This is the second in a series examining the 2007 Diamondbacks batting order. Unlike most teams, the unusually balanced Arizona roster doesnt shout out obvious lineup choices. There’s no high OBP speed demon to leadoff, or proverbial #3 or #4 slugger, leading some to conclude that placement decisions are relatively unimportant. Our earlier installment, on leadoff batters, is here.

If one word defines the traditional role of a #2 hitter that word might be ‘sacrificial’ or ‘complementary’, tablesetting for the sluggers, taking strikes for basestealers, bunting and hitting the other way to move runners along. He is, primarily, a conduit between the specialized skills of the leadoff man and the general excellence of the team’s best hitter. Traditionally, footspeed is not an absolute requisite for the job, but is valued more than it is later in the order.

My personal criteria for a #2 are fairly similar to the ones above, valuing power and complimentary aspects(apart from sacrificial ones) somewhat more than does conventional wisdom. That is to say, an optimal #2 hitter on one team wouldn’t always be an optimal #2 on another.

For example, if Ricky Henderson led off for the Dbacks, I might bat Chad Tracy second, because he’s left handed and reasonably patient (affording Henderson SB opportunities), Tracy can utilize the hole created by holding Ricky at first, doesnt hit into many double plays, and reaches base reasonably well himself. Chad doesnt run that well, but with Ricky who really cares – Henderson alone has enough disruptive speed for an entire lineup. But Chad would be a less wise #2 choice on our favored Dbacks order, the one led off by Carlos Quentin. Quentin’s relative lack of basestealing nullifies some of Chad’s advantages, and it probably doesnt make sense to frontload Carlos and Chad, forcing all your basestealing to the back of the order.

Assuming Quentin first, we prefer that the #2 man will bat left handed to maintain the R/L/R/L batting sequence. Having eliminated Tracy above, that leaves Drew, Hudson and conceivably Miguel Montero. Let’s drop Montero. Some think Conor Jackson and his nice OBP belong at #2, but remember that he led the team in GIDP, also doesnt run that well and bats righthanded. IOW, his OBP is very important, but he’s kind of a one-dimensional, and not very good overall, fit here.

The debate is really between Drew and Hudson – and the wonderful thing about starting with Quentin is that his broad based skills(OBP/SLG/running) make him very easy to complement. It’s not as if you’re desperate for power at #2, like you would be batting behind Craig Counsell – or in need of a big OBP to compensate for Juan Pierre.

Hudson fizzled at 2, early last year, before rebounding to a career .809 OPS – and Drew was even better in limited time. I expect them both to decline some. Neither steals much, but both run very well; Drew, in particular, flies down the line to first. In 81 PAs with a runner on first, he GIDP once. In 174 similar PAs, Orlando hit into seventeen DPs. Not a sustainable difference, but I’m comfortable projecting Hudson with at least twice as many GIDP as Drew in similar time. Uncharacteristically, both guys actually hit better against lefties last year, but I wouldnt expect that to continue. Hudson switch hits, Drew’s a lefty. Hudson‘s established a better BB/K rate, whereas Drew quite clearly has a larger offensive upside.

  So, who is #2. As much as this surprises me to say, I’m going with a guy I shuddered when he hit behind Counsell last year. Orlando Hudson. He may not match last year’s OPS, but, frankly, I’m more concerned with Drew’s discouraging K/BB carrying over. Why is Hudson ok at 2 this year but not last? It’s not him – it’s Quentin vs Counsell. Quentin’s unusual leadoff package gives Arizona the luxury of following up with a steady, safe, speedy switch hitter who lacks HR power. A goal in constructing the front end is to link together players who will a) make pitchers work , b) not su*k and c) complement each other’s strengths. The value of Orlando’s switch hitting will become even more clear when we unveil our surprising #3 hitter in the next installment.

Think complimentary.

This is the first in a series examining the 2007 Diamondbacks batting order. Unlike most teams, the unusually balanced Arizona roster doesnt shout out obvious lineup choices. There’s no high OBP speed demon to leadoff, or proverbial #3 or #4 slugger, leading some to conclude that placement decisions are relatively unimportant. Below is our first installment examining that assumption. 

Today we’ll look at the #1 spot. Before tabbing who is best suited to bat first, here’s our leadoff criteria, in order of importance.

1. Ability to reach base consistently – the key to reaching base consistently is drawing walks. Although a given individual’s walk rate is fairly stable year to year relative to his batting average fluctuations, there’s a far greater deviation, or spread, among different players’ walk rates than there are between players’ batting averages. Some players walk ten times more often than others, whereas hitters rarely double another batting average. By examining walk rates, one can project individual OBP threshholds(ceilings and floors) with considerable confidence.

2. Ability to advance on the bases (ie first to third, stealing, tagging up,etc) – notice how stealing bases is not a stand alone criteria, but has been effectively downgraded alongside less trumpeted baserunning skills.

3. "Medium" power (defined by XBH, isolated power,etc) – while you dont want your best slugger leading off with a bunch of solo homers, it nonetheless behooves a #1 to exhibit some degree of pop. Too often, managers lead off hitters who lack power, which serves to "cancel out" much or all of their baserunning advantage. 

4. High propensity for GIDP – a groundball hitter who GIDP alot will have fewer opportunities to do so when leading off and his propensity will manifest itself less often – and hurt his team less – when he hits in the 1 spot.

5. Another leadoff consideration is maintaining a R-L-R-L sequence through the order, which limits an opposing manager’s ability to sustain platoon advantages with his bullpen. In Arizona’s case, four of the eight regulars are RH, two are LH, and two ( Hudson and the expected catching platoon), effectively, "switch hit". Leading off with a RH provides the Diamondbacks more R/L lineup balance and flexibility later and lessens the likelihood of bunching several RHs elsewhere.

Let’s test some Dbacks against these criteria. Who reaches base ? Based on 2006 – CoJack, Hudson and Tracy fared best – and in less PAs, DaVanon, Drew, Snyder and Quentin held their own. After Carlos, there’s a precipitous drop. But are 2006 stats our best measure of OBP? Not if we’re projecting reaching base consistently. Based on career OBP(MLB and minors), and valuing high BB rates more than high BA, the guys who stand out are CoJack, DaVanon, Tracy, and, by virtue of the HBPs, Carlos Quentin. The others havent demonstrated an ability to reach base as consistently, over time.

Advancing on the bases? Most Dbacks run well enough to leadoff, whether or not they steal many bases. Give extra basestealing points to Byrnes and Young. The footspeed of Jackson, Tracy or the catchers, however, would be a leadoff liability; not taking third base on a single to right, being thrown out at the plate on a medium fly to left – that sort of thing.

"Medium" power? This applies to virtually the whole roster now that a) Counsell is gone and b) no slugger appears head and shoulders over his teammates. The catchers are suspect, and we all know they’re not leading off anyway. Everyone else though, even Hudson and DaVanon, hits more than singles and has sufficient power to hit leadoff.

Double plays? CoJack hit 18, Hudson 17. Surprisingly, Chad Tracy never hits into more than 10 or 11 per year. In 166 ABs, Quentin hit into six; Drew hit one, in 209 ABs.

The candidate who best meets our five leadoff criteria is Carlos Quentin. Worst case, if he hits .250, his BB and HBP will cushion him towards a league average OBP; if he hits .280+, as he’s already done against RHP in the bigs, he’s getting on base close to 40% of the time. He runs well enough to advance on the bases and swipe an occasional bag. His power is obvious and he grounds into a fair number of double plays when batting elsewhere in the order. There are leadoff candidates with more speed (Young, Byrnes), better demonstrated OBP (Jackson), more MLB experience (Hudson, Byrnes, DaVanon) and more offensive upside (Young, and perhaps Drew), but no Diamondback brings Quentin’s broad based skillset and demonstrated performance to the leadoff position.

Will Bob Melvin bat Quentin leadoff?

Hardly. Quentin doesnt fit the tired profile of what a leadoff man looks like. We suspect Bob will gravitate towards a 1-2 punch (or punchout) of Hudson and Drew, or maybe Young and Hudson. He’s certainly batted weak hitting middle infielders up near the top of the order (Counsell/06, Clayton/05, Hudson/early 2006) in the past. In truth, Hudson and Drew isnt a bad 1-2, if they both sustain their 2006 numbers. The problem is that Hudson sustaining his 2006 is iffy, Drew sustaining the .316 BA + .500+ SLG is a big if – and both of them doing so is a really big if. If O-Dawg reverts back to his established level of play in Toronto and Drew hits .260 instead of .316, they’ll absolutely kill the offense, not just with the insufficient production at the top, but also by forcing the Dbacks to bat a litany of RH fodder behind them, broken up only by Chad Tracy. In this respect, mercurial Chris Young would seem to be a better leadoff fit than Hudson or Drew. We certainly love his power and speed. Our hesitation with Young is in how consistently he can get on base against MLB pitching. He hasnt demonstrated that ability yet and that’s the most important criterion here. Quentin, by contrast, is a safe choice for #1. Not an obvious choice, perhaps, but a safe choice – even if he struggles some at the plate, his peripherals ensure he wont be a leadoff bust.

Jackson shares this trait, but Carlos simply runs better. And what better way to start a game than with an HBP, perhaps an HBP where the pitcher feels the batter didnt make an effort to get out of the way? It sets a marvelous early tone – a pitcher questioning his control or ability to throw inside, the Dbacks not being backed off the plate,etc.  Psychologically, it’s better than a walk or a single. We cant think of a more unsettling start for a pitcher – unless maybe he yielded a home run. And Carlos should hit a few of those too.