One method of constructing a line up card is to have the next batter "cover" or protect the preceding hitter.
For example, a typical good lead-off batter would be covered by a #2 batter who can take pitches, draw walks, bunt, hit or run or move runners by hitting the opposite way. At the same time, the pitcher has to be wary of putting the #2 hitter on base knowing that the team's best hitter will be up next.
The Cubs currently have no established, traditional lead-off hitter.
Rizzo could be a #2 hitter since he meets most of the requirements of coverage. But he is a double play ground ball hitter, too. He would good better pitches to hit if the #3 hitter was Bryant, who has shown good plate discipline and power. If he can cut down on strike outs and play like his post-season form, Soler would be a good cover at #4 for Bryant. It gets harder to cover Soler because the #5 hitter should be able to drive in runners with gap power. Will Russell grow into this role (which would be a major promotion from batting mostly #9) or is it Castro's position to lose? Depending on where Schwarber will play full time, he makes the most sense at #5. That could push Castro to #6 and Russell to #7 and the catcher hitting ahead of the pitcher.
It gives a balance hitting line up: ?, lefty, righty, righty, lefty, righty, righty, lefty/righty, pitcher.
The idea of two right handers batting in a row is to help the second batter see how the pitcher is setting up right handed hitters. Pitchers throw differently to lefties than righties. This can help in game adjustments.
But most managers like the idea of flipping the batters box: R, L, R, L, R, L. But none of this really works unless each hitter knows his role and can understand the situation when he enters the batter's box.
That is why I am a proponent of a set line up card. The players, who are creatures of habit, can settle in to a clear routine. But Maddon, like most managers, likes to change things up based on stat analysis and gut feelings.
