Quote:
Originally Posted by Orcin
After all of this discussion, which was very helpful, I still feel like having a 90 at first base is better than having a 50 at first base.
|
While playing a 90 rated defender will always be better than playing a 50 rated defender, I have come to believe that not all positions are created equal. Strong defense is far less important at some positions than others, and 1B probably matters the least. This may or may not be actually true in real baseball (a lot of teams hide bad fielders at 1B, yet your Cardinals example appears rather indicative of its importance). More importantly, I believe the
game is modeled around this belief. I personally believe we see evidence of this modeling when we look at Overall Ratings and the impact of positional defensive ratings, though this does retain a measure of ambiguity.
I used to highly value defense at 1B on my teams. In 19, I ran 2017 All Star Corey Seager for 21 years, and he rewarded me with 20 consecutive Great Gloves after a season being trained up, but his mediocre offensive production proved untenable if I wanted to compete at Perfect.
Ironically, it is the ambiguous findings during the testing of catchers that others have outlined in these forums that now governs my current philosophy at 1B. Good enough is probably more than good enough, and anything more probably suffers to varying degrees from diminishing returns. The trick is in defining what "good enough" means to each of us.
__________________
"And, Masters, do not forget to specify, when time and place shall serve, that I am an [censored]." (
Much Ado About Nothing 5.1.255-256)
Primary Team
Collection Rewards (Cards & Packs) F2P Theme Team
Movers F2P Theme and Adam Schlesinger Memorial Team