Given a choice... would you prefer a bunch of solid hitters (.300ish average with a little pop, not Shane Spencer but guys who don't suck) and a bullpen full of 3.00 ERC# guys, or a bunch of terrible hitters (empty .240 average) and a really good bullpen full of 2.00 ERC# guys?

(This is for a no DH league, 100mil cap)

I realize it's hard to pick in a vacuum. I actually think I'd prefer the better bullpen, even if I know I'll never get any big pinch hits. 

One thing I have noticed very often, is that the guys who win the WS almost always have low inning starters with eye popping stats, and use them to win key games. It is nice to have one of those 50PA guys who hit, even nicer to have more than one, but pitching generally seems to win championships. Having a Milacki or McDowell, or even a Carlos or Falkenberg or Niggeling does more. If you have them all, you will be pretty tough to beat. Additionally, teams often don't have a starting rotation that is designed to win every game. Frequently, I see two stud starters, occasionally three (if they are lower IP guys), and a so so high innings guy to eat up innings, and help with fatigue. That helps provide the funding for those 40k/IP guys.

Bullpen hands down, every time. 

I like one slightly non-terrible hitter on the bench to pinch-hit, but more than 1 feels like a waste. At 100M if everything else is going to plan this might even be '53 Ted Williams, but in some sense if you aren't going big in this way maybe it is just better to have your non-terrible pinch hitter be the standard '03 Wilson Delgado. Really though bullpen seems like the key thing overall, if the choice is one or the other go with that.

I'm sure there is probably a real way to quantify how much value a pinch hitter really has given the way sparky uses them, but that would probably take some clever use of data that is not so easy to obtain.

It seems that a very large portion of the answer to this question depends heavily on exactly how much use you expect your bullpen and bench to get.  Obviously you're a good enough owner to not create a bullpen of all equal arms unless you had no choice, but how many high-quality bullpen innings do you need?  If you have 800 IP of starters you might need 350.  If you have 1000 you might need 200 or less.  If it's the latter the bench starts to feel more important, particularly if you have a couple of guys in the lineup with 500 or 550 PAs (or fewer).  Normally, though, I'd say bullpen just like everyone else.  Or maybe a little of each, if that's an option...

Thanks guys. The "good" bullpen is probably a little bit too stacked, but the bad one is probably a little weaker than I would like. It's a restrictive theme league so neither is what I'd do in an OL, and it's not like the good bullpen is Eck/Gagne/Rivera and the bad bullpen is Jose Mesa/Roberto Hernandez/Jose Jimenez. 

Team with good bullpen: 970 IP in rotation (ERC# about 2.20), 225 IP from 4 relievers that are better than that, and another 180 IP of relievers around 2.95 ERC#

Team with bad bullpen: 970 IP in rotation (ERC# about 2.25, but a distinct top 3 and lesser 4), 140 IP from 3 relievers that are better than that, and about 270 IP of relievers around 3.20 ERC#. 

The difference isn't quite as big as I initially thought. The bad bullpen team is a little closer to "ideal" since I'm spending less on lower-leverage innings and on my #4 starter who won't help me in the playoffs if I make it there. 

I actually think I might be talking myself into the "bad" bullpen now. But averaging just over 6 IP/start from my rotation and then having only 3 good RPs to back them up seems a little dangerous. 

I prefer bench

Posted by pinotfan on 7/26/2012 11:53:00 AM (view original):
Bullpen hands down, every time. 

Same here

Having 2-3 guys who can come off the bench and rake the ball, not for power, just get hits, has been my preference for the last year.  Rewarding to watch as the game unfolds.  On the other side, not too rewarding watching my second worst pitcher throw away another game . . .

Pen

It's nice to have a dude or two off the bench who can hit or run or both, but I find with small sample sizes of PA, my bench guys (or at least a couple of them) usually seem to overperform anyway.  A good bullpen, on the other hand, gets used more and seems to win (or not lose) games more often than a PH does.  So, my vote goes to bullpen.

I generally prefer neither. I try to maximize my $/PA everywhere by platooning as much as possible and only if I have a few bucks extra and an open bench spot I'll take the aforementioned Delgado. 

Likewise, with my bullpen, I draft a tiered rotation a long, a couple of setups and a closer, then I just fill in with the cheapest innings I can muster for the theme and if there's any money leftover it goes back into my rotation or into upgrading a few hitters. 

Bump

Bullpen every time. Most players drafted are everday players anyway !