Yea the more I think about it that guy is too good to pass up

So despite the 69 DUR and defensive limitations, you guys rank Player D (who's probably a RF) over the top two Pitchers (A & B) and over Player C (plus glove at 3B and plus bat)?

The good news is you're in a good position - you're probably going to end up being happy with whoever you take.

Posted by NickKappel on 8/11/2016 10:44:00 AM (view original):
So despite the 69 DUR and defensive limitations, you guys rank Player D (who's probably a RF) over the top two Pitchers (A & B) and over Player C (plus glove at 3B and plus bat)?

First time I've looked it over. My take - the two pitchers profile as very, very good. C and E are good all around players, C will not be a SS but probably a 3B. D profiles as an elite or near-elite bat. Who you like best may depend on your positional requirements, but in the past handful of drafts I've been in, I usually only see one bat this good, almost never two. When I'm pre-ranking my prospects, first thing I do is find the difference-making bat and move him to #1, and I almost never get him. I'd guess that's why the guys here like him best.

Player Profile: Torey Dali - Hardball Dynasty Baseball | WhatIfSports had similar ratings to player D excep Dali has a little more CON and EYE but 25 less VRH. He had a career 1.000 OPS and 673 HR's.

Thanks for the input, fellas. I'm having a hard time ranking Player D (average RF) ahead of Player C (plus 3B), given the gap in defensive versatility and D's low DUR. If D had an 87 DUR like C does, this probably isn't a debate. With so many great options at the top of this draft, I'm reluctant to use this pick on a guy who'll only be 100% for 110-120 games (Player D), no matter how elite his bat may be.

Right now (with a few days left to adjust), I'm at:

1. Pitcher A
2. Pitcher B
3. Player C
4. Player D
5. Player E

Posted by brianplath on 8/11/2016 12:12:00 PM (view original):
Player Profile: Torey Dali - Hardball Dynasty Baseball | WhatIfSports had similar ratings to player D excep Dali has a little more CON and EYE but 25 less VRH. He had a career 1.000 OPS and 673 HR's.

This guy had an 81 DUR. Player D projects to a 69 DUR. That's my biggest hold up with him. Although, here's a thought: Player D also projects to a 95 health. Could I lower his rest setting to, say, 85-90%, and still get maybe 140-150 games? Seems like his bat at 85% would still be better than most at 100%, right? Is that logical, or am I stretching too far to justify Player D's case by saying I could start him at ~85%?

Shessh. Maybe I overvalue defense.

Player C does B/T R. I don't value him as a SS; he's a GG 3B to me. Which is still very valuable, right? Compared to Player D, his bat isn't elite, but 80 splits with 71 CON and 80 PWR is still pretty awesome. Not to mention 76 SPEED, 77 RUN, 87 DUR, 81 MAKEUP, etc.

The point you make about his contract demands exceeding his value is something I hadn't thought of. Is that because his fielding attributes are better than a 3B but not quite good enough for a SS?

You shouldn't care. But I'm seven seasons into HBD and you have 36, so maybe you know something that I don't. I'm not questioning your opinion, I'm just trying to objectively rank these five players considering all the factors in play.

Player D and it isn't even close. Yeah, he's RF/LF/1B. He's also a beast at the plate and can run if you're a basestealing team. There really shouldn't be a debate. Tell me who didn't take him at #1 and I'll make fun of them.

That said, I try to figure out why to take players rather than why not. I took this guy at 29 because my scouts projected him to be a destroyer of LH pitching. At the end of the round, getting a player that can destroy LHP is a good pick-up. And he projects to be an near elite level C.

Player Profile: Luther Verdugo - Hardball Dynasty Baseball | WhatIfSports

However, his DUR is 17. I said "Screw it. He can catch against lefties. That's all I need at 29."

Snagged a guy at pick 76 that my $20M scouts project at 98/92/100/56/85 for hitting ratings. "Only" a 72 DUR. Couldn't believe the best hitter in the draft dropped that far. Owners must focus too much on OVR.

Although in that case, my guess is the only guys who saw him where also the guys who had a 0 setting for their DH slot in draft settings. That's the only explanation that makes sense.

Thanks, Mike. That's kind of my approach here too - look for reasons to say no - which is why I'm skeptical of Player D because of his 69 durability. And this isn't a late pick; I need to hit with this one. If I wind up with Player D, am I settling for 110 games a year with this player? I don't have much experience starting players who drop below 98%. Is that something I could do with a guy like him and still get elite production?

Me, personally, I'd rather have a hitter I love and have to manage his playing time, than a player who can play 162 but I wish he was better.

Posted by NickKappel on 8/11/2016 3:06:00 PM (view original):
Thanks, Mike. That's kind of my approach here too - look for reasons to say no - which is why I'm skeptical of Player D because of his 69 durability. And this isn't a late pick; I need to hit with this one. If I wind up with Player D, am I settling for 110 games a year with this player? I don't have much experience starting players who drop below 98%. Is that something I could do with a guy like him and still get elite production?

You misunderstood me. I don't look for reasons to say "no", I look for reasons to say "yes".

Player D is an elite bat. If he only gives you 500 AB a season, you're better off than a 75%-level player giving you 700. Build your team around that type of player. That will include a guy who can be his back-up for 30-40 games.