[yzerman19]

call me billy bean, but I don't think I would ever put time and effort into the development of a player who can't get on base. If a player is only fair in walks and contact, he is going to be more of a headache than anything else. Sure 40-45 homeruns looks nice, but what about the 150 strikeouts? Thats a combination of 150 times of not advancing a runner, or not getting on base to lead off an inning, or not cashing in a runner on third with less than two outs...I just don't think 40 home runs are worth that kind of a rally stopper.
Compare these two players:
first baseman 1 hits 20 homeruns, hits .290 and has an on base of .380, while striking out 45 times.
first basemen 2 hits 45 homeruns, while hitting .240 and drawing an .310 on base percentage and striking out 135 times.

First baseman one reaches base about 60 more times, and by striking out so little, he is doing the little things way better (anvancing a runner, reaching on error, sac flies, etc.)
First baseman two doesn't do any of these things, and he only produces 25 more homeruns...many of which will be solo shots! Plus he probably commands a much larger contract than first baseman one does.
So why even develop the next rob deer? I don't understand.