Hodges vs. Murray

[mridge01]

Has anybody every noticed how earily similar Gil Hodges and Eddie Murray's cards are? It's uncanny. Makes me think Hodges is the better deal of the two. With Hodges you're giving up a little bit on stolen bases, but let's face you're not picking up Eddie to steal bases anyway. Also, Gil has positive clutch and Murray is negative clutch. Thoughts...

[chunga1]

murray usually under performs. hodges is usually worth the money...........But he has the 15 game injury thing with his card

[mridge01]

[quote:0e1705739c]But he has the 15 game injury thing with his card[/quote:0e1705739c]

Ahh, that's the reason.

[Cruiser]

When I've had them, Hodges has either underperformed or matched his card. Murray has had anywhere from weak seasons to some real monster seasons (most recently .314-50-146 in Fenway '46). I'd look at the starting pitching in your division. If there are lots of lefties, Hodges is probably the better option, even with the injury bug.

[DizandMiles]

Hodges does really well in a slugger park and not well in pitchers parks
Murray if you have a pitcher or neutral park. imho

[cplake]

I have tried both once. Hodges in Huntington was a major disappointment and Murray in Sportsman's '46 was also pretty mediocre. He couldn't even manage 100 RBIs (99).

[Proverbial Psalms]

I agree that one should avoid Hodges in a pitcher's park... but he can produce big numbers with the help of a good ballpark.

[RickRanger]

They're both good buys. Murray has been pretty consistent for me -- 25-35 homers, 100 plus rbi's, generally around .280 - .290. Hodges is more feast or famine, but he did go off for 53 homers for me once. I really like the ATG I McGwire -- consistently 50 plus homers for under 4 million. I haven't used the ATG II McGwire, but I know he went over 60 homers for a buddy of mine.