Range at 2B, Arm at CF? Topic

I have two position players who will begin the season in the starting lineup. I am unsure how to optimize the defensive alignment. Essentially, one will play 2B, one will play CF.

Player A has range-glove-strength-accuracy ratings of 82-78-85-80.

Player B has range-glove-strength-accuracy ratings of 87-78-62-66.

I suspect the difference between these two is minimal, but since the 2B is likely to be involved in more plays, and CF theoretically will have an opportunity to use the good arm for outfield assists, I intuitively want to put player A in CF, and player B at 2B. 

Any thoughts from people who have studied or discussed similar situations?

6/15/2014 5:24 PM
82 range is weak for CF. 
6/15/2014 5:37 PM
Additionally CF do not get as many assists as you might think their arm strength/accuracy would indicate.

IMO you're better off with the higher range guy in CF. Player A will make a lot of plus plays @ 2B due to his AS.
6/15/2014 5:44 PM
Me three. Range in CF. Don't know who you have at 3B but Player A would be plenty good over there.

6/15/2014 7:45 PM
Thanks for the helpful input, guys. I acquired a GG 3B this offseason (81-85-93-70) to help with IF defense, so although player A has been an excellent 3B in the past, he's been bumped. Will go with Player A at 2B, per suggestions.
6/15/2014 8:59 PM
Me four, you'll notice Player A's stronger arm more at 2B than you will in CF. Plus you'll want the rangy guy in CF.
6/15/2014 10:51 PM
Me five.  There's still a bug preventing outfielders from making throwing errors, so the high AA wants to play at 2B.
6/15/2014 11:50 PM
Range at 2B, Arm at CF? Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2016 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.