While the first thing I always look at is vsR because this game is so geared towards right handers, and I never like to have guys on my ML roster that are below 50 in contact or batting eye. Which do you favor more, Contact or Batting Eye???

Eye Eye Captain. If I have a very fast player I'll take a closer look at Contact, but I'm a much bigger fan of Batting Eye.

Oddly enough I'm the opposite. I prefer contact but if I have a fast player I'll look at eye because then they can walk and steal second. But I hate having my guys strike out. With a ball in play a lot can happen.

I just see more of a connection with eye/OBP than I do with contact/K's, plus sometimes low contact is better (the K is better than a DP for example).
The worst are the speedy guys that can't run the bases though, they irritate me.

I’m not an expert at this game by any means but I heavily favor eye and sometimes completely ignore contact. I love walks and want my players to walk. Although, I’m starting to see a correlation between contact and better batting average, which leads to the all mighty OBP, so I’ve started to look at contact a little bit, but still put the same emphasis on eye.

I find that contact enhances more of the power than the average.

Posted by jwynkoop2424 on 7/19/2021 3:58:00 PM (view original):
I find that contact enhances more of the power than the average.

+1

I'm strange in that I find its a balance. If a guy has a lot of power I prefer eye over contact. Like with Vincente Elcano (except that his contact is even too low for me. Would prefer 30-35) Where as with Jimmy McMicheal who has no power, if his eye and contact were reversed he wouldn't be nearly the very good player he is in my opinion.

Posted by hockey1984 on 7/19/2021 1:40:00 PM (view original):
Oddly enough I'm the opposite. I prefer contact but if I have a fast player I'll look at eye because then they can walk and steal second. But I hate having my guys strike out. With a ball in play a lot can happen.

Like a double play

Ideally both, but if I have to pick one I take eye over contact every time.

In my formulas, I find Contact and Eye to be about as important as each other in Avg.

But Eye has a huge advantage when it comes to OBP, of course, so I find Eye to be slightly more important than Contact.

I haven't found much of a correlation between Contact and SLG. For me, SLG is heavily driven by Power and vL/vR splits.

So I'll add a couple of thoughts for those of us who like extreme pitchers' parks. (Tacoma is my favorite). Eye is very important. Contact is very important, because a strike-out is a rally killer. In Tacoma, you either need to string a few hits together, or get a walk + HR. Don't ever let anyone tell you to abandon power in extreme pitchers parks. I find that my legit power hitters will still get plenty of salamies in Tacoma.

And then it's also about the overall line-up. I've built most of my teams around high speed-high contact-high BR leading off, then my best OBP hitter hitting #2. And then the 3 hole is the guy who has the best power + contact.

This is all assuming the vR is over 70, and vL is over 60 for all of those hitters.

To piggy back off of previous entries above, if a player has 85+ speed and a low baserunning ability, I'll take a higher contact rating. If a player has 85+ speed and 70+ baserunning, I'll take the higher eye rating. If the player is slow, I would nearly always take the higher eye rating because he'll hit into too many double plays with a high contact rating.

Posted by dw172300 on 7/20/2021 6:19:00 PM (view original):
In my formulas, I find Contact and Eye to be about as important as each other in Avg.

But Eye has a huge advantage when it comes to OBP, of course, so I find Eye to be slightly more important than Contact.

I haven't found much of a correlation between Contact and SLG. For me, SLG is heavily driven by Power and vL/vR splits.

I break down SLG into AVG + ISO. AVG seems to be correlated with contact and vsL/vsR splits, and ISO seems to be correlated with power, vsL/vsR splits, and speed to a lesser extent. So at least for me there is a component of contact in SLG, but less dominant than power and splits.

I’m with you Saintonan. I should have said ISO above instead of SLG.