How come everyone thinks it's easier to hit in the #3 spot than cleanup? Various people in the film mention that hitting third will get Maris more fastballs than hitting fourth.
Why is that?
Anybody explain?
Normally the cleanup hitter is your best or most powerful guy at the plate. Hitting 3rd is easier cause you are gonna see a lot of good pitches to hit, cause no pitcher wants to walk the 3rd hitter and put him on for the cleanup guy...if he gets a hit, so be it, but do not put him on for free when the most powerful guy is coming up.
shareWhen you have a weaker hitter batting behind you in the lineup, the opposing pitcher is more likely to throw you lousy pitches -- or just walk you intentionally. This is so they can get to the weaker hitter coming up after you, who is less likely to hurt them with solid hitting.
Remember the first game where Maris and Mantle were switched in the lineup and Maris doubled? The Tigers then intentionally walked Mickey. This is a perfect example of that strategy. Maris got good pitches to hit because nobody in their right mind would "pitch around" him only to face Mickey next -- they'd throw their best stuff to Maris and try their darndest to get him out. The downside, though, is they'd pitch around Mickey a lot. To opposing teams, it's better just to give him a free pass to first base and then face the next guy than risk having him drive more runs in.
As for "seeing more fastballs" -- fastballs are generally regarded as easier to hit than breaking or offspeed pitches, and pitchers are more likely to throw them in situations where getting an out is more critical.
I do believe that Maris had zero intentional walks in 1961, amazing for someone with 61 homers, so it's pretty clear how feared was Mantle. Of course, Mantle was out of the lineup a lot late in the season, but then it was Yogi Berra backing up Maris.
Unfortunately, the Detroit Tigers had a great season and gave the Yanks a run for the pennant. Under better circumstances, the Yanks might have clinched very early and batted Mick and Roger 1-2 the rest of the year. The extra at-bats would have resulted in a few extra homers for each.
They never would have battted Mick and Roger 1-2 for the rest of the year, they already had very good 1-2 hitters and would have kept them 3-4... back to the movie, great movie except for that i realized one mistake. Bob Cerv is on the team in the very beginning of the movie, they didn't acquire Cerv until May of '61.
shareWhat I MEANT was that with a pennant clinched and winning further games irrelevant, they might have indulged M and M a bit even if it were not an ideal lineup. In 1962, Ralph Houk really DID move Mantle to the leadoff slot the final week so that he'd garner enough plate appearances to qualify for the batting title (Pete Runnels won it anyway).
And the Yankees most certainly did NOT have good 1 and 2 hitters that year! Bobby Richardson and Tony Kubek both hit in the .250 -.260 range, had no power and never drew walks. It's amazing that Maris and Mantle both drove in 140+ runs behind those guys. It was a strange lineup, with five "cleanup" hitters and three glovemen.
Right about Cerv. The Yankees even used HIM as a leadoff man at times. He was a very bold baserunner and good at breaking up double plays.
after a team has clinched or been eliminated, if someone is close to a record he is put to leadoff to get more at bats than he would get hitting 3rd or 4th.
the last time i remeber it was in 2002 when vladimir guerrero was 1 homer shy of 40/40
Forgive me for pointing this out, but the 1961 Yankees did not have "very good 1-2 hitters". Bobby Richardson and Tony Kubek were outstanding defensive infielders who hit 1-2 because that is where Ralph Houk chose to hit them, but neither was a good hitter. Richardson, quite frankly, was awful--in 662 official at-bats with Maris, Mantle, Berra, Howard, and Skowron following him in the line-up he scored only 80 runs all season, an absolutely pathetic total for a lead-off man who never missed a game. Kubek was a decent hitter for a shortstop but he was not a good hitter for a #2 hitter.
share[deleted]
Billy has another mistake in this film. He has a white guy, Marc Sherman II, playing the black Earl Robinson of the '61 Orioles. Earl passed away July 4, 2014. He roomed with Joe Kapp at the University of California and is in their HOF.
Picture of Earl Williams http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_z1xzR4daO_M/S0ckx740EhI/AAAAAAAAED0/a5rH9_41 0LM/s400/62+Topps+Earl+Robinson.jpg
His major league record http://www.baseball-reference.com/players//r/robinea01.shtml
His obit http://www.contracostatimes.com/breaking-news/ci_26096668/former-cal-g reat-earl-robinson-passes-away-at
How come everyone thinks it's easier to hit in the #3 spot than cleanup? Various people in the film mention that hitting third will get Maris more fastballs than hitting fourth.
What every one has said here is correct but I'd like to add one minor point. Your 3rd hitter is usually your best over-all hitter. The reason this is, is because he is asked, at times to continue a rally, as your first two hitters do, and at times to clean up a rally as would your 4th place power hitter. He is the guy that is expected to either keeps it going or is asked to end it with a blast, and that's a pretty tough order. That is why George Brett, Keith Hernandez in earlier days, or,nowadays Carlos Beltran and Alex Rodriguez were and are hitting 3rd. It is true, if your 4th place hitter is a great hitter, you will see better pitches due to the base on balls being an absolute no-no, but it really isn't "easier" to hit 3rd, just different.
i completely agree with frank ^. that's why guys like griffey and bonds (used to) bat third. its typically your best overall hitter while the 4th hitter is typically your most powerful hitter. unless of course, your 3rd hitter is the most powerful hitter, then the 4th hitter would be the second most powerful hitter.
shareI don't know stats, but do know the prevailing wisdom about starting order .... but then again isn't it just that ... a STARTING order? After the first inning it becomes randomized based on the success of the inning. Figuratively speaking, how many times during a game (or season) does the top of the order start off an inning -- other than the first? I understand the possibility that the top of the "starting" order may come up toward the end of the game, when you might need to start a rally. But if that is truly a factor, wouldn't you want to bat your best 1 & 2 so they do come to bat more often? Yes you gotta have guys on base .... I'm getting away from my question, which I've wondered most of my life, .... how many games are won by the first innings batting order? How many are won by because the top of the order comes up around inning 8 or 9? ...... and by the way, I loved the movie. I was only 4 years old, but knew the names even then.
sharegoudgo, THAT is a very good point! The thing is, however, unless you have a team like todays Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals or Rangers, all of your best hitters are 1 through 5,(the teams mentioned have good hitters 1 through 25) because they may see that extra at bat. Now that is strictly percentage baseball and it doesn't always work that way. I'm not sure if anyone keeps stats like you ask for, but I will tell you this, historically, in world series play, it is the Gene Tennaces, the Billy Martins, the Bobby Richardsons etc. who shine in the series. Bill Mazeroski, loved by all of Pittsburgh, is despised by New York. These were all good, solid ballplayers who never were known for their hitting prowess, but came through in clutch situations. The thing to remember, however, is that your number 1 guy should get on base a lot, your number 2 guy should handle a bat well enough to bunt that guy over to second if need be, and your number 3 guy should be able to get the clean hit to send him home. By that time, the pitcher may be rattled and number 4 and 5 may park a long shot into the stands. So here you are looking at at least one run, possibly more. 1 and 2 should be good on base percentage guys with number one being speedy to steal a base when needed to "set the table" for the big guys coming up 3, 4 and 5! So here again "best hitter" is a relative term. Your first place guy should have a good batting average, speed and savy. Your second place hitter should be able to bunt or hit a sacrifice fly when needed and be fast as well. Your 3rd place guy should be able to keep the rally going, or clean it up, and 4 and 5 should be strong home run hitters, not known for their batting average necessarily, but for their run production. Who is the better hitter? That is in the eye of the beholder, but, as Ralph Kiner used to sy "Home run hitters drive cadillacs".
shareThat was a pretty good explanation, but next I want to see you explain a blown save...
"They put a gun in your face, you still have a choice." -Jack Foley
Blown Save: Please see Jason Isringhausen's performance on 5 June against the Reds
I have to push the pram a lot.
Blown Save: Please see Jason Isringhausen's performance on 5 June against the Reds
I LOVE BASEBALL FANS!!!!! They have such a great way of expressing themselves. Well said nic.
Apropos of nothing, but this conversation brings to mind a truly amazing stat.
In 1927, Lou Gehrig had 175 RBIs. Quite a nifty total, you'll agree. But what makes this feat amazing is that, for at least 60 of those at-bats, no one was on base, because Columbia Lou was batting behind Babe Ruth, who hit 60 home runs that year! And he had to have led off his share of innings, too, so maybe it's more like 70 or 80 at-bats.
I wonder how many AL pitchers developed mystery illnesses when their spot in the rotation coincided with a series against the Yankees that year?
" " ~ Harpo Marx
Mantle was the most feared hitter in baseball. And that includes the likes of Mays and Aaron. That is one reason why Mantle was walked so often. Whoever batted in front of Mantle was most likely to get good pitches to hit as the pitcher would bear down to get them out rather than face Mantle. And in this case, Mantle was so hot early in the season, Maris was able to see better pitches than he did batting behind Mantle. Mantle for most of his career had pitchers pitch around him to keep him from getting a hold of one.
shareAs for "seeing more fastballs" -- fastballs are generally regarded as easier to hit than breaking or offspeed pitches, and pitchers are more likely to throw them in situations where getting an out is more critical.
mom i'm coming home, they started throwing the curveball. the sad reality is fastballs are easier to hit. most fast ball pitchers throw the fast ball with nothing on it. it may go 96 miles an hour but without some sort of rotation on it, its a straight pitch. also the great fastball pitchers will strike a lot of guys out, so with 2 on and 1 out in the bottom of the ninth, you can't gamble with a curveball pitcher who may give up a sacrifice fly and allow the run to score, you must gamble with the guy who can, at times, strike people out. you can't allow ant form of contact in the scenario i just gave. even a dribbler down the third base line could score the run. live by the fastbal, die by the fastball. see armondo benitez, jabba chamberlain etc. etc. i think catfish hunter once said it takes a fasball pitcher at least 3 pitches to get his guy out using his (the pitcher's) best stuff. it takes me 1 pitch to get that out.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
While the majority of baseball coaches bat their home run hitter in the #4 spot, I do not. I am a high school baseball coach and I bat my power hitter in the #3 hole. My reasoning is that my number one and two batters have the best On Base Percentage (OBP) on the team. Therefore, my power hitter will come up to bat in the first inning with, most likely, a man on base. If I batted him fourth, and the first three batters get out in the first inning, then my power hitter leads off the next inning, and I don't want that because solo home runs don't mean very much.
shareYup. It depends on who your other players are and what they can do. The traditional lineup logic is always adaptable.
Like, for instance, if you have another power hitter who's about as good as your #4. If you have no other guys who can hit for average, you'll probably put him as #5 to protect your cleanup (as the Red Sox did during some of their great hitting years in the 2000s). But if you've got a couple more guys who can hit for average, or who have a great OBP because they can hit a little for average and draw a few extra walks with a good eye (and/or because pitchers in your league walk an above-average number of batters), you can have a kind of second top-of-the-order kind of arrangement at, say, six through eight. But that _is_ a luxury, for sure...
Yup. It depends on who your other players are and what they can do. The traditional lineup logic is always adaptable.
Like, for instance, if you have another power hitter who's about as good as your #4. If you have no other guys who can hit for average, you'll probably put him as #5 to protect your cleanup (as the Red Sox did during some of their great hitting years in the 2000s). But if you've got a couple more guys who can hit for average, or who have a great OBP because they can hit a little for average and draw a few extra walks with a good eye (and/or because pitchers in your league walk an above-average number of batters), you can have a kind of second top-of-the-order kind of arrangement at, say, six through eight. But that _is_ a luxury, for sure...