 set, so he can get HR's off the pitchers card.

I value the hitting cards from best to worst as --8-5-7-4-3-6-2-1

The ob + slg is

8--73.2
5--72.1
7--50.9
4--47.15
3--29.2
6--25.4
2--15.4
1---3.0

And the 6 card is usually better than the 3 overall due to always n-power, but some 1,2,3,4,5 pitchers do have N power

I was referring to OBP + SLG, which isn't the same thing as card chances -- I'll do the math again and report back

Card chances are directly proportional to OB + slugging, divide the numbers above by 216 (the overall number of chances each roll, assuming the pitcher gives up nothing)

73.2/216 = .339

or if you want to consider them independent of the pitcher they would be facing

73.2/108 = .678

Though most drafted pitchers are better, the avg. pitcher is similar in ob + slg given up to an 8 hitting card (to me)
though in the online game that would be consider a poor pitcher.

using 73.2 as an avg pitcher

73.2+73.2 / 216 = .678 for an 8 card

3 + 73.2 /216 + .353 for a 1 card

This is just a way to compare values

I would guess an average pitcher on a 80M team to give up something like 55 to 60 chances--in that case

73.2+55 / 216 =.593 ob + slugging percentage

--the point is it varies--it is easier just to consider card chances.