Skip to content

Who should bat second?

Feb 5, 2010, 11:05 PM EST

The incomparable Brian Oliver of Nats Farm Authority and the incorrigible Steven Biel of Fire Jim Bowden have been combining forces on a regular podcast for a little while now, and they were kind enough to invite me to join them earlier today for their latest installment. If you're interested to hear three guys talking Adam Kennedy, bullpen changes and other stuff Nats, here's the link

OK, we've had all day to debate the merits of Adam Kennedy, the disappointment of losing out on Orlando Hudson and the potential stunting of Ian Desmond's development. But what's done is done, Kennedy is a National, Hudson is a Twin and Desmond is likely a Syracuse Chief. It's time to move on.

So with that in mind, I figure it's time to start looking at a more-pressing baseball matter: Jim Riggleman's potential lineup combinations.

Barring some surprising development between now and April, it would appear the Nats' eight starting position players are set: Adam Dunn, Adam Kennedy, Cristian Guzman and Ryan Zimmerman around the infield; Josh Willingham, Nyjer Morgan and Elijah Dukes around the outfield; Ivan Rodriguez behind the plate.

Now, Riggleman needs to figure out how to line up those eight guys to elicit its maximum offensive production. There are undoubtedly dozens of combinations the manager could come up with, but here Read more »

  1. Hendo - Feb 6, 2010 at 12:11 AM

    I can't believe Morgan's going to reprise that .396 OBP he logged last year in a Nats uniform. But if you're going to bat him first, Dukes (who would bat leadoff in my lineup) should be #2.

  2. NattyLite - Feb 6, 2010 at 12:59 AM

    repost….guzie is great 2 hole guy. he has great bat control, switch hitter, makes a lot of contact for hit and run (which i want to see much more). i am expecting many crooked numbers on the board with tplush guzie zim dunn hammer…goooooosebumps

  3. natbiscuit - Feb 6, 2010 at 1:09 AM

    I think you need to have different lineups against lefties and right-handers. I like Kennedy behind Morgan against right-handers and Dukes after Morgan against lefties. I don't think Guzman is patient enough to maximize Morgan's talent.

  4. Craig - Feb 6, 2010 at 1:20 AM

    Gotta be guzie.

  5. Dave Nichols - Feb 6, 2010 at 1:53 AM

    did the Nats sign Shawn Estes??? ugh.

  6. JMW4th - Feb 6, 2010 at 2:41 AM

    please tell me the Nats didn't just sign Shawn Estes.

  7. NattyLite - Feb 6, 2010 at 2:49 AM

    shawn estes? i think jim bowden has executed a coup! hes back in charge!

  8. Let Teddy Win - Feb 6, 2010 at 3:19 AM

    You've got me dreaming about a day when it's Dukes 2, Desmond 5, Guzman gone.

  9. An Briosca Mor - Feb 6, 2010 at 4:01 AM

    Dukes needs to learn how to hit a curve ball before he's a good #2 hitter. And if he does, he'll probably end up hitting too many HRs to be a #2 hitter.

  10. periculum - Feb 6, 2010 at 4:14 AM

    Line up 3 makes the most sense. It's what I would expect.

  11. Positively Half St. - Feb 6, 2010 at 1:27 PM

    I went for Dukes in the 2-hole, but perhaps would change that to Kennedy. I think that OBP really matters at the top of the line-up, and you just don't get that with Guzman.As for Estes, I am scratching my head. The money Rizzo saved with Kennedy over Hudson must have burnt a hole in his pocket. Why would it be necessary to give him up to $1M? I can't imagine anyone else was competing too hard for him. They must have seen a great workout.Tell me, Constituency- who is going off the roster to make room for Kennedy? Might we lose another marginal player to a waiver claim?

  12. JayB - Feb 6, 2010 at 3:23 PM

    I would be great to get some information on the time line and details leading up to the Estes deal….Really sounds like a waste to me and Rizzo is not Jimbo so there must be more to the story than this…….To me Dukes has not earned a roster spot let alone RF or 2nd in the order. He is just such an easy out when bother to scout his prior ABs and pitch to his weaknesses. If the Nats are more competitive and teams to some advance scouting he will have hit 8th in the order and what is the point of that?

  13. Steven - Feb 6, 2010 at 3:27 PM

    Two observations.1. batting order is not nearly as important as people tend to think. As long as you don't bat the pitcher lead-off, there's not more than 1 win or so of value in optimizing batting order.2. to the extent you do care about optimizing batting order, the most important thing is getting more PAs over the course of the season for your best hitters by hitting them up top. every team in baseball would be better off just making a list of their best to worst hitters and making that their batting order. Speed barely matters at all, and getting some L-R alternation doesn't hurt (though the Phillies have proven that even that's not all that important). Putting contact hitters at #2 is the dumbest idea Earl Weaver ever had–it's just a good way to create double-plays.So for the Nationals that would be something like this:ZimmermanDunnWillinghamDukesMorganGuzmanKennedyFlores

  14. Steven - Feb 6, 2010 at 3:33 PM

    Here's a post I did on this last season at this time, if you're interested:

  15. An Briosca Mor - Feb 6, 2010 at 4:00 PM

    Putting contact hitters at #2 is the dumbest idea Earl Weaver ever hadPerhaps that's why he's in the Hall of Fame. And you're not.

  16. Mark Zuckerman - Feb 6, 2010 at 4:09 PM

    Steven, I get what you're saying. And yes, if you want to maximize run production over the course of 162-game season, your way would work. But MLB doesn't award the team that scored the most runs over the whole season a spot in the playoffs. You have to win the individual battle each day, and in order to do that, I think it's important to put certain guys in positions where they can produce the most runs on that given day. Zim has the best chance on this team of driving in runs. If he's leading off (or essentially hitting behind your two worst batters) he's going to wind up batting with the bases empty far more often than he would batting third behind Morgan and Guzman/Kennedy/Dukes/Whoever.

  17. Wally - Feb 6, 2010 at 5:44 PM

    I would go with Guzzy to start in the #2 slot, and play it by ear with Kennedy. Dukes needs to produce over the course of an entire season, and I think a lower profile spot in the order would help take some attention off him.By the way, does anyone else think that we could be seeing two different teams this year. A Pudge, Guzzy, Olsen, et al vet team for the first half (which hopefully avoids the immense nose dives of the recent past), but then by the all-star break, Strasburg, Desmond, Flores, Storen, maybe others are playing significant roles? Might be kind of cool, especially if they can pick up some prospects for some of the vets.

  18. Anonymous - Feb 7, 2010 at 12:22 AM

    Normally, I'd say "it's only once a game that the leadoff hitter hits leadoff", but it's more than that, especially with the easy out at #9. However, I'd have to say I'd prefer to get Dukes an extra 50 or so ABs over the course of the season than Guzman or Kennedy.

  19. Will - Feb 7, 2010 at 12:42 AM

    Guzman?! Really? In general, you want to put a guy on who gets on base a lot, so your two best batters, Zimmerman and Dunn, have a better chance to drive in this guy with a double, HR or whatever. For the same reason that you don't want to put a power hitter in lead off (their power is relatively useless when no one is on base), you don't want to put guys in the #1 and 2 spots who are unsuccesful at getting on base and setting the table for the middle of the order.Who was one of the least successful batters at getting on base? Cristian Guzman. There were 13 other Nationals who were better at getting on base than Guzman last year, that means there's 5 back ups who were better than Guzman.I think it's probably more useful to name who would be a worse #2 batter than Guzman, than who would be better. So here goes… Ivan Rodriguez (but not Flores or Nieves) and the pitcher. I'd be happy with anyone else.

  20. rfk428 - Feb 7, 2010 at 3:21 PM

    From what we saw at the end of last year, I think Desmond can beat out Guzman, both offensively and defensively, and start at SS. The Nats paid Kearns 8mil to sit the bench last year, so there is precedent for this. It also seems that Guz's arm is not 100%. Guz is not ready to start the season and then gets Wally-Pip'ed by Desmond. So then I'd hit Kennedy 2nd to start because I think he'd be more consistant than Dukes or Desmond. I would hit Pudge 8th s that the younger guys have a little protection behind them and hopefully get a few more fastballs.

  21. Wil Nieves - Feb 9, 2010 at 2:07 AM

    Wasn't there a time last year when they tried to move Guzman out of #2 and he sulked and was terrible? Or am I just making that up?

  22. Sam - Feb 9, 2010 at 3:42 PM

    Dukes' .312 wOBA compared with Guzman's .301 wOBA pretty much sums it up. They both sucked, but Dukes was, hands down, a better hitter.I would bat Kennedy second. He was, at least, average last year. Guzman was terrible. Some of it might have been due to injury, but it didn't seem like he was hitting the ball hard at all. He hit far fewers line drives last year than in 2008 (when he was pretty much average). You know what you're getting from Guzman – average to below average offense and average defensive play. I'm very much in favor of Desmond.Also, power is not useless at the top of the lineup. A leadoff homerun by the home team (with two neutral teams playing each other) raises its chances of winning by something like 11%. Obviously it will even out throughout the game, but that is a large swing.

  23. bknight47 - Feb 17, 2010 at 5:05 PM

    I like Kennedy hitting from the two hole, and if Guzman can't hit from the bottom of the order, bring Desmond up and plug him in the 8 spot.





As ESPN-980 AM's Nats Insider, Mark makes daily appearances on the station's various shows. Here's the 2015 schedule (subject to change)...

MON: 12:45 p.m.
TUE: 2:30 p.m.
WED: 4:30 p.m.
THU: 2:30 p.m.
FRI: 5:30 p.m.
SAT: 10:30 a.m.

*All times Eastern. You can also listen to the station on 94.3 FM, 92.7 FM and online at Click here for past audio clips.

Follow us on Twitter