Posted by r0b0t on 10/27/2010 11:33:00 AM:
I think our difference of opinion largely stems from me thinking that certain players' high contact/power can make up for lower than preferred splits. I feel like having a guy who is 80/80/60/60 or even 80/80/50/50 might statistically outperform someone who is 60/60/80/80.

Posted by robusk on 10/27/2010 11:45:00 AM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 10/27/2010 11:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 10/27/2010 11:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 10/27/2010 11:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 10/27/2010 11:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 10/27/2010 11:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 10/27/2010 10:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 10/27/2010 10:17:00 AM (view original):
Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Chicago, Kansas City, Minnesota and Seattle seem like the top teams ML talent-wise in HR.  Am I missing anyone?

I'm hurt. Deeply.

Pitching is overrated. I just need a good enough pitching staff to get me to the playoffs, and I can shorten it from there.

And the defense isn't bad at all... A lot of range amongst my projected starters. I don't really see it as that bad.

Your division sucks outside of TM...  the playoffs are reasonable.

I don't think that team makes the playoffs in the AL though.

I think I'd be better in the AL. I could move Stein from defensive liability to DH, improve my team defense across the board, and find a spot for some of the bench bats that I have in the organization. I have the depth to start nine, and it'd improve my team defensively.

And my pitching staff isn't solidified at this point. I have a few things pending/planned which will fortify them.

I honestly don't think the AL looks that intimidating. There's a lot of talent there, but it's mostly because of how ****** that league was years ago and all the high picks that went into those teams. It still doesn't seem that difficult now to navigate. The adjustment to having a DH would improve my lineup, not diminish it.

Maybe.  I just don't think your position players are nearly as talented as you do.  We tend to disagree on this stuff though.

Probably right about how the AL got so talented, but the top 5 teams in the league have been good for at least five seasons.

A lot of them weren't very good before that. To my knowledge, it was a largely NL-dominated league for some time. These things are cyclical, but I don't really see any teams in the AL that look overwhelming.

I think our difference of opinion largely stems from me thinking that certain players' high contact/power can make up for lower than preferred splits. I feel like having a guy who is 80/80/60/60 or even 80/80/50/50 might statistically outperform someone who is 60/60/80/80. If I can deal with the streakiness of this team, I think they'll do well. They lack a traditional leadoff guy, but I think 1-7 they probably have more pop than any team out there, and that eight spot is going to be the best defensive SS in the league on any given night. Between Terrell and Osuna. Having Moorhouse with his projected defense is a luxury that will sure up the field for me.

Agree on the last.  I am not a big contact guy and value power less than most.  Decent power, high splits and high eye on some switch hitters and left handers....  that is usually how I construct my offense, mixing in as much D as I can.  Certainly not the same model you use.

I think KC is definitely the most talented team in the world.  After them though, I think the 2nd, 3rd and 4th most talented teams reside in the AL...  with the 4-8 squads right there with the likes of Seattle and Minnesota.

Posted by vandydave on 10/27/2010 1:35:00 PM (view original):
the HR chat about HOF worthy-ness amuses me.

Posted by antonsirius on 10/27/2010 1:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 10/27/2010 11:33:00 AM:
I think our difference of opinion largely stems from me thinking that certain players' high contact/power can make up for lower than preferred splits. I feel like having a guy who is 80/80/60/60 or even 80/80/50/50 might statistically outperform someone who is 60/60/80/80.

Case in point, Mitch Wilkerson, who gave me a couple of solid (800-850 OPS in a homer-killing park) seasons when I started in HR.

Posted by r0b0t on 10/27/2010 1:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by antonsirius on 10/27/2010 1:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 10/27/2010 11:33:00 AM:
I think our difference of opinion largely stems from me thinking that certain players' high contact/power can make up for lower than preferred splits. I feel like having a guy who is 80/80/60/60 or even 80/80/50/50 might statistically outperform someone who is 60/60/80/80.

Case in point, Mitch Wilkerson, who gave me a couple of solid (800-850 OPS in a homer-killing park) seasons when I started in HR.

I just got to the point where I realized any combination of the contact, power, and splits would be effective. You can lack in one area if you're strong in the others. So I feel like I can build teams accordingly and maybe get some guys I can use for cheaper from guys who would write them off otherwise.