Who's going to be my long-term SS?

[Tony820]

Curious to get the groups thoughts here. I'll try and keep it simple. One SS is currently on my ML squad. Playing pretty well recently. Also VERY highly regarded on the trade market. So keep that in mind. Also, I'm currently very much in my window to compete, I'm in first place right now. Here are the two players. Thinking about getting rid of one at the deadline.

Top image is my ML SS, Gunnar Henderson, bottom image is my AAA SS, Danny Baird. The players seem different enough when they will give me something a little different. I usually lean towards eye which I obviously don't like with Baird, but I do like the gap potential, he isn't just a slap hitter....

[ohiodevil]

If you want to keep both and you're weaker at 3B, I would move Henderson over there and let Baird play SS. But if you have a good 3B and need an upgrade at 2B, then you could try Baird at 2B and pair him with Henderson at SS.

The other option would be to deal Henderson and fill some other need or get that last piece to push you over the top. I had same dilemma with the Indians and had Tyler Freeman ready to make the jump but he was blocked by Lindor (who I happened to sign for 7 years), so I moved Freeman to 2B and he went on to win 5 gold gloves in 7 years and we made the playoffs 6 of those 7 seasons.

You have a very good problem.

[treymancini]

If you are competing, my strategy in this instance is to start Baird, as his trade value is lower for sure, then trade Gunnar (how'd you get him from the O's???) for a piece to "get you over the hump".

[CBeisbol]

These questions are difficult, that's what's makes OOTP fun

The question isn't whether to keep Henderson or Baird. The question is whether the team is better off with Henderson + what you trade Bird for or with Baird + what you trade Henderson for. Then there are the longer term considerations. When is Henderson a free agent. How much do you have available to sign him. Henderson is a low greed player while Baird is a higher greed player, so if you're thinking of extending one into their free agent years, that might be a consideration. Etc...

None of us can answer that given the limited info that we have,


I think it's clear that Henderson is the better player right now. So, if you trade him it's got to be for a bigger upgrade than the downgrade from hit to Baird (unless you get such a good future piece that the downgrade this season is offset by the upgrade in future seasons).

[DonMattingly]

I would say trade the guy you have in the majors. While his power and eye ratings are better, the numbers he's put up so far in his career are probably outlier-ish and that is bumping up his trade value. You have a very high quality replacement pretty much ready for the majors.

Especially if you can get a really nice piece back that helps your ML team elsewhere on the roster (since you are in a competitive window), I would be shipping Gunnar out.

[BBGiovanni]

Assuming you are playing modern-era OOTP and that you don't have a crying need for something else (like a C) that Baird can get you, I'd work Baird at 2B and use him as a backup on the ML roster. I don't have much luck in modern OOTP with contact/gap guys with no eye and not much speed. And if you are playing with injuries anywhere but very low, he can be the first IF out of the gate when you have an injury. I play with injuries at "very low" and even I HIGHLY value good players with options as depth, rather than the old retreads that have to be waived every time you want to send them back down. If they're so bad no one claims them, you shouldn't be giving them plate appearances in the majors except in a short-term emergency.

[Syd Thrift]

I’m generally a big fan of eye as well but when it comes to middle infielders, especially shortstops, fielding trumps everything if other aspects are close. The guy in the minors isn’t a *lot* better defensively but 55/80 is about where I start thinking a player isn’t acceptable at shortstop. I’d go with Baird but I don’t know that either player is a long term answer at short, in spite of their age.

[Tony820]

Legit every post in this thread is helpful, so thank you.

I'll add in a few notes.

- Fairly set at 2B with Cole Barr, who turned out to be an absolute stud.
- In terms of acquiring Gunnar, he was a guy I targeted early on while he was still in Single A, and had the O's put in Alex Cobb to the deal so I could take on some bad money to get him for lesser prospects.
-Gunnar only has 1 year, 57 days of ML service time, so have him for a while.

Someone mentioned it's not about who to keep per say, it's about value and what I could get for someone like Gunnar, if I have a clear need. I think that might be the way to go, see if there is a big piece I can get back so it makes sense.

[jimmysthebestcop]

Gotta throw up wrc+, woba, bb%, and k% then compare the 2. Their defense is so close I wouldn't even consider it a factor.

But it depends if you have a certain team philosophy.

[Tony820]

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

Gotta throw up wrc+, woba, bb%, and k% then compare the 2. Their defense is so close I wouldn't even consider it a factor.

But it depends if you have a certain team philosophy.

Ask and ye shall receive. Curious to hear your thoughts.

[RBI Baseball]

I'd have a clear preference for Henderson. Baird's offensive value seems dependent on posting a high BABIP. The points about trade value are valid, but I'd view Baird more as insurance that allows you to trade Henderson if the return is fantastic, rather than shopping Henderson to fit Baird in.

[Tony820]

Originally Posted by RBI Baseball

I'd have a clear preference for Henderson. Baird's offensive value seems dependent on posting a high BABIP. The points about trade value are valid, but I'd view Baird more as insurance that allows you to trade Henderson if the return is fantastic, rather than shopping Henderson to fit Baird in.

That is sort of where my head is at. I play every game, and Henderson is really starting to come on here, and at only 25, still could have some decent growth room.

[jimmysthebestcop]

Their offensive production looks really darn close to one another. But we are judging mlb vs AAA. Yet that also means Baird most likely isn't fully developed. I find every prospect needs mlb time to fully develop. There is the flip side going to mlb and never making it.

Wrc+ would indicate they are both slightly above average. However Baird being 23 with no mlb time has the chance to keep going. First guy probably not.

Baird has room to improve extra base hits so he might be able to go past what Henderson can do.

So it comes down to Henderson being a known quantity and Baird still with some unknown. Baird should put up same offense that Henderson did. With a slight chance he goes beyond and a slight chance he busts.

If you like chance you go Baird if you like what is known you stay with Henderson.

[Tony820]

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

Their offensive production looks really darn close to one another. But we are judging mlb vs AAA. Yet that also means Baird most likely isn't fully developed. I find every prospect needs mlb time to fully develop. There is the flip side going to mlb and never making it.

Wrc+ would indicate they are both slightly above average. However Baird being 23 with no mlb time has the chance to keep going. First guy probably not.

Baird has room to improve extra base hits so he might be able to go past what Henderson can do.

So it comes down to Henderson being a known quantity and Baird still with some unknown. Baird should put up same offense that Henderson did. With a slight chance he goes beyond and a slight chance he busts.

If you like chance you go Baird if you like what is known you stay with Henderson.

Good breakdown. With me feeling pretty good about the rest of my team, it may allow me to take a chance on Baird, see if it pays off. Hopefully I can provide an update to see how it turns out. Love seeing what happens in these type of situations.

[Fronzizzle]

It might not mean anything in your game, but my '21 OOTP experience is that guys with high Contact & Avoid K's are absolute BA studs for a couple of years, then start to drop.

You hope the eye and/or power develop, but if not a decrease in either of the other two leads to...meh.

I had a CF with a nearly identical offensive profile, called him up when he was 24. Not the end all, be all of numbers but here were his slash lines:

343/376/476, 3.9 WAR
322/354/412, 3.6 WAR
267/280/356 0.3 WAR

He's been replacement level every year since.

[kcroyalty29]

Speaking of SS's - has anyone else noticed that just about EVERY top prospect at SS turns into "fragile" shortly after making the MLB?

I have sold out players to trade for the best shortstop each season - and have brought FOUR different SS's 4 star or above (at current, not potential) to the Big Leagues. Two were 23, one was 25 and one was 26. This was over the span of 8 years.

All four became "fragile" within two years of getting to "The Show."

I've noticed the same with other teams when I go through the top SS's in the league - don't have hard data, but would be willing to bet 3/4 of 4 star or above SS's are "fragile"

Is this a bug or just a byproduct of the position taking a toll on your body?

I hate the term "fragile" in general for anyone below the age of 30 as that seems unfair and something this game does way too much. But maybe that's just me.

[jimmysthebestcop]

I've not seen it. Fragile can be bad for pitchers. But it's not carved in stone. You might have a fragile guy never get a major injury. The only one I really stay away from is work ethic unless I'm using them as trade assets. Yes someone with low work ethic can become an all star. But their chances are crazy low and then low to stay relevant for awhile. People have crunched numbers on them. So I don't even bother anymore.

I've actually considered turning off all personality and chemistry. The implementation of this game mechanic has remained so simple I now find it borderline broken. Or at the very least involves zero interaction from us the human player.

I've already turned off owner controls budget, stories, and owner goals. The first and second gimp AI teams. The last is just more annoying as most of the time the goals I get are so random they don't make sense.

Once ootpb goes beyond customization and number crunching for results it more often ends in a fail.

In summary it's your game customize it anyone that gets you more enjoyment or the results your after.

[Tony820]

Originally Posted by Fronzizzle

It might not mean anything in your game, but my '21 OOTP experience is that guys with high Contact & Avoid K's are absolute BA studs for a couple of years, then start to drop.

You hope the eye and/or power develop, but if not a decrease in either of the other two leads to...meh.

I had a CF with a nearly identical offensive profile, called him up when he was 24. Not the end all, be all of numbers but here were his slash lines:

343/376/476, 3.9 WAR
322/354/412, 3.6 WAR
267/280/356 0.3 WAR

He's been replacement level every year since.

I have noticed this. Wander Franco was a perfect example, and actually Vlad Jr. a little bit as well. Both were hitting like .330, then by 27-28, are almost 0 WAR players. I’ve noticed Nick Madrigal still having success, but I can confirm I’ve noticed that trend.