by gbrookes » Fri Jan 07, 2011 9:11 pm
durantjerry, I am really intrigued by the debate between offense/defense and the choice of a DH, and about Lind (2009) in particular. A while ago I resolved to try to avoid playing outfielders who had a range of 4 or 5, except as a DH. I also thought Lind was a great bargain at $5 million - but I used him almost exclusively as a DH. I have used him as DH on several teams, and I liked what I got from him most of the time. (He didn't seem to be as effective as I thought he would be at Kauffman - I was thinking of all the doubles he has - but he was very effective at PNC).
My analysis of the defense effect is like this (ignoring e ratings for now to keep things simpler):
Compared to a 3 range OF, a 4 range gives up 1 more triple and 4 more singles on the Xchart, out of 20 of course. I value the single at 2.0 and the triple at 4.4. The total additional run production points therefore (using my factors) is 12.4 out of 20, or .62 per X chart reading. For a 5 range OF, there are 2 more triples, 2 more doubles (run factor of 3.25 and 5 more singles than there are for a 3 range OF, for a total of 25.3 more than there are for a 3 range OF, or 1.26 per X chart reading. For a LF, there are 2 X chart readings per 216 die rolls. For a player who bats high in the order and gets 5 Plate Appearances (like Lind), I multiply the defense effect by 8 (40 defensive rolls to 5 batting rolls). So, for Lind, who is a 5 range, I essentially subtract from his offensive batting card 1.26 times 2 times 8 from his run production calculation - or in other words, a subtraction of about 20 for his poor range.
My calculation of his run production on offense vs. RHP at PNC (not a runs predictor - just a "relative to 100" scale I use) is 144 - a very nice total. I use 1.4 for walks and 5.74 for homeruns.
BUT, if I subtract 20 from that total for his poor defensive range (compared to a 3 range), his net offense/defense contribution is only 124 - about 14% lower than his raw offense contribution, and far from a killer amount in my books.
So, I resolved to not use him on defense, but only as DH, where I thought his value was maximized.
I am really not saying all this to try to win an argument. I am always interested in learning and trying to look at things from new perspectives, to try them out. So I am just really curious about your thoughts about going ahead and playing him LF!!
Cheers! :) geoff