is it madness to bat springer 4th

[Fredia]

would he gain his stride and confidence lower in the order...and if not him who the n

[Mr. Happy]

Right now, the answer is yes. Porter made a terribler call simply inserting a green rook into the cleanup spot. It's almost as if he wanted to wish him to hit.

[moriartp]

No one's on base anyway, why is there any added pressure on the cleanup hitter in this lineup?

[Mr. Happy]

No one's on base anyway, why is there any added pressure on the cleanup hitter in this lineup?

You make an excellent point. However, I maintain that hitting cleanup brings internal and external pressures on a player that he may not be able to handle at this point.

[roadrunner]

I really don't think it matters in this lineup.  The pressure is going to be on him regardless and he is supposed to be a middle of the order hitter at some point in his career.

[MRaup]

Right now, the answer is yes. Porter made a terribler call simply inserting a green rook into the cleanup spot. It's almost as if he wanted to wish him to hit.

Hap, you're trying WAY too hard to find things to criticize about Porter. Putting Springer in the cleanup spot seems to me more like a vote of confidence that they know he can/will hit than a pressure on Springer move.

[Mr. Happy]

Hap, you're trying WAY too hard to find things to criticize about Porter. Putting Springer in the cleanup spot seems to me more like a vote of confidence that they know he can/will hit than a pressure on Springer move.

You may well be right about Springer. I am not really looking for things to criticize Porter about though. Actually, the contrary is true. I want Porter to succeed. I just really worry that Springer is putting undue pressure on himself because he was inserted into what historically has been a crucial spot in the lineup.

[geezerdonk]

The question is not who the n but what the n.

[JimR]

Hap, you're trying WAY too hard to find things to criticize about Porter. Putting Springer in the cleanup spot seems to me more like a vote of confidence that they know he can/will hit than a pressure on Springer move.

agreed. some folks just like to bitch.

[VirtualBob]

I really don't think it matters in this lineup.  The pressure is going to be on him regardless and he is supposed to be a middle of the order hitter at some point in his career.

I think the real pressure is on his agent.  No more talk about how the evil Astros held him back from his rightful role in the middle of the order.

[Mr. Happy]

agreed. some folks just like to bitch.

I really don't like to bitch, Coach.

[sporadic]

Hap, you're trying WAY too hard to find things to criticize about Porter. Putting Springer in the cleanup spot seems to me more like a vote of confidence that they know he can/will hit than a pressure on Springer move.

I question the move as well.  The guy was held in the minors past the point of having anything to prove then put in one of the most high pressure spots to hit in the order...brought along slowly only to be thrown into the fire?  I am far from a great baseball mind, but I figured he would bat 5 or 6.  Then again, there could be far less of a difference between AAA and Big League pitching than I imagine there being.

[SoonerJim]

I question the move as well.  The guy was held in the minors past the point of having anything to prove then put in one of the most high pressure spots to hit in the order...brought along slowly only to be thrown into the fire?  I am far from a great baseball mind, but I figured he would bat 5 or 6.  Then again, there could be far less of a difference between AAA and Big League pitching than I imagine there being.

It is madness. He should be at 5-7 in the order.

[JimR]

5 is the main RBI spot.

sometimes the debates on here slay me. if he is not driving in runners on, it makes no difference if he is batting 1-9.

[Mr. Happy]

5 is the main RBI spot.

sometimes the debates on here slay me. if he is not driving in runners on, it makes no difference if he is batting 1-9.

Maybe not. But he strikes me as really pressing right now. However, he's hitting four again tonight.

[sporadic]

5 is the main RBI spot.

sometimes the debates on here slay me. if he is not driving in runners on, it makes no difference if he is batting 1-9.

If 5 is the main RBI slot, then why do managers continue to pencil their best hitter in at 3 or 4?  Not trying to be argumentative, that is a legitimate question directed at someone that has managed.  As for not making a difference when not hitting, completely understand that - just thought he might have a better mental approach if he were moved in the lineup, therefore start to hit.

[JimR]

If 5 is the main RBI slot, then why do managers continue to pencil their best hitter in at 3 or 4?  Not trying to be argumentative, that is a legitimate question directed at someone that has managed.  As for not making a difference when not hitting, completely understand that - just thought he might have a better mental approach if he were moved in the lineup, therefore start to hit.

http://www.spikesnstars.com/2001/12/10/a-hot-stove-in-the-dugout/#more-60

that article has my thoughts on a batting order, which I believe to be the traditional thoughts on it.

#3 best hitter
#4 best power/HR
#5 best RBI
#s 6 and 7 can also be RBI slots

[sporadic]

http://www.spikesnstars.com/2001/12/10/a-hot-stove-in-the-dugout/#more-60

that article has my thoughts on a batting order, which I believe to be the traditional thoughts on it.

#3 best hitter
#4 best power/HR
#5 best RBI
#s 6 and 7 can also be RBI slots

Thanks, that was very interesting. 

[Uncle Charlie]

Maybe not. But he strikes me as really pressing right now. However, he's hitting four again tonight.

I'm with Happy on this one.  He just didn't need the added pressure.  Many of the fans saw him as some sort of messiah coming to save the Astros season - that is a tall order that few, if any, could accomplish.  Putting him lower in the order and just asking him to get good swings on the ball with low expectations sounds like a much better plan to me.  That said, I'm not a manager/coach and haven't ever been at an appreciable level.

[roadrunner]

If 5 is the main RBI slot, then why do managers continue to pencil their best hitter in at 3 or 4?  Not trying to be argumentative, that is a legitimate question directed at someone that has managed.  As for not making a difference when not hitting, completely understand that - just thought he might have a better mental approach if he were moved in the lineup, therefore start to hit.

More at bats.

Ever since the 2004 season when Garner was batting Beltran second I've always thought the best hitter should bat second.  That has seemed to have caught on recently with guys like Trout and even Votto batting second.

[SoonerJim]

http://www.spikesnstars.com/2001/12/10/a-hot-stove-in-the-dugout/#more-60

that article has my thoughts on a batting order, which I believe to be the traditional thoughts on it.

#3 best hitter
#4 best power/HR
#5 best RBI
#s 6 and 7 can also be RBI slots

My opinion on the order qualities:

#4 power hitter, prone to clutch hitting
#5 similar to #4, with a lower BA and higher SO relative to #4 hitter. Hits with power
#6 Should have lead off capacity, with fewer SBs and BBs relative to #1
#7 Similar skills to #2, good hit and run capability
#8 and  #9 worst hitters on team, prefer contact capability

#5 works for me re Springer. Anointing him the hitting savior of a team with a BA of 0.225 is undue pressure. That's as high in the order as I'd put him at this point

[Dark Star]

http://www.spikesnstars.com/2001/12/10/a-hot-stove-in-the-dugout/#more-60

that article has my thoughts on a batting order, which I believe to be the traditional thoughts on it.

#3 best hitter
#4 best power/HR
#5 best RBI
#s 6 and 7 can also be RBI slots

Although you have definite ideas about it, it seems to me #2 (and to a lesser extent, #7) has been the most ambiguous spot in modern lineup construction (and by "modern", I mean 1960s-forward.)

[Fredia]

just saw springer batting 6th

[Mr. Happy]

just saw springer batting 6th

Noted. The lineup that I posted in the GZ reflects that.

[Fredia]

sorry for stepping on your toes. my bad

[Mr. Happy]

sorry for stepping on your toes. my bad

No offense was taken. I was merely pointing out that the lineup for today's tilt was posted.

[Uncle Charlie]

Straight from the horses mouth....

http://blog.chron.com/ultimateastros/2014/05/04/porter-drops-springer-out-of-cleanup-spot-to-ease-pressure-on-rookie/#23035101=0

[JimR]

More at bats.

Ever since the 2004 season when Garner was batting Beltran second I've always thought the best hitter should bat second.  That has seemed to have caught on recently with guys like Trout and even Votto batting second.

Beltran was far from the best hitter on that team.

[roadrunner]

Beltran was far from the best hitter on that team.

Far from?  During the 36-10 run plus the playoffs, I don't think anyone was a better hitter.

[sporadic]

Far from?  During the 36-10 run plus the playoffs, I don't think anyone was a better hitter.

I don't necessarily agree with the "far from" sentiment, as the mole was quite a hitter, but I seem to recall thinking how the run was going on in spite of Beltran hitting all that well.  The post season was another story altogether...he was white hot.  Then again, I could be wrong.  As far as best hitters on that team...Berkman was clearly the best bat on the team.  And, he might not have been a better hitter, but with two outs in the ninth and any hit needed to win a game, I would take Jeff Kent over Beltran as well.

[JimR]

Far from?  During the 36-10 run plus the playoffs, I don't think anyone was a better hitter.

he was great during the playoffs. not so much during the regular season, if I recall correctly. he hit #2 because he was a switch hitter who could run.

that team had Biggio, Bagwell, Berkman and Kent.

[BudGirl]

he was great during the playoffs. not so much during the regular season, if I recall correctly. he hit #2 because he was a switch hitter who could run.

that team had Biggio, Bagwell, Berkman and Kent.

and Ensberg