Article in today’s OCR, about where it makes sense to slot Trout in the batting order:
"…there is the idea that if Trout hit in the No. 3 spot, he would have more opportunities to drive in runs. That is debatable. ‘There is a lot of sabermetric analysis that shows that second could be optimum (for your best hitter),’ Manager Mike Scioscia said…"
Sharp eyes reading through that article might notice that no mention is made of actually slotting Trout at #1. This is even though the direct evidence is presented that it would be more advantageous:
"…From the first hole down to third hole you are taking 40-50 at-bats away from him during the year…"
(So right there the obvious point is being made to ask the question: then why not give Trout 40-50 more at-bats per year?