theoretical def
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:21 pmwould you rather have a 3e15 at 3b and a 3(0)4 LF or a 4e23 3b and a 2(-1)5 LF?
thanks
thanks
Archive of SportingNews.com's old SOM Baseball forum
http://forum-365.strat-o-matic.com/archivesn/
theoretical def
http://forum-365.strat-o-matic.com/archivesn/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=178487
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:21 pmPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:38 pm3e15 at 3b and a 3(0)4 LF
Re: theoretical def
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:45 pm[quote:c5faee19f0="geekor"]would you rather have a 3e15 at 3b and a 3(0)4 LF or a 4e23 3b and a 2(-1)5 LF?
thanks[/quote:c5faee19f0]
Give my the guy who limits XBH's in the outfield. For whatever reason, there are a lot of 3Bs in this world who can contribute a lot to a team's offense, who have crappy gloves. I'm sure their "win shares" typically show that their bat makes up for the lack of D. And in Strat - a 3B's defensive lapses will cause you to suffer LIMITED damage.
As opposed to the XBH's that 3's and 4's in the OF allow.
Having said all of that, your choice in this case should probably be decided by offense contributions by the players in question.
My $.02.
thanks[/quote:c5faee19f0]
Give my the guy who limits XBH's in the outfield. For whatever reason, there are a lot of 3Bs in this world who can contribute a lot to a team's offense, who have crappy gloves. I'm sure their "win shares" typically show that their bat makes up for the lack of D. And in Strat - a 3B's defensive lapses will cause you to suffer LIMITED damage.
As opposed to the XBH's that 3's and 4's in the OF allow.
Having said all of that, your choice in this case should probably be decided by offense contributions by the players in question.
My $.02.
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:29 pmWell technically just tuning up for the playoffs. My 1 and only 70's team made the WC and I've had Rose at 3b with Buford in LF (the def Visick said) all season. Was wondering if switching them was better. Trying to squeeze out any little advantage I could.
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 4:41 pmgeekor,
I think it's a toss-up. There are 3 X-rolls for a 3B for every 2 X-rolls for a LF, but I believe the LF X-roll uses the range more while the 3B X-roll uses the e-number more. Also, I think the LF has a higher chance of giving extra bases on a misplayed X-roll. Again, I think it's a toss-up.
Good luck in your playoffs.
I think it's a toss-up. There are 3 X-rolls for a 3B for every 2 X-rolls for a LF, but I believe the LF X-roll uses the range more while the 3B X-roll uses the e-number more. Also, I think the LF has a higher chance of giving extra bases on a misplayed X-roll. Again, I think it's a toss-up.
Good luck in your playoffs.
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 9:43 pm[url=http://andrew-stevens.tripod.com/index/stratfield.html]This article[/url] provides guidance on questions like this.
3e15 at 3B = .25 (i.e., 3B will get 25% as many 3B(X) rolls as they do rolls on their cards while batting) * .762 (the OPS on a 3B(X) to a 3e15) = -.191 on defense
3e4 at LF = .167 * .924 = -.154
Total = -.345
4e23 at 3B = .25 * 1.128 = -.282
2e5 at LF = .167 * .587 = -.098
Total = -.380
The 3e15/3e4 combo hurts you a little less on defense. Although it's not a big difference -- 35 OPS points -- and a -1 OF arm advantage to the 4e23/2e5 might make up for a bit of it. So it's probably not gonna matter much either way, but just based on the only objective numbers we've got, I'd take the 3e15/3e4.
3e15 at 3B = .25 (i.e., 3B will get 25% as many 3B(X) rolls as they do rolls on their cards while batting) * .762 (the OPS on a 3B(X) to a 3e15) = -.191 on defense
3e4 at LF = .167 * .924 = -.154
Total = -.345
4e23 at 3B = .25 * 1.128 = -.282
2e5 at LF = .167 * .587 = -.098
Total = -.380
The 3e15/3e4 combo hurts you a little less on defense. Although it's not a big difference -- 35 OPS points -- and a -1 OF arm advantage to the 4e23/2e5 might make up for a bit of it. So it's probably not gonna matter much either way, but just based on the only objective numbers we've got, I'd take the 3e15/3e4.