think that the way games have shaken out for us this season would throw some weight behind the concept. How many times has Josh Bard totally screwed the pooch on a run-scoring opportunity only to then have the pitcher K or weakly ground out? Merely flipping them wouldn’t solve anything.

What we really need is someone who can drive in the Edmonds/Greene/Hairstons of our lineup in the bottom half. I would almost consider flipping Khalil and Bard, but then you’d have Edmonds and Bard right behind each other on the bases—a frighetning thought to be sure.

Tom Tango (Author of The Book Playing The Percentages In Baseball) has a chapter about lineup construction where he sees an advantage in batting the pitcher 8th. I believe every team should be looking at batting the pitcher 8th. There may be some 8th hitter/pitcher combo that are able to leverage a few more runs than others by switching spots in the lineup. It’s something worth looking into. I have been using my simulator to test this theory and have found instances where a team would score up to 25-30 more runs by switching their #8 and #9 hitter.
vr, Xeifrank

The advantage is, on average, +2 runs. The smaller the difference in hitting ability between the pitcher and #8/9 hitter, the less of a gain. And the less OBP-heavy the #8/9 hitter, the less of a gain.

Their study also included putting the best two hitters in the #2 and #4 spots in the lineup. With a traditional #2 hitter (not that great, but has good “bat control”), things might be different.

I doubt the difference is on the order of 30 runs (better or worse). Heck, ten runs would surprise me. But I that’s just opinion.

It’s important to remember that with decisions like this where the potential gain or loss is very small, you can’t just use intuition to come up with the right answer. You must do a rigorous study if you expect that much precision.

The worst part about the USA Today article is they used team OBP and SLG to judge the success of batting the pitcher 8th. If anything, the team OBP and SLG will go down, because the pitcher spot gets more plate appearances. The potential gain in run scoring is having all the positive events grouped together more. Nobody should hit better or worse.

I’m not prepared to enter the scientific fray here because all my simulations of the pitcher batting 8th were done on Ken Griffey Jr. Presents Major League Baseball for the SNES.

I know it’s a robust testing platform, but it also has some dated lineups.

FYI, there is a very good thread on lineup construction at a Reds blog called Jinaz-Reds. It’s worth a read.
vr, Xeifrank

It’s one of those things that we will never be able to back up with serious data. Like the four-man rotation, you can’t test it unless somebody does it. It seems to me that there are too many variables involved, and you would be better off (safer) giving less AB to your worst hitter(s).

I completely and wholeheartedly believe that the pitcher should bat eigth if he can’t clear the Mendoza line. I also believe that the competitive advantage that this gives you is very small…someone above said two runs a season. I think I know why.

Batting the pitcher 8th strengthens the 9-1-2 combination, at the expense of the 6-7-8 combination for obvious reasons. If you’re playing in the National league and you had a choice, you’d want the order to start the furthest away from your weakest hitter. That’s why the pitcher traditionally bats ninth.

But, even batting eighth, it wouldn’t matter very much. With the exception of the first inning, it’s just as likely to have the batting order “land” so the pitcher leads off the next inning as he is with the pitcher having made the last out.

Traditional:
7-8-9 is nearly as likely as 1-2-3
Pitcher Eighth:
Weakened 6-7-8 is nearly as likely as the improved 9-1-2

Also, this strategy doesn’t really work with the 2008 Padres too well. Realistically, you’d bat your “second lead-off guy” here. Does anyone really want to see Iguchi bat ninth?