June 21, 2004
Backwards Lineup
The Arizona Diamondbacks lineup struck me as very unusual tonight, especially in the top three slots. All three hitters have OBA's between .351 and .361. But they are arranged in order of descending slugging percentage. In general, you want the sluggers behind the table setters because the value of slugging is driving runners a long distance.
Hairston, with a lead-off double, now has a .550 slugging percentage. Finley bats behind him, with a .525 slugging percentage. Now, you might expect Finely to try to drive in Hairston with a big hit and go for the big inning. But nooooooooooooo! Brenly has Finley lay down a bunt. A .525 slugger giving away an out in the first inning with a man on 2nd. The third hitter, Bautista has a low .448 Slug%. Isn't the third hitter supposed to be the best on your team? Bautista grounds out, driving in Hairston. So the DBacks play for one run, and get it.
I'm sorry, this is not major league managing. This is wasting opportunities. It's not maximizing the chances for your team to score. It's giving in to the idea that your team can't score, and forcing that idea into reality.
Posted by David Pinto at
10:34 PM
|
Strategy
|
TrackBack (0)
That does sound insane, but I have to wonder if Brenly knew what he was doing in that situation, 'cause it's the only run the D'backs scored in the game.
Maybe it's a cry for help...
What you pointed out about the Diamondbacks batting order is another reason they are only a game ahead of the last place Rockies. Even if Richie Sexson would have been healthy all season this team still couldn't withstand the loss of Curt Schilling to the Red Sox.
And check out the power potential of the position prospects at El Paso. Wow.
Finley's SLG reflects his (typical) poor start; over the last two months, he's hitting better than that. Bautista's placement is the result of Brenly's aversion to putting lefties back-to-back in the lineup. With Gonzo hitting 4th, that puts Finley at 2nd.
And Finley is fast enough that he could have been bunting (or at least trying to) for a hit. (I don't know, I didn't see the play.)
If you ask D-Back bloggers, most would not be happy with Brenly's in-game managerial decisions. But that, for what it's worth, puts the play in context.
I noticed this when I watched the playoffs in 2001. Brenly gave up an awful lot of outs then. But he won the world series. In his first year. So he became a managerial genius. Few people questioned whether his team won despite him rather than because of him.
I think Brenly was definitely onto something, but I think the sac bunt was a bit extreme.
Putting a doubles-triples hitter first means that only a single needs to be hit to drive him in, as opposed to the normal singles hitter leading off while hoping that one of the next guys is lucky enough to hit for extra bases. Two walks or singles or one of each in any order (without SB or bunting or hit-and-run) = 0.
Any lover of smallball will tell you it's a mistake to bunt a runner from second to third with no outs. The runner was already in scoring position.
Jack Wilson did this in the finale against the Cardinals. The media went after McClendon after the game, assuming it was his call. It wasn't. It was Jack Wilson's own great idea. Maybe he thought he could scratch out an infield single.
Tonight, in the first game against the Brewers, Jack Wilson had a high-bounding single over the third baseman's head. Never knowing when Wilson would not bunt, third basemen tend to come in when he's up. I don't know how many cheap singles Jack will get because of the reputation he's earned as a stupid bunter, but it would be an interesting study.