In Inside the Lines a lot of us are arguing about the lineup and I wonder what lineup produces the most runs. One would think it would be fairly simple to find out if you had some sort of computer program and I'm sure it has been done.
Anyways, it seems to me that baseball managers and baseball people think the best lineup has a speedster who gets on base in the 1 spot, a guy that doesn't ground into DP's, hits for a good avergage, and can do the little things in the 2 spot, your best hitter in the 3 spot, SLG guys in the 4 and 5 spots and then your worse hitters in the 6-9 spots.
But, is this right?
I say definitely not. I want both my 1 and 2 hitters to be high OBP guys. I could care less about their speed. And then have your best hitters in the 3-4-5 spots.
Then I thought about something else. Would you score more or less runs if you literally just started off with your best hitters. For example, if the Yankee lineup was something along the lines of:
Totally unconventional and never would happen, but would the Yankees score more runs like this? They would certainly get more AB's because their best OBP guys are right at the top of the order, so instead of making outs, they are getting on base. But, then you have to take into account the fact that your SLG guys are coming to the plate without as many people on base - at least in the first inning. You also have your best hitters getting more AB's. I don't know though. I do know that the Yankees do not score as many runs as they could with the lineup they have now.
So, I guess my question is what is correct? Have there been any studies done on this? What are your thoughts?