Lineup concern

[mcm3312]

At what point do we swap Pierzynski and Dunn in the lineup. Similar OBP and obviously AJ makes a lot more contact/kills less rallys. I would say swap Dunn and Rios, but we all know Rios is a head case.

De Aza
Youkdawg
AJ
Paulie
Rios
Dunn
Tanky Tank
Alexei
Beckham

GO

[Boondock Saint]

Originally Posted by mcm3312

At what point do we swap Pierzynski and Dunn in the lineup. Similar OBP and obviously AJ makes a lot more contact/kills less rallys. I would say swap Dunn and Rios, but we all know Rios is a head case.

De Aza
Youkdawg
AJ
Paulie
Rios
Dunn
Tanky Tank
Alexei
Beckham

GO

You do realize that the Sox are kicking ass right now, right?

edit: Also, Youkdawg and Tanky Tank? Seriously?

[WhiteSox5187]

I am not a fan of Dunn batting third but I see no reason to change the lineup right now.

[PeteWard]

Share your concern but don't mess with things while the Sox are so hot.

[DickAllen72]

Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187

I am not a fan of Dunn batting third but I see no reason to change the lineup right now.

Dunn is batting something like .150 against LHP. Maybe he should move lower in the order, at least when facing a left handed starter.

[Frater Perdurabo]

Originally Posted by DickAllen72

Dunn is batting something like .150 against LHP. Maybe he should move lower in the order, at least when facing a left handed starter.

Maybe Dunn should get more off days against LHP. Not all the time, but sometimes.

[hawkjt]

WINNING!!! Don't change a thing.

[everafan]

Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo

Maybe Dunn should get more off days against LHP. Not all the time, but sometimes.

This! I know Rios is the natural choice for #3 but I wouldn't mess with the lineup given the production. But there is no reason that Dunn can't sit against lefties eery once in a while. On those days move Rios to #3.

[Nellie_Fox]

Originally Posted by Boondock Saint

... Also, Youkdawg and Tanky Tank? Seriously?

[FoulTerritory]

Originally Posted by Boondock Saint

You do realize that the Sox are kicking ass right now, right?

edit: Also, Youkdawg and Tanky Tank? Seriously?

That doesn't mean as a manager you get complacent and stop looking for ways to improve and assure continued ass-kicking. The Sox are kicking ass despite Dunn being mostly terrible for the past month. Even his OPB has dropped down quite a bit.

In general, I'm no fan of tinkering, but I think AJ or Rios should bat third because what the poster said is true -- in the 3 hole we're seeing Dunn kill a lot of rallies, and if you want to win this division, we're going to need as many rallies as we can.

Myself, I prefer to move Rios to 3 than AJ, and Rios did do well in the 3 hole in 2010 so I wouldn't think it would be much of a head-case issue. But either way, you are not maximizing the potential of this lineup with 250+ K's and a 210 average in the 3 hole, despite the homers and walks (the walks are losing value as his OBP continues to drop).

I don't think any other facets of the lineup should even be considered for change though.

Just one man's opinion.

[TDog]

Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187

Perhaps you can explain this to me, I have often heard that RBIs are a useless stat and that it is runs scored that is the important one because it is not a player's fault that there is no one on base for him to drive in. But it seems to me that the same argument can be applied there as well. He is still going to need someone to drive him in unless he can steal home several dozen times. Why is that RBIs are no longer an important stat for hitters but runs scored are? And I should clarify that while you specifically are not making this argument I have read a lot of saber metric guys make that very argument.

The premise that RBIs are unimportant comes from the perspective of using RBI to predict future productivity. But what stats tell you is what players have done. Generally, at the end of the season, the player who drives in the most runs is the team's offensive MVP. But if you are looking to acquire a player from another team, RBIs might not transfer into your lineup, the RBIs might not transfer. Not only have the runs already been driven in, but they have been driven in in the context of another lineup. Runs scored can be viewed similarly. You can get on base with no one behind you to drive you in.

There should be no question that if you are judging a player's contribution to a team's offense that RBIs is one of the stats you look at. Of course, it is going to depend on players getting on base in front of you, if you subtract the home runs. Some RBIs are easier than others and all are not created equal, and it isn't always about hits with runners in scoring position. When Ramirez grounded out to drive in a runner from third Thursday, it tied the game against the Rangers. When Dunn grounded out to drive in a runner from third Sunday against Toronto, the Blue jays conceded a run that made the score 8-4. But a productive out from Viciedo after Ramirez's two-run triple in the same inning would have tied the game.

The idea is that all the raw stats accumulated in 19-2 and 2-1 games alike are just as meaningful. The problem I have is that stats taken in isolation don't reflect that they are taken from situations where circumstances differed. RBIs are influence by where you bat in the lineup and who you play for, but for many players, so is just about everything else. Ultimately, it's a matter of not how many a hitter hits but when he hits them. I don't believe stats make the MVPs, but winning games does. That applies to OPS (see Albert Belle, 1998) as well as RBIs.

Nonetheless, Dunn this year has a batting average of .237 with runners in scoring position. He has driven in no more than 28 of the 107 runners that have been in scoring position during his at bats. Konerko has come up with 85 runners in scoring position, driving in no more than 25 of them with an RISP BA of .355. Ramirez, despite doing so poorly offensively overall so deep into the season, has come up with 100 runners in scoring position, has an RISP BA of .397 and has driven in no more than 35 of them.

Tell Ramirez his RBIs are a meaningless stat, but for his career he has hit .277 overall and .306 with runners in scoring position.

[kittle42]

Originally Posted by TDog

The idea is that all the raw stats accumulated in 19-2 and 2-1 games alike are just as meaningful. The problem I have is that stats taken in isolation don't reflect that they are taken from situations where circumstances differed.

I think shoota believed a version of this.

[TDog]

Originally Posted by kittle42

I think shoota believed a version of this.

Yes, if you want to take what I've written out of context.

[Tragg]

Originally Posted by TDog

The premise that RBIs are unimportant comes from the perspective of using RBI to predict future productivity.

No, it comes from the reality that an RBI is based to a large extent on what others have done or what they will do in running the bases. If they aren't on base, you aren't getting a RBI, unless you hit a homer. OPS with runners in scoring position is a better stat, although I think for most hitters, OPS with runners in scoring position will approximate their OPS in all circumstances, over the long-haul.

[asindc]

Originally Posted by Tragg

No, it comes from the reality that an RBI is based to a large extent on what others have done or what they will do in running the bases. If they aren't on base, you aren't getting a RBI, unless you hit a homer. OPS with runners in scoring position is a better stat, although I think for most hitters, OPS with runners in scoring position will approximate their OPS in all circumstances, over the long-haul.

When a player produces far more often with runners on base than not over the course of a 4.5 year MLB career as Alexei has, then I think we can rule out random luck as the most likely explanation.