Who has a good example of a defensive style type team?  Trying to get ideas of what a defensive team might look like and see how far my team is off from converting if I decide to go that route.

Thx!!

My Metropolis franchise is pretty solid defensively.

It's actually not the best (position-by-position) that I've put together, but in the most recently completed season, we led the league in fielding percentage (tied for fewest errors at 66) and led the league in plus plays (121) and tied for best differential (subtract minus plays from plus plays) at 101. Interesting, 12 of my 20 (-) plays were from pitchers, which makes sense because I almost *never* consider a pitcher's defense.

I had a good hit /bad field shortstop. By just inserting a good fielding SS, moving my former SS to third and my 3B (another bad SS) to second, I went from 9th in defense to 3rd.

Ideally, I like to have at least 2 plus defensive SS up the middle, one at SS and one at 2B. I look for 90/90/90/90 if at all possible. In CF, a third 90/90/90/90 would be awesome, but I'll sometimes go less on the glove/arm, but I keep the 90 range in CF if I can. 3B is generally what those who don't care about defense would consider an acceptable SS for them - below the SS recs in one or two categories, but not by much.

The fact of the matter is, if you focus that much on D at those 3/4 spots, you're not likely to get much offense out of them unless you are very fortunate. I try to compensate somewhat by treating 1B/LF/RF as relatively unimportant defensively. For example, I haven't much problem with playing a guy who is recommended as a LF in RF, or a guy recommended as a 1B in LF. I won't go so far as to play a true DH anywhere (even 1B) but other than that, I tend to cut corners at 1B/LF/RF if I have to.

Posted by joev188 on 10/27/2010 2:08:00 AM (view original):
I had a good hit /bad field shortstop. By just inserting a good fielding SS, moving my former SS to third and my 3B (another bad SS) to second, I went from 9th in defense to 3rd.

This is a good point, especially since you are considering "converting" to a good defensive team.

Even most bad teams are only one or two plus defenders from becoming solid or even good defensive teams, because adding a guy to SS allows the crappy defensive SS to slide over to a position (like 3B) where he might now be above average defensively.

I usually look at chances to determine where to play guys.   SS should have 5+, 2B will have just under 5.  Those are obviously your two most important D positions.  CF/3B are a little tricky but, fortunately, they're completely different player types.   A good CF will get close to 3 chances while a bad 3B will get the same amount.    Lastly, a good LF will get 2+ chances while a good RF will get less than 2. 

Based on player types, your only real decision is 2B/CF.    Personally, if they're similar, I put the higher range guy in CF and the better glove guy at 2B.  I'd like my 2B to kick less balls and my CF to get to more.

good info guys.  I kinda had the mindset that when you get defensive players, its more likely you will give up hitting.  It's just how much hitting Iguess I want to give up and where.

I wouldn't give up hitting in LF, RF or 3B especially if you value C defense and have already sacrificed there.   You have to build a balance.  Having great D up the middle is fantastic but, if you don't have the bats to cover for weak hitters, you're just going to lose 2-1, 3-2 instead of 7-5.   I think saying "I'm going to build a defensive team" or "I'm going to build a power-hitting team" is a mistake because you get too focused on that and forget about building a winning team.   

I have some DH type guys do "good enough" at 1st to warrant putting them thereIF they are far superior at the plate. One guy had a 0 range and  glove under 20 but only made 8 errors on the season. 

He hit .350 with 40 HR and 130 RBI, that trade off was worth it. 

I bet he had a bunch of negative plays.

And I wouldn't be surprised if your other infielders sharing the INF with the DH underperformed somewhat as well.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/27/2010 11:13:00 AM (view original):
I bet he had a bunch of negative plays.

How many (-) plays would be too many to trade-off for .350, 40 HR, 130 RBI production?

EDIT: For instance, Derrin Schourek hit .291 with 58 HR & 154 RBI in Season 10 playing 1B, where he had 14 errors & 6 (-) plays.... I think that is a fair trade-off.

Depends on my other option.    Could my other option hit .330/36/124?