Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dagrims
Here is a typical 25-man roster, assuming your league does not have a designated hitter ...:
8 - starting C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, LF, CF, RF
1 - backup C
1 - backup 1B/3B
2 - backup 2B/SS
2 - backup OF
5 - starting pitchers
2 - long relievers/occasional starters
3 - shorter relievers/set-up men
1 - closer
...
|
11 pitchers, is that really typical for the NL nowadays? I don't follow the NL closely enough to know yes or no and maybe I'm too influenced by the AL, but I thought most teams carried 12 pitchers nowadays and some even 13. I suppose that without the DH, and therefore more need for pinch hitters, the NL might have 1 more batter and 1 less pitcher than your typical AL team though.
That reminds me of a question I've been meaning to ask in the Talk Sports forum for some time now. I'll post it later.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dagrims
As to what you want to get first, that all depends on whether you want a team built on on-base percentage, power, pitching, defense, or some combination of the four. It's never a bad idea to be strong up the middle (that is, catcher, 2B, SS, CF). Again, it's all personal preference. Choose based on the type of team you want to follow, or choose the best player available during each of the first 3-4 rounds, and let that dictate the type of team you're going to be building.
|
I agree except for the catcher part. Even if he is more important defensively than a non up-the-middle fielder, the catcher typically doesn't get nearly as many starts as your average starting non-pitcher so I don't think it's wise to spend as much resources on a starting catcher. It's nice to have a good one, but if it is between a good catcher and a good other starting non-pitcher, I'm taking the latter. That said, I'd agree with putting more importance on your catcher in real life, but I'm one of those people who believe the catcher does play an important role in handling staffs.
As for what I draft, I like everything (speed, power, OBP, fielding, pitching, you name it), but more and more I find myself just gravitating to the best player available who still has plenty of his best years ahead him yet isn't so young that you're not sure he'll turn into the player you see him being. That leads me to focusing on, at least early on in the draft, players in their mid to late 20s.