What do you build your team around?

Cuss16 · 12-18-2002, 07:02 AM

i build mine around hitting coz i think batting stats are more interesting and easier to disect.

Cole · 12-18-2002, 09:23 AM

I would say I try for a combination of both, because you usually can't win without one...

However, more specifically, in batting, I usually focus more on contact guys who are going to get on base often, rather than guys who will hit a bunch of homeruns but have an OBP of .240

AsTrOFaN · 12-18-2002, 06:05 PM

Well-rounded lineup and an ace pitcher.

If a guy only posts a .240 OBP, his name must be Rey Ordonez, and everyone knows he doesn't hit homers

holyroller · 12-18-2002, 06:28 PM

A lineup full of hitters who get on base, if possible strong defense up the middle, one ace starter, some innings eaters, and a deep bullpen.

twins15 · 12-18-2002, 09:56 PM

Hitting at first, then I go for some pitching. It's probably dumb, but I don't go for defense that much.

blubbla · 12-18-2002, 11:08 PM

I like to have a 2-3 hitters with a high OBP, preferably with either blazing speed (I run with those guys liberally) or the ability to get plenty of doubles, then a big dependable 30+ HR bat or two in the center of the lineup to knock the runs in. I also like to have 3-4 starters that can go 7 or 8 innings and keep me in the game for my reliable relievers to finish the job.

If a guy can't hit like I want him to, he'd better be a darn good defensive player, especially if he plays up the middle.

spleen1015 · 12-18-2002, 11:36 PM

I'm not telling. I don't want the guys I compete online with to know my secret for losing.

Cuss16 · 12-18-2002, 11:37 PM

HAHAHAHAHA

)

Cuss16 · 12-21-2002, 04:02 PM

looks like pitching is a fundation for lots of good teams, hmmm

Markmeister · 12-21-2002, 05:02 PM

I tend to build around hitting with one dominant pitching ace.

Fielding - I always take a better fielder over hitter unless they more than 2 rating points apart (i.e I don't take a SS w/ 2 avg and A range over a 5 avg and C range.) If only going down 1 range factor, will close the ratings points difference to just 1 point.

dsvitak · 12-21-2002, 10:05 PM

If I have one really dominant pitcher, and the rest of the staff is .500, then I have a legitimate shot at the pennant.

Example: One starter 27-5, leaves 130 other games.

Half of 130 = 65, plus 27 = 92 wins.

So, in my fictional leagues - I always have the very first pick, funny how it works out;

I get the very finest pitcher available.

After that, I look for the highest OBP guy, then the potentially highest OPS guy.

Then build around.

I only look at speed and defense if they are exceptionally good (or bad), as a factor.

voxpoptart · 12-22-2002, 03:11 AM

The way i've enjoyed winning so far is to focus on

(1) Having good fielders at EVERY position (lots of A's, no lower than B's or a C outfielder with an A arm), with the possible exceptions of first base and catcher.
(2) Then filling my staff with good pitchers, not aces, who score well in preventing homers and walks, get a lot of ground balls, and hold runners well, even if their hits-prevention score is mediocre. As in real life (and this is one thing i like about this simulation), having experts at every position will save a lot of hits, and the groundballs will result in lots of double plays when a hitter does get on -- thus, pitchers come to my teams and drop their ERA's substantially.
(3) Getting excellent, durable relievers who can keep games close when my groundballing starters don't have what it takes and need to be yanked.
(4) Paying a lot of attention, offensively, to walks, doubles, batting average, platooning opportunities, and A or at least B stealing ability. This often leads to my teams finishing 13th out of 14 in homers, but 1st in runs -- we have long-chain offenses (in hitters' parks) or at least strong one-run offenses (in pitchers' parks), and ground into very few DP's because of the high-percentage base-stealing.

Does it work? I think so. In my fictional league, my large-market team wins 108 games a year and my small-market team wins 97 even though, as a deliberate handicap, i hire mid-level coaches and scouts and refuse to sign superstar free agents (except bullpen superstars). I play against the computer, true, but i intervene now and then to create mutually-smart trades among the computer teams or to cancel any of their trades that are clearly utterly stupid -- which, in the real world of Kevin Millwood, my human oppenents would be allowed to commit.

The reason my strategies work, i suspect, is the same reason they worked for Whitey Herzog in real life: because fielding, drawing walks, and hitting doubles are low-glamour abilities, and hitting homers or pitching strikeouts are high-glamour abilities, so i'm getting good players who are undervalued, and whom i can dispose of if necessary to find players with similar skills.

The reason my strategies are fun is that clicking "Double Steal" or "Squeeze Play" or "Hit & Run" is more suspenseful than clicking "Swing Away". For me, anyway. Cheers!

dsvitak · 12-22-2002, 04:37 AM

Voxpoptart, your last post is one of the best I have read on this forum.

Being from St. Louis, and a true "Whitey-Ball" fan, I appreciate the small-ball style of play.

Until your post, I have not appreciated the nuances of small-ball, or more importantly, their affect on this baseball simulation.

Are you are telling us that there is a significant and quantifiable statistical advantage to [average hit/good field], vs. [good hit/poor field?]

Your way is more difficult than just plugging in big boppers and swinging away. There is certainly more artistry and creativity involved.

But it is HARD to put in a player who you KNOW will not get on base as much as another guy.....even though his peripheral stats and abilities are much better.

Trick is to quantify how relevant they are.

How many runs per year does an A outfielder save, vs. a C?

I can do the math on fielding percentage, vs. how many plays they make, but how significant are the differences in ranges?

I remember the Cards teams of the early to mid 80's, when they had (arguably

) the finest defensive infield in the history of baseball.....Ozzie, Hernandez, Herr, Oberkfell/Pendleton, Kaat.

Then they got John Tudor, a lefty groundball pitcher. He ended up with the highest winning percentage in National League history, even better than Koufax. NOTHING got through the left side.

For fun, look up Ozzie Smith's assist totals per year, and compare them to your favorite shortstop. The difference is breathtaking, a real eye opener.

I will try your way. Pitching, speed, defense, trade all the sluggers!!!

Bohunk · 12-22-2002, 08:09 AM

I usually build my team around pitching. When done right (my current season) I have 2 or 3 twenty game winners with the other two getting anywhere from 10 to 15 wins. Defence and speed are the only priorities I look for for my line up. Usually have over 100 wins and the playoffs are a breeze when your top 3 pitchers are better than the other teams top 3, you usually win the series.

voxpoptart · 12-22-2002, 06:28 PM

Thanks for writing. I'd better be clear: i have NOT done the studies to determine the number of runs saved by fielders at any given position. I know that traditionally, the sabermetricians measure hitting as half the game, pitching as a third of the game, and fielding as a sixth of the game, in terms of runs scored/saved.

The logic behind me going for the fielding, in numbers terms, is that both my teams, even the small-market one, are ABLE to assemble great fielders everywhere -- better-fielding teams than any current major-league equivalent, i suspect -- which is much cheaper than getting those great hitters across the board. "One-sixth of the game is fielding" is a generalized rule, and i'm creating very a non-generalized situation, especially by hiring pitchers who put a large number of balls in play.

I'd estimate, based on the ERA ratings of my staff and the park effects of my teams, that the direct savings of my maniacally A-focused defense are about 100 runs per 162-game schedule, maybe a bit more. Indirectly, with my defense reducing the number of pitches thrown, my teams seem to get fewer pitcher injuries.

Good luck with your Whiteyball makeover!

Jason Moyer · 12-24-2002, 05:56 AM

I build my teams around hitters who hit for average and power, take a ton of walks, know how to bunt, and are high percentage base stealers, defenders who have A range/arm ratings and high fielding percentages, and pitchers who are 10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10 across the board. I do this while spending as little money as possible while attempting to win lots of games.

I find this to be the best strategy.

Jason

MM13 · 12-24-2002, 09:15 AM

I try to get by with pitching and defense. I try to piece together a decent offense that can score a few runs and let my staff and D do the rest.I usually emphasize this in the amateur draft. I've produced two above average starting pitchers from my farm system and I've got 3-4 at AA who should be ready in a year or two. Much like the pros, I've tried to draft older players if I need help soon (1-2 years) and grab younger players (18-19 year olds) at my deep positions. If a 18 year old and a 22 year old have the same talent, I'll likely grab the 18 year old as they have a better chance of improving their talent since they have 4 more years to develop. The 22 year old is likely to be ready for the bigs sooner.

Besides Whitey ball, has anyone tried the Oakland A's High OBP/Power approach to getting hitters? Also, has anyone been able to put together a team that can win consistently in Coors Field?

Jason Moyer · 12-24-2002, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MM13
Besides Whitey ball, has anyone tried the Oakland A's High OBP/Power approach to getting hitters?

That's all I've ever done in OOTP. Since the AI undervalues walk ability, it's not hard to get guys who have like 4 hitting/10 power/10 walks for peanuts. Sure they'll hit .250 but they'll walk 120 times and pound 40 homeruns. That's probably also why I need to use harsh house rules (i.e. a personal salary cap of $25 million while making sure the AI teams have about $100 mil to spend) to keep from winning 130 games every year.

Quote:

Also, has anyone been able to put together a team that can win consistently in Coors Field?

Yep. Do the same thing you do with any other team. Since the pitching model isn't realistic (there's no such thing as "ability to avoid hits" in real life) you don't need to do the things the Rockies really need to do, i.e. stop being fooled by park effects and build a stronger offense (Larry Walker is their best hitter now, and he's basically a .280/20 HR hitter in any other park) and sign power pitchers with high strikeout rates since putting the ball in play in Coors Field is murder In OOTP I'd just do what you normally do when it comes to signing pitchers - focus on 3 abilities: ability to avoid hits, ability to avoid homeruns, and ability to avoid walks.

FWIW, the Rockies in the mid-90's consistently won in Coors Field, they just couldn't win anywhere else. Now that they don't really have an offense or pitching, they don't win anywhere, but that's a different story.

Jason

SufferingSoxFan · 12-24-2002, 11:06 AM

I build my teams around speed and sound base running to manufacture runs as much as possible. Solid Fielding especially at the corners, solid pitching with atleast 2 studs, with good #4 and 5 power hitters.

I accomplish this most of the time by:
1. trading for relief pitchers and leadoff hitters
2. drafting stud pitchers, good fielding and speed on offense
3. free agent signings for power hitters and stud pitchers

It would be nice to see who was available in the draft during the free agency period so that I could alter the above as required.

MM13 · 12-24-2002, 11:23 AM

Hmm...maybe I don't exploit the AI as I much as I can. My team usually does pretty well (85+ wins a year), but I've never been able to get 115+ wins. I've got 3 above average or better SPs, a decent bullpen, and some pretty good offensive players. I'm trying for 80's stats so a power hitter to me is someone who can hit 25+ homers. I've removed Coors from the league so that the stats aren't inflated.

View Poll Results: What do you build your teams around?
Batting	20	22.99%
Pitching	65	74.71%
Fielding	2	2.30%
Voters: 87. You may not vote on this poll

12-18-2002, 07:02 AM	#1
Cuss16 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: BC, CANADA Posts: 2,994	What do you build your team around? i build mine around hitting coz i think batting stats are more interesting and easier to disect. __________________

12-18-2002, 09:56 PM	#5
twins15 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Area 51 Posts: 4,792	Hitting at first, then I go for some pitching. It's probably dumb, but I don't go for defense that much. __________________ "Ah man we're just hungry man" - Dovonte Edwards Bismarck Boy Scouts of the OTBL - league yes-man Ross Gload at baseball-reference.com Book Quotes and Book Lists

12-18-2002, 11:37 PM	#8
Cuss16 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: BC, CANADA Posts: 2,994	HAHAHAHAHA ) __________________

12-21-2002, 04:02 PM	#9
Cuss16 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: BC, CANADA Posts: 2,994	looks like pitching is a fundation for lots of good teams, hmmm __________________

12-18-2002, 09:23 AM	#2
Cole Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Fredericton, New Brunswick Posts: 2,685	I would say I try for a combination of both, because you usually can't win without one... However, more specifically, in batting, I usually focus more on contact guys who are going to get on base often, rather than guys who will hit a bunch of homeruns but have an OBP of .240

12-18-2002, 06:05 PM	#3
AsTrOFaN Major Leagues Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 334	Well-rounded lineup and an ace pitcher. If a guy only posts a .240 OBP, his name must be Rey Ordonez, and everyone knows he doesn't hit homers

12-18-2002, 06:28 PM	#4
holyroller Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: OTBL Forums Posts: 3,532	A lineup full of hitters who get on base, if possible strong defense up the middle, one ace starter, some innings eaters, and a deep bullpen. __________________ Back to work, but not drawing a paycheck. TonyJ et. al.'s alias “I confused it with the chicken’s neck,” Mocanu, who was admitted to the emergency hospital in Galati, was quoted as saying. “I cut it ... and the dog rushed and ate it.”

12-18-2002, 11:08 PM	#6
blubbla Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Herscher, IL Posts: 2,460	I like to have a 2-3 hitters with a high OBP, preferably with either blazing speed (I run with those guys liberally) or the ability to get plenty of doubles, then a big dependable 30+ HR bat or two in the center of the lineup to knock the runs in. I also like to have 3-4 starters that can go 7 or 8 innings and keep me in the game for my reliable relievers to finish the job. If a guy can't hit like I want him to, he'd better be a darn good defensive player, especially if he plays up the middle.

12-18-2002, 11:36 PM	#7
spleen1015 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 6,008	I'm not telling. I don't want the guys I compete online with to know my secret for losing.

12-21-2002, 05:02 PM	#10
Markmeister Major Leagues Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Kentucky Posts: 463	I tend to build around hitting with one dominant pitching ace. Fielding - I always take a better fielder over hitter unless they more than 2 rating points apart (i.e I don't take a SS w/ 2 avg and A range over a 5 avg and C range.) If only going down 1 range factor, will close the ratings points difference to just 1 point. Last edited by Markmeister; 12-21-2002 at 05:05 PM.

12-21-2002, 10:05 PM	#11
dsvitak Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 5,410	If I have one really dominant pitcher, and the rest of the staff is .500, then I have a legitimate shot at the pennant. Example: One starter 27-5, leaves 130 other games. Half of 130 = 65, plus 27 = 92 wins. So, in my fictional leagues - I always have the very first pick, funny how it works out; I get the very finest pitcher available. After that, I look for the highest OBP guy, then the potentially highest OPS guy. Then build around. I only look at speed and defense if they are exceptionally good (or bad), as a factor.

12-22-2002, 03:11 AM	#12
voxpoptart Major Leagues Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 387	The way i've enjoyed winning so far is to focus on (1) Having good fielders at EVERY position (lots of A's, no lower than B's or a C outfielder with an A arm), with the possible exceptions of first base and catcher. (2) Then filling my staff with good pitchers, not aces, who score well in preventing homers and walks, get a lot of ground balls, and hold runners well, even if their hits-prevention score is mediocre. As in real life (and this is one thing i like about this simulation), having experts at every position will save a lot of hits, and the groundballs will result in lots of double plays when a hitter does get on -- thus, pitchers come to my teams and drop their ERA's substantially. (3) Getting excellent, durable relievers who can keep games close when my groundballing starters don't have what it takes and need to be yanked. (4) Paying a lot of attention, offensively, to walks, doubles, batting average, platooning opportunities, and A or at least B stealing ability. This often leads to my teams finishing 13th out of 14 in homers, but 1st in runs -- we have long-chain offenses (in hitters' parks) or at least strong one-run offenses (in pitchers' parks), and ground into very few DP's because of the high-percentage base-stealing. Does it work? I think so. In my fictional league, my large-market team wins 108 games a year and my small-market team wins 97 even though, as a deliberate handicap, i hire mid-level coaches and scouts and refuse to sign superstar free agents (except bullpen superstars). I play against the computer, true, but i intervene now and then to create mutually-smart trades among the computer teams or to cancel any of their trades that are clearly utterly stupid -- which, in the real world of Kevin Millwood, my human oppenents would be allowed to commit. The reason my strategies work, i suspect, is the same reason they worked for Whitey Herzog in real life: because fielding, drawing walks, and hitting doubles are low-glamour abilities, and hitting homers or pitching strikeouts are high-glamour abilities, so i'm getting good players who are undervalued, and whom i can dispose of if necessary to find players with similar skills. The reason my strategies are fun is that clicking "Double Steal" or "Squeeze Play" or "Hit & Run" is more suspenseful than clicking "Swing Away". For me, anyway. Cheers!

12-22-2002, 04:37 AM	#13
dsvitak Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 5,410	Voxpoptart, your last post is one of the best I have read on this forum. Being from St. Louis, and a true "Whitey-Ball" fan, I appreciate the small-ball style of play. Until your post, I have not appreciated the nuances of small-ball, or more importantly, their affect on this baseball simulation. Are you are telling us that there is a significant and quantifiable statistical advantage to [average hit/good field], vs. [good hit/poor field?] Your way is more difficult than just plugging in big boppers and swinging away. There is certainly more artistry and creativity involved. But it is HARD to put in a player who you KNOW will not get on base as much as another guy.....even though his peripheral stats and abilities are much better. Trick is to quantify how relevant they are. How many runs per year does an A outfielder save, vs. a C? I can do the math on fielding percentage, vs. how many plays they make, but how significant are the differences in ranges? I remember the Cards teams of the early to mid 80's, when they had (arguably ) the finest defensive infield in the history of baseball.....Ozzie, Hernandez, Herr, Oberkfell/Pendleton, Kaat. Then they got John Tudor, a lefty groundball pitcher. He ended up with the highest winning percentage in National League history, even better than Koufax. NOTHING got through the left side. For fun, look up Ozzie Smith's assist totals per year, and compare them to your favorite shortstop. The difference is breathtaking, a real eye opener. I will try your way. Pitching, speed, defense, trade all the sluggers!!!

12-22-2002, 08:09 AM	#14
Bohunk Minors (Single A) Join Date: May 2002 Location: Cleveland Posts: 73	I usually build my team around pitching. When done right (my current season) I have 2 or 3 twenty game winners with the other two getting anywhere from 10 to 15 wins. Defence and speed are the only priorities I look for for my line up. Usually have over 100 wins and the playoffs are a breeze when your top 3 pitchers are better than the other teams top 3, you usually win the series.

12-22-2002, 06:28 PM	#15
voxpoptart Major Leagues Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 387	Reply to dsvitak Thanks for writing. I'd better be clear: i have NOT done the studies to determine the number of runs saved by fielders at any given position. I know that traditionally, the sabermetricians measure hitting as half the game, pitching as a third of the game, and fielding as a sixth of the game, in terms of runs scored/saved. The logic behind me going for the fielding, in numbers terms, is that both my teams, even the small-market one, are ABLE to assemble great fielders everywhere -- better-fielding teams than any current major-league equivalent, i suspect -- which is much cheaper than getting those great hitters across the board. "One-sixth of the game is fielding" is a generalized rule, and i'm creating very a non-generalized situation, especially by hiring pitchers who put a large number of balls in play. I'd estimate, based on the ERA ratings of my staff and the park effects of my teams, that the direct savings of my maniacally A-focused defense are about 100 runs per 162-game schedule, maybe a bit more. Indirectly, with my defense reducing the number of pitches thrown, my teams seem to get fewer pitcher injuries. Good luck with your Whiteyball makeover!

12-24-2002, 05:56 AM	#16
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,108	I build my teams around hitters who hit for average and power, take a ton of walks, know how to bunt, and are high percentage base stealers, defenders who have A range/arm ratings and high fielding percentages, and pitchers who are 10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10 across the board. I do this while spending as little money as possible while attempting to win lots of games. I find this to be the best strategy. Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

12-24-2002, 09:15 AM	#17
MM13 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 23	I try to get by with pitching and defense. I try to piece together a decent offense that can score a few runs and let my staff and D do the rest.I usually emphasize this in the amateur draft. I've produced two above average starting pitchers from my farm system and I've got 3-4 at AA who should be ready in a year or two. Much like the pros, I've tried to draft older players if I need help soon (1-2 years) and grab younger players (18-19 year olds) at my deep positions. If a 18 year old and a 22 year old have the same talent, I'll likely grab the 18 year old as they have a better chance of improving their talent since they have 4 more years to develop. The 22 year old is likely to be ready for the bigs sooner. Besides Whitey ball, has anyone tried the Oakland A's High OBP/Power approach to getting hitters? Also, has anyone been able to put together a team that can win consistently in Coors Field?

12-24-2002, 11:06 AM	#19
SufferingSoxFan Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Attleboro, MA Posts: 150	I build my teams around speed and sound base running to manufacture runs as much as possible. Solid Fielding especially at the corners, solid pitching with atleast 2 studs, with good #4 and 5 power hitters. I accomplish this most of the time by: 1. trading for relief pitchers and leadoff hitters 2. drafting stud pitchers, good fielding and speed on offense 3. free agent signings for power hitters and stud pitchers It would be nice to see who was available in the draft during the free agency period so that I could alter the above as required.

12-24-2002, 11:23 AM	#20
MM13 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 23	Hmm...maybe I don't exploit the AI as I much as I can. My team usually does pretty well (85+ wins a year), but I've never been able to get 115+ wins. I've got 3 above average or better SPs, a decent bullpen, and some pretty good offensive players. I'm trying for 80's stats so a power hitter to me is someone who can hit 25+ homers. I've removed Coors from the league so that the stats aren't inflated.