Defense vs Offense Debate - Page 2

dodger300 · 08-11-2014, 05:03 AM

If your going to build your team around pitching and defense, your going to want some top notch speed guys who can come of the bench late in games to pinch run. I have won a lot of close games by keeping speed guys on my bench. They will not cost much $ either.

bobfrig · 08-11-2014, 08:39 AM

Its way easier to score a run than to save a run

dumbrabbit · 08-11-2014, 11:39 AM

Even though it costs a truckload to purchase runs?

Dyzalot · 08-11-2014, 02:31 PM

Let's assume the average team scores 5 runs per game. Without changing the pitching staff do you think it would be more expensive to increase your team's offense to 5.5 runs per game without changing how much your opponent scores or more expensive to decrease your opponents' offense to 4.5 runs per game without changing how much your team scores? I would expect the latter.

Zyllyx · 08-11-2014, 04:20 PM

I tend to play by instinct rather than by brainpower, so with that in mind: my strategy is to create a heart of the order with exceptional gap power ratings, then fill out the rest of my starters with exceptional Eye/K/Contact ratings. My bench is filled with those guys we all know - the plus-plus defenders with lightning speed and baserunning and pathetic batting ratings...

I never, ever sign or start a player with a defensive rating below 10 (on a 1-20 scale) and a nearly always have at least one catcher with at least 17/17/17 ratings as a defensive sub late in games.

Helped me win the World Series in 2016 in my current game with the D'backs, so I guess not having a brain for stats didn't hurt too badly!

PSUColonel · 08-11-2014, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobfrig

Its way easier to score a run than to save a run

and way more expensive

canaveral · 08-12-2014, 11:24 AM

In his book, Beyond Batting Average, Lee Panas compared all the MLB playoff teams from 1988 to 2008 as to what overall qualities the teams possessed. He used a simple ranking system for each year: the offense was ranked good, OK, or poor compared to the other teams in the league that year, and the defense/pitching was ranked similarly.

He found the best chances for making the playoffs were for a team to be good in something, either offense or defense or both. Some 92% of playoff teams over that span of time ranked good in something.

Odds of being a playoff team greatly diminished if a team was only OK in both categories, or worse yet, had to overcome a poor ranking in either offense or defense. Only 18% of such teams made the playoffs (categories overlap in my summary).

The only type of teams to never make the playoffs either had an OK offense and poor defense, or else a poor offense and poor defense.

The best odds? Both a good offense and good defense - 36% of all playoff teams had those qualities - followed by an OK offense and good defense - 27% - and then a good offense and OK defense - 19%.

The above suggests a nice pitching staff with solid fielders can overcome so-so hitters better than above average hitters can overcome mediocre pitching and fielding - but not by much.

A fascinating, simple study that shows a winning team apparently needs an all-around balance AND to be good (top third of the league) at something for the best odds to win.

ThePretender · 08-13-2014, 09:07 AM

I've found it's easier to rebuild a team with elite defence, but when it comes to winning a championship it's either through a stud offence sacrificing a bit of defence or more two way players. A few guys in our league tried elite pitching and defence, and they don't make the playoffs. Ever. Maybe you guys have had better luck, but in the leagues I play with sacrificing offence usually limits you to below 90 wins even with top tier pitching.

As an example, the top defensive team in our league has the #1 pitching staff, and won 88 games. So I guess my prediction was pretty bang on. And he's 7 games back of the division winner.

kingcharlesxii · 08-13-2014, 11:49 AM

Winning a championship requires you to be really good 2 of the 3 of pitching, fielding and hitting (as well as a healthy dose of luck). However, you can't punt the third - you need to be at least semi-competent. I've won a lot of league championships with great pitching and defense and an offense around average or slightly below.

08-11-2014, 05:03 AM	#21
dodger300 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 268	If your going to build your team around pitching and defense, your going to want some top notch speed guys who can come of the bench late in games to pinch run. I have won a lot of close games by keeping speed guys on my bench. They will not cost much $ either. Last edited by dodger300; 08-11-2014 at 06:34 PM.

08-11-2014, 08:39 AM	#22
bobfrig Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 94	Its way easier to score a run than to save a run __________________ always classy, never trashy

08-13-2014, 09:07 AM	#28
ThePretender All Star Starter Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,324	I've found it's easier to rebuild a team with elite defence, but when it comes to winning a championship it's either through a stud offence sacrificing a bit of defence or more two way players. A few guys in our league tried elite pitching and defence, and they don't make the playoffs. Ever. Maybe you guys have had better luck, but in the leagues I play with sacrificing offence usually limits you to below 90 wins even with top tier pitching. As an example, the top defensive team in our league has the #1 pitching staff, and won 88 games. So I guess my prediction was pretty bang on. And he's 7 games back of the division winner. Last edited by ThePretender; 08-13-2014 at 09:11 AM.

08-13-2014, 11:49 AM	#29
kingcharlesxii Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,730	Winning a championship requires you to be really good 2 of the 3 of pitching, fielding and hitting (as well as a healthy dose of luck). However, you can't punt the third - you need to be at least semi-competent. I've won a lot of league championships with great pitching and defense and an offense around average or slightly below. __________________ OTBA - Stockholm Royal Squirrels of Sweden OOTP Grand League Champion 2015

08-11-2014, 11:39 AM	#23
dumbrabbit All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 827	Even though it costs a truckload to purchase runs?

08-11-2014, 02:31 PM	#24
Dyzalot All Star Starter Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,735	Let's assume the average team scores 5 runs per game. Without changing the pitching staff do you think it would be more expensive to increase your team's offense to 5.5 runs per game without changing how much your opponent scores or more expensive to decrease your opponents' offense to 4.5 runs per game without changing how much your team scores? I would expect the latter.

08-11-2014, 04:20 PM	#25
Zyllyx Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 48	I tend to play by instinct rather than by brainpower, so with that in mind: my strategy is to create a heart of the order with exceptional gap power ratings, then fill out the rest of my starters with exceptional Eye/K/Contact ratings. My bench is filled with those guys we all know - the plus-plus defenders with lightning speed and baserunning and pathetic batting ratings... I never, ever sign or start a player with a defensive rating below 10 (on a 1-20 scale) and a nearly always have at least one catcher with at least 17/17/17 ratings as a defensive sub late in games. Helped me win the World Series in 2016 in my current game with the D'backs, so I guess not having a brain for stats didn't hurt too badly!

08-12-2014, 11:24 AM	#27
canaveral Minors (Double A) Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Space Coast FL Posts: 194	In his book, Beyond Batting Average, Lee Panas compared all the MLB playoff teams from 1988 to 2008 as to what overall qualities the teams possessed. He used a simple ranking system for each year: the offense was ranked good, OK, or poor compared to the other teams in the league that year, and the defense/pitching was ranked similarly. He found the best chances for making the playoffs were for a team to be good in something, either offense or defense or both. Some 92% of playoff teams over that span of time ranked good in something. Odds of being a playoff team greatly diminished if a team was only OK in both categories, or worse yet, had to overcome a poor ranking in either offense or defense. Only 18% of such teams made the playoffs (categories overlap in my summary). The only type of teams to never make the playoffs either had an OK offense and poor defense, or else a poor offense and poor defense. The best odds? Both a good offense and good defense - 36% of all playoff teams had those qualities - followed by an OK offense and good defense - 27% - and then a good offense and OK defense - 19%. The above suggests a nice pitching staff with solid fielders can overcome so-so hitters better than above average hitters can overcome mediocre pitching and fielding - but not by much. A fascinating, simple study that shows a winning team apparently needs an all-around balance AND to be good (top third of the league) at something for the best odds to win.