George Fultz and Calvin Decker.

Just traded for Decker and not sure what to do.  I know they can both play both positions, but Fultz has been a really good 2B for me the past few seasons and I'm hesitant to move him.  I guess it really comes down to where glove (Decker) matters most versus arm (Fultz).  I know what I would do in real life, but I have no idea what works best in HD.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.  Thanks.

Decker at 2B, Fultz in CF.

Decker's 92 glove will be more of an asset at 2B than it would be in CF as he'll get more touches of the ball.

Fultz's superior arm in CF will generate a lot of plus plays as it will discourage baserunners from advancing an extra base on balls to the outfield that he fields.

From other conversations about this in the forums I can tell you that there is a difference of opinion on this issue. I say put the better range guy in CF, but in this case Fultz lacks elite range for a center fielder. His offense should play enough to cover his defense in center, but depending on your options I would be tempted to play Fultz at SS, Decker at 2B and find another CFer. In CF Fultz probably gives you 4-6 poor plays a season, depending on your staff's GB/FB rate. At SS he gives you maybe 4 plus plays but also 20-30 errors. I don't know, he is not an elite defender at either CF or SS and he is at 2B. Decker plays at 2B and no where else except LF and 1B where he could easily win multiple gold gloves but where his bat will likely become an issue.

Sorry, this is not very helpful.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/12/2012 9:11:00 AM (view original):
Decker at 2B, Fultz in CF.

Decker's 92 glove will be more of an asset at 2B than it would be in CF as he'll get more touches of the ball.

Fultz's superior arm in CF will generate a lot of plus plays as it will discourage baserunners from advancing an extra base on balls to the outfield that he fields.

Has this been verified? I have not seen the high arm steength/accuracy guys producing a lot of plus plays, but I have noticed that they produce fewer poor plays than their similarly range challenged brothers.

Posted by tedwmoore on 7/12/2012 9:18:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/12/2012 9:11:00 AM (view original):
Decker at 2B, Fultz in CF.

Decker's 92 glove will be more of an asset at 2B than it would be in CF as he'll get more touches of the ball.

Fultz's superior arm in CF will generate a lot of plus plays as it will discourage baserunners from advancing an extra base on balls to the outfield that he fields.

Has this been verified? I have not seen the high arm steength/accuracy guys producing a lot of plus plays, but I have noticed that they produce fewer poor plays than their similarly range challenged brothers.

Unless ADMIN was blowing smoke up my *** in this ticket from nearly two years ago:

9/29/2010 3:22 PM	tecwrg
Good afternoon, I'm trying to get a handle on plus/minus plays. I've got Amos Taylor playing CF for me in Mantle. He's got defensive ratings of 92/82/92/91 and is making a lot of plus plays in CF for me. But when I go through the box scores, I'm seeing that most of the plus plays are on base hits. Should I assume that it's his high range (92) that's responsible for these plus play, in that he's getting to balls and turning doubles into singles, or triples into doubles? Or could his very high arm strenth/accuracy (92/91) be preventing runners from taking the extra base? Just to clarify: all of his plus plays are either marked as + (good) or ++ (great), but not +- (good range). The reason I'm asking is because I'm considering another player for CF with similar range but much lower arm ratings, and I'm concerned about the impact to my defense. I cannot really tell from the box scores how much of the plus plays are atttributed to range as opposed to arm. Thanks.
10/1/2010 11:28 AM	Customer Support
Bill, In this specific case it is because of his arm strength and accuracy. Had it been due to his range it would have been denoted as such in the boxscore.
10/1/2010 1:50 PM	tecwrg
Good to know. Thanks for the response.

Okay, looking at your outfield defense, think you might need to keep your current guy in CF...that 95 range and 87 glove gives you an elite defender at least at one position out there. And you everyday SS is not enough of a defensive upgrade over Fultz to take the offensive drop off between the two.

Again, I don't know. Your LF and RF defense is bad, and your 1B is weak too. Putting Decker at 2B and Fultz in center weakens another two positions (defensively) but Fultz is close enough to the defender your current SS is, and such a better hitter, that I would make the swap there.

Thanks, guys.

Before the trade, I had Bernie Hernandez in CF and Fultz at 2B.

Obviously he was a much better defender, but I just figured that ultimately Decker's offense would make up for whatever defensive hit I took.  I also assumed that Fultz would not be my best candidate at SS.

Would I be better off going Fultz at SS, Decker at 2B, and Hernandez in CF?

My current platoon SSs are both better defenders than Fultz, but nowhere near the hitter.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/12/2012 9:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tedwmoore on 7/12/2012 9:18:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 7/12/2012 9:11:00 AM (view original):
Decker at 2B, Fultz in CF.

Decker's 92 glove will be more of an asset at 2B than it would be in CF as he'll get more touches of the ball.

Fultz's superior arm in CF will generate a lot of plus plays as it will discourage baserunners from advancing an extra base on balls to the outfield that he fields.

Has this been verified? I have not seen the high arm steength/accuracy guys producing a lot of plus plays, but I have noticed that they produce fewer poor plays than their similarly range challenged brothers.

Unless ADMIN was blowing smoke up my *** in this ticket from nearly two years ago:

9/29/2010 3:22 PM	tecwrg
Good afternoon, I'm trying to get a handle on plus/minus plays. I've got Amos Taylor playing CF for me in Mantle. He's got defensive ratings of 92/82/92/91 and is making a lot of plus plays in CF for me. But when I go through the box scores, I'm seeing that most of the plus plays are on base hits. Should I assume that it's his high range (92) that's responsible for these plus play, in that he's getting to balls and turning doubles into singles, or triples into doubles? Or could his very high arm strenth/accuracy (92/91) be preventing runners from taking the extra base? Just to clarify: all of his plus plays are either marked as + (good) or ++ (great), but not +- (good range). The reason I'm asking is because I'm considering another player for CF with similar range but much lower arm ratings, and I'm concerned about the impact to my defense. I cannot really tell from the box scores how much of the plus plays are atttributed to range as opposed to arm. Thanks.
10/1/2010 11:28 AM	Customer Support
Bill, In this specific case it is because of his arm strength and accuracy. Had it been due to his range it would have been denoted as such in the boxscore.
10/1/2010 1:50 PM	tecwrg
Good to know. Thanks for the response.

I remember when you posted this before and I immediately looked at m center folders at the time, all of who were high range but low AS/AA guys, and none of their plus plys were marked as +- (good range), all were marked as either good or great plays. I think admin was blowing smoke: I have never seen a below average range/high arm strength and accuracy guy in center field produce a lot of plus plays, at best I would suggest that maybe they produce fewer poor plays than guys with below average range and average arms.

Posted by tedwmoore on 7/12/2012 9:25:00 AM (view original):
Okay, looking at your outfield defense, think you might need to keep your current guy in CF...that 95 range and 87 glove gives you an elite defender at least at one position out there. And you everyday SS is not enough of a defensive upgrade over Fultz to take the offensive drop off between the two.

Again, I don't know. Your LF and RF defense is bad, and your 1B is weak too. Putting Decker at 2B and Fultz in center weakens another two positions (defensively) but Fultz is close enough to the defender your current SS is, and such a better hitter, that I would make the swap there.

Apparently we were thinking the exact same thing. 

Yeah, for a while my lineup looked like this:

C: Mark Martin
1B: Ray Rudolph
2B: Fultz
SS: Mediocre platoon
3B: Yuniesky Nieves
LF: Pascual Hernandez
CF: B. Hernandez
RF: Gus Lennon

That lineup was obviously much stronger defensively.  But then Nieves has been a big disappointment offensively for his career to this point and R.J. Petit has just raked, so I didn't to find a spot for him.  So the switch was made with Lennon moving to 3B and Petit into RF.  He actually hasn't been that bad.  The range has made up for his other below average defensive traits for the most part.  Then Rudolph got hurt, which precipitated the trade for  Jim Lee and Decker.

Anyway, long story semi-short, the offense has been legit, and the defense seems fine, although not great.  But I agree, maybe B. Hernandez should stay in CF and I should move Fultz to SS.

Posted by isack24 on 7/12/2012 9:27:00 AM (view original):
Thanks, guys.

Before the trade, I had Bernie Hernandez in CF and Fultz at 2B.

Obviously he was a much better defender, but I just figured that ultimately Decker's offense would make up for whatever defensive hit I took.  I also assumed that Fultz would not be my best candidate at SS.

Would I be better off going Fultz at SS, Decker at 2B, and Hernandez in CF?

My current platoon SSs are both better defenders than Fultz, but nowhere near the hitter.

I cannot link players in the forums right now, but your primary SS is Armas, right? 86/83/90/82 defense, 69/34/37/57/59 offense. Moving to Fultz at SS you will see a couple fewer plus plays, maybe a couple more poor plays on throws(?), about the same number of errors and less zip on the throw to home; but you also get 100+ points of OPS.

How is your pitching staff for GB/FB? Is it enough to change how you value IF versus OF defense? Overall, I think the change in defense at SS is worth the upgrade in bat.

All but one of my SPs are sub-50 GB/FB, so that bolsters your thought.

SS is a platoon with Armas playing against RHP, but yeah, everything you said makes sense.  For some reason I have always been opposed to Fultz at SS and never even really considered the idea, but it seems to make a lot of sense here.  Thanks!