Quick question for the vets: what are typical ratings for fielding traits for center fielders at the ML level? And also, what are the minimum ratings you'd feel comfortable with for your starting CF? Thanks!

I ask because in my franchise the entire system contains only two players who are listed as CF for their primary position. So I either need to move some corner OF or sign some more CF.

On the GM Page, if you click on their position, it will pop up a window that shows the recommended settings. It's the same place where you change their defensive positions.
It has 85 for both Range and Glove, which I find pretty sensible.

What a player is "listed" at is kind of irrelevant.    You can change a player's position by "Edit roster", click his position.    At that point you'll see the recs for each position and you can hit "show recs" for current or projections.   Or you can adjust them to suit your fancy.

Personally, 85/70/60/60 works for me but many will say "Oh no, 70 glove is way too low!!!"    80+ range, 70+ glove and 50+ arm is fine, IMO, if the guy can hit.   If he can't, I want a lot more defense.

Posted by hypnotoad on 7/23/2015 9:11:00 AM (view original):
On the GM Page, if you click on their position, it will pop up a window that shows the recommended settings. It's the same place where you change their defensive positions.
It has 85 for both Range and Glove, which I find pretty sensible.

this is one of the most important screens to memorize, esp for new players. the numbers do not represent "league average" as much as they represent "rate plus / minus plays" and "error rate"

In general there is a scarcity of players who qualify 85-85-60-65, and teams who have a guy who qualifies and who can also hit (whether for power or even as a leadoff prototype) have a competitive advantage over most other teams who only have a 80-70-55-55 guy.  Also, 70 glove is the kind of player who is last in the league in fielding % amongst qualifiers, and CF errors tend to be amplified relative to infield errors because all runners typically get multiple bases each as compared to infield errors (esp errors by the 2B) which typically result in one base for all runners. There is a significant difference between 75 and 70 glove, dont listen to Mike- 75 is the bare minimum that belongs in CF. 80r-70g who throws RH should play 2B, 80r-70g who throws left should play LF or RF or bench unless it's he's an absolute destroyer at the plate (.900+ OPS)

 Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Nap Slaughter is the kind of player who wins multiple MVPs, but even a guy like  Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Christian Ross makes all-star games and wins gold gloves and is near the top of the league in WAR at his position. If you look around at the good teams in any random world- guys like that tend to be a common denominator because they make your entire pitching staff better and also because there are so few guys like that. More often, guys who can field CF can't hit and guys who can hit can't field CF

Very useful - thank you!

Every season when set my lineups, I click on the "show recs" button to see what the AI thinks is the best use of my players before picking my own lineup. I just did that for my team in Cooperstown today, and it recommended  Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Tom Doyle in CF,  Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Footsie Corbin at 2B, and  Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Tommy Hiatt at 1B. It left  Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Paul Lee on the bench. Since the three starters all have similar throwing ratings (Doyle and Hiatt are almost identical), and the only player (Lee) who exceeds the recommendations in all 4 defensive categories wasn't picked to start despite having better offensive ratings than Doyle, I think it means that the AI favors range over all other categories in CF (Doyle has better range than Lee).

Doyle is also a lefty so it's CF or bust as far as challenging fielding positions go.

Show Recs won't put a player outside of his primary position unless you have a position where no one has that as their primary position.   If you switch Lee to CF as his primary position, it will tell you to play Lee over Doyle at CF.  

It's really just a matter of what you're comfortable with.    If a player isn't throwing out negative plays and errors at a crazy rate, he's good enough for that position.  But, if you're struggling for runs, maybe you're better off taking some negative plays/errors.   84-77-57-63 would be good enough for me if I could trade it for 100 OPS points at another position.

Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Arthur Wolf is a pretty good example.   When I traded for him, I thought his glove would get 4-6 points better(70+).   It hasn't.   He's making an error every 8 games(no +/- plays).     I can live with that.   However, he's not hitting as well as I expected(.670-.700 OPS).  I'm not sure I can live with an error every 8 games AND a .600 OPS.   He might become a utility player while I find a better CF.

Keep in mind chances, too, when you're skimping on D.

Using Range Factor as a (very) rough estimate, CF sees 2-3 chances per game (around what a 3B sees fwiw), SS will see 6-8, 2B is somewhere around 5-6.

I prefer to skimp in places I'll get burned less often.

Better defenders make more plays, worse ones fewer, but these are starting points.

Yeah, that's how I decided RF was the best place for the failed C.   All leagues are different but they'll fall in this average range for RF.

2B - 4.8
3B - 3.2
SS - 5.3
LF - 1.9
CF - 2.4
RF - 1.3

Posted by MikeT23 on 9/16/2015 9:07:00 AM (view original):
Yeah, that's how I decided RF was the best place for the failed C.   All leagues are different but they'll fall in this average range for RF.

2B - 4.8
3B - 3.2
SS - 5.3
LF - 1.9
CF - 2.4
RF - 1.3

All else being equal (which rarely happens), do you think you should place the better fielder at 3B rather than CF? Obviously, AS and AA are more important at 3B, but I've always assumed Range was a crucial rating for CF, and CF was more important than 3B. If Range matters more at 3B, that would change my thoughts about the WiS version of the defensive spectrum. (I don't have a problem right now ... among my 2B/CF/3B, only one has a good arm, so it's easy to pick the 3B, but I'm talking an overall approach.)