I'm going to try to free up a couple million here and there in trades, but ultimately, I think I'm going to be stuck with these guys.  The only other alternative is to NOT sign one of my top free agents, which would free up $10-15 mil I could then disperse to 3 more players.  That said, I'm more of  a "one super star" kind of guy as opposed to "several good players."

I'm more of a "no crappy players" kind of guy as opposed to "surround your crown jewel with cubic zirconia." I'll take lousy hitting out of a Gold Glove-caliber SS or truly outstanding defensive C (70+ AS/AA and 85+ PC), but there's no reason to accept less than .700 OPS out of any other position on the diamond. Especially from a corner spot.

Defense is the best, and easiest, way to improve a bad team.   I took over a bad team in Hamilton.   There just wasn't any talent on the team.   A couple of hitters, no pitching and horrible fielding.   I had the #1 claim on the WW.  I claimed every decent player that was waived.    Most of them were D-Spec types.    I finished the year below the average in RS(somewhere in the middle of the pack).   I was 24th in ERA.   But I was 3rd in fielding percentage, top 10 in + plays and #4 in - plays(the good #4).  Finished with 75 wins despite mediocre hitting and horrible pitching.

Posted by travisg on 9/20/2010 3:50:00 PM (view original):

I'm going to try to free up a couple million here and there in trades, but ultimately, I think I'm going to be stuck with these guys.  The only other alternative is to NOT sign one of my top free agents, which would free up $10-15 mil I could then disperse to 3 more players.  That said, I'm more of  a "one super star" kind of guy as opposed to "several good players."

I'm more of a "no crappy players" kind of guy as opposed to "surround your crown jewel with cubic zirconia." I'll take lousy hitting out of a Gold Glove-caliber SS or truly outstanding defensive C (70+ AS/AA and 85+ PC), but there's no reason to accept less than .700 OPS out of any other position on the diamond. Especially from a corner spot.

There is nothing wrong with a .270/.330/.350 guy at CF if he has 90/90 defense, I would start that guy.

And the problem for newbies is that a lot of them a) overvalue offense and undervalue defense and b) suck at projecting performances based on offensive ratings.  A lot of noobs will play a 60/60/60/60/60 hitter at DH, and end up getting comparatively very poor production.  Defensive ratings are a bit more cut and dry- either they are above the recs or they are not.  If a guy is above the recs, he will perform well.

A lot of the problems on crappy teams is that they will play a high end 3B who barely hits better than a D-Spec SS at SS, and that guy will really hurt their team.  Or they will play a light hitting RF at 3B.  Ultimately, they end up with crappy offense and very poor defensive teams- by raising thresholds for defensive performance they will probably end up with the same types of hitters while preventing a lot of extra runs.

Avoid the things that are fatal to productivity.  Without a pitch over 60, pitchers cannot succeed.  With an eye of under 30, the hitter cannot produce.  Look at where the player's weaknesses are, and determine if you can stand the flaw, or the flaw will keep you from winning.   Don't be afraid to check other players with the same flaw to see what they can do. 

I don't know, I'd say this guy had a pretty solid career with a batting eye of 3:

whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx

The problem with specific rules is that sometimes they do cause you to overlook quality guys.  Just make sure that whoever you get has good ratings, and if they have some really bad ratings, they better have really good ratings to compensate.

Rules of thumb are useful for n00bs because there's a lot to remember. They can be bent with some success by more experienced owners, but in the meantime it's useful to know that bad players = bad results. And bad players are guys that cannot field their positions at the premium defensive spots (SS, 2B, CF and C) or guys that can't give you .700 OPS or better from spots where defense is less of a premium.

Obviously, there are going to be exceptions to those rules, but that's a good place to start if you want to win enough games to stay in your league long enough to learn the game.

Something that just occured to me, for those competing in a world w/ a min wins floor that think you've got to be really bad to draft well.  In one of my worlds (no min wins floor) I had the 19th pick, and a college & HS scouting buget of 15 a piece.   That was 3rd in college, and tied for 3rd best in HS scouting that season.  I would imagine those ranges are fairly consistant w/ a min wins world (I'm not in one, can someone confirm what the typical draft buget would look like for the 3rd best scouting buget in each catagory?).   I got the 5th ranked player on my board down at 19.  That was in season 5, we're now in season 9.  I traded that guy away to acquire a solid CF prospect last offseason, but he's a candidate for rookie of the year this season.  Looking back on that draft this morning and the 18 guys drafted ahead of him (16 of which signed and are in the world still) There are only 4 other players drafted ahead of him that I'd rather have than the guy I drafted in that spot today.

Moral of the story, if you buget properrly, you don't have to finish w/ the worst record in the league to draft solid talent into your system.

Depends on the world...in weaker worlds, you can get solid value in the late 1st round, in worlds with sharper owners, it's a lot harder to get anything more than a d-spec SS outside of the top 30.

And it still doesn't compare to the potential world beater that you may get at #1 overall.

What ratings to I look for in getting a good pitcher?

Posted by winter64 on 10/20/2010 11:34:00 AM (view original):
What ratings to I look for in getting a good pitcher?

You are going to get a lot of advice about this question. Many guys are going to say some crap like "at least 80+ splits!" or other such nonsense. The bottom line is that it's all about the combination of ratings. One rating can be weak if another is very high. I'll break down briefly how I see it.

I think the first ratings to look at are vL and vR. If these are really bad, the pitcher probably won't be very good. If these are 80+, he'll be good irregardless (in almost all cases) of any other ratings. Generally speaking, I've never seen a good pitcher with a vR in the 40s or worse. I have had one guy who had a vL of 48 who was pretty good, but his vR was in the high 60s and he had good control and pitches. And he still wasn't great. So, I would suggest starting with 50+ as the cut-off for splits. I would suggest the same cut-off for control. I have seen a few good pitchers with control in the 40s, but they had great other ratings to compensate. As a n00b, I would suggest looking for pitchers with control in the 70s or 80s. There can be good values to be found with pitchers in the 50s or 60s, but they are "riskier" in the sense that you have to have a good sense of what their other ratings are. It's my opinion that pitchers with 90+ control can be overrated. I have a guy with 90+ control who still walks 4+ batters/9 because his splits and pitches are poor. The difference between 75 control and 90 control could be the difference between a 4th and a 3rd starter. The difference between 75 and 90 vR could be the difference between 4th pitcher and Cy Young candidate. But again, that's just my opinion.

Everything else seems to work in conjunction. A guy with high (80+) velocity and at least one 80+ pitch will usually strike plenty of guys out. Guys with splits, GB/FB, and at least one pitch all 70+ seem to have low OAVs even if their strikeout numbers aren't stellar. It seems to me that the value of having one good pitch is more than having multiple decent pitches. I would rather have a guy with 80/60/40/40 pitches than 60/60/60/60 pitches. I haven't seen too many guys who are very good with at least one 70+ pitch.

Also, it is my belief that, all things being equal, a right-hander is about 5% better than a left-hander with the same ratings due to the fact that there are more hitters who can mash lefties than righties.

The only thing I can contribute is to formulate a plan for the next 5 years, and stick with it. Avoid temptation, especially with trades or FA signings.

Eg.
You require player "X", X being the player that you feel is your greatest need. Prior to FA signings, figure out how long and for how much you can spend on player X. Consider players that will hit arb, needs you will have next season or the season after.

Check your minor leagues. If he exists there, that's your first option.

If not, set your FA targets for the players that fit that criteria.
Bid on the first one. Once he exceeds your spending budget, move on to the next. And so on.

If unsuccessful, then trade options are your next step.

Everyone has their own tolerence for what is the max for "how long" and "how much", and it can change from season to season. But the death stroke is getting caught up in FA bidding to get "that guy", and blowing out the ability to build the rest of your team.

green does this more successfully than I, but I still haven't had a team below 74 wins under my control (non-abandoned takeover). If I can do it, certainly to God anyone can.