The art of Protection in Major League Lineups

[Jeffy25]

I have always argued that lineup protection does not exist in baseball.

The main reason is because a pitcher is facing a hitter one on one, not the guy on deck. He has to get get the guy who is up out, and worry about the guy on deck when he comes up.

MANY people said Miguel Cabrera was going to have a better year offensively this year because Prince Fielder is now batting behind him.

It's only been 2.5 months on the season, but Miggy is down this year. You have to assume he will improve as the season goes on.

He is being walked less, certainly (from 15% to 8%), and he is also striking out more (12.9 to 13.5%).

wOBA is down 56 points, and he is actually seeing more strikes this year than he did last year (58% to 63%) and less balls.

Meanwhile, Ryan Braun isn't doing any worse without Prince Fielder. In fact, he is hitting almost the exact same as he was last year (slash line, wOBA, wRC+, same walk rate, slight jump in strike out rate) and he is seeing the same number of strikes (63%) as last year.

What about fastballs?

Braun is seeing the exact same number of fastballs last year, as he is this year, same with Cabrera.

So is the argument that protection exists for only weaker hitters? Or is there still an argument for protection existing in major league lineups?

[RTL]

You could make the argument Cabrera is getting challenged more because of who is hitting behind him. You sort of made two conflicting accounts. Why Braun is being pitched to is beyond me. Pitchers are very aware of who is on deck. It's an old agrument but keep making it if it makes you happy

[keymax]

IMO protection isn't a myth like some people like to say. But in certain situations(RISP, first base open) the batter on deck decides if a guy sees anything good to hit or not.
When the terrible version of Adam Dunn was hitting behind Konerko(Or Mark Kotsay or other insane Ozzie Guillen ideas) you could bet that Konerko would be walked or got himself out.

[Jeffy25]

I guess the argument from the stats head, is that there is no statistical evidence of it existing. There might be the occasional situation where a guy is pitched around a little like Keymax noted. But in general, no one is going to improve as a hitter because of who is hitting ahead of...or behind them.

[Nymfan87]

In some cases I'd argue that protection in a lineup actually makes the guy in front worse. For example, nobody is pitching to David Wright this year and he's killing the ball because he's always ahead in the count. I don't think it's a big secret that guys do better ahead in the count than behind, yet somehow there's this notion that guys will do better if the pitcher is attacking the strike zone. If the hitter isn't disciplined enough to take pitches off the plate I can see how "protection" would help, but generally I'm not a big believer in its effects. But that doesn't mean there aren't cases where it does help.

[HickCaesar]

In some cases I'd argue that protection in a lineup actually makes the guy in front worse. For example, nobody is pitching to David Wright this year and he's killing the ball because he's always ahead in the count. I don't think it's a big secret that guys do better ahead in the count than behind, yet somehow there's this notion that guys will do better if the pitcher is attacking the strike zone. If the hitter isn't disciplined enough to take pitches off the plate I can see how "protection" would help, but generally I'm not a big believer in its effects. But that doesn't mean there aren't cases where it does help.

That actually makes sense to me, if you're a great hitter and have nobody behind you, then you're going to take a lot of walks and be ahead in a lot of counts, which lets you take some really aggressive swings at balls in hitter's counts.

Just all the extra walks alone will make your stats look better.

[Jeffy25]

That actually makes sense to me, if you're a great hitter and have nobody behind you, then you're going to take a lot of walks and be ahead in a lot of counts, which lets you take some really aggressive swings at balls in hitter's counts.

Just all the extra walks alone will make your stats look better.

You would think.

But Pujols wasn't pitched any differently when he had 1.000 OPS+ hitters Edmonds and Rolen hitting behind him then when he had .706 OPS outcome out of the cleanup spot by Juan Encarnacion and company.

Same walk rate, some strike out rate, same numbers. Didn't matter, and it hasn't mattered to other hitters in the same situations.

[Nymfan87]

You would think.

But Pujols wasn't pitched any differently when he had 1.000 OPS+ hitters Edmonds and Rolen hitting behind him then when he had .706 OPS outcome out of the cleanup spot by Juan Encarnacion and company.

Same walk rate, some strike out rate, same numbers. Didn't matter, and it hasn't mattered to other hitters in the same situations.

Outliers man. Outliers. You seem to deny their existence in every thread ever created.

[BrianWestKins]

How is this any different than the AJ Burnett thread

[Jeffy25]

How is this any different than the AJ Burnett thread

What? How is it similar?

Outliers man. Outliers. You seem to deny their existence in every thread ever created.

Outliers, I am having trouble finding any outlier that says it does exist.

[keymax]

Outliers, I am having trouble finding any outlier that says it does exist.

If you look at OPS or wOBA you won't notice a difference, because hitters without lineup protection get walked a lot. Yet, these metrics can't reflect how a lot of those walks are "empty" and don't help the team a lot.

RBIs get ridiculed a lot on this site, but it would be interesting if there is a correlation with RISP splits and lineup protection.

[Jeffy25]

If you look at OPS or wOBA you won't notice a difference, because hitters without lineup protection get walked a lot. Yet, these metrics can't reflect how a lot of those walks are "empty" and don't help the team a lot.

RBIs get ridiculed a lot on this site, but it would be interesting if there is a correlation with RISP splits and lineup protection.

Yeah, I would be interested to see if they do.

[Twitchy]

2011 Jose Bautista is all the proof I'll ever need that protection exists.

441 wOBA for the season, 20.2% walk rate overall.

Bases empty BB% = 15.9%
Men on base BB% = 24.9%
RISP BB% = 35.4%

#4 hitter behind Bautista that year? 702 OPS

The walk rates in 2010/2012 never were higher than 20%.

I didn't believe in protection beforehand, but I certainly did after I watched everybody pitch around Bautista And the BB% pretty much sums it up, that pitchers went around him because he had 0 protection.

[Jeffy25]

2011 Jose Bautista is all the proof I'll ever need that protection exists.

441 wOBA for the season, 20.2% walk rate overall.

Bases empty BB% = 15.9%
Men on base BB% = 24.9%
RISP BB% = 35.4%

#4 hitter behind Bautista that year? 702 OPS

The walk rates in 2010/2012 never were higher than 20%.

I didn't believe in protection beforehand, but I certainly did after I watched everybody pitch around Bautista And the BB% pretty much sums it up, that pitchers went around him because he had 0 protection.

That is a strong example.

I guess for me, we need to see more examples from both sides (pro and anti-protection) that it does or doesn't exist.

2006 and 2007 Pujols is an example of it not working.
2010 and 2011 Bautista is an an example of it working.

[spliff(TONE)]

Barry Bonds didn't accrue all those walks solely based on his keen eye at the plate. Much of it was a byproduct of the anemic lineup around him and the completely awful hitters he had behind him the last handful or so years with the Giants.