Team wins league with a "4" in CF

[durantjerry]

I'm sure someone else must have won with Clark in CF or Soriano at 2B or the such, but I have not seen any posts. Ironically, I cut Rowand at game 120 to add A Razirez because I thought I needed another bat, moving DH B Clark to CF. I was 60-60 at the time, close to the top of the division, but floundering due to what I perceived as being short a hitter. I went 25-17 down the stretch to take the division and went 7-3 in the playoffs(4-1 finals). Ironically again, Ramirez got hurt and missed game 5 of the semi's and all of the finals.
Ramirez after pickup:
146 26 43 10 0 11 35 8 20 0 0 0 .295 .344 .589
Title team w/ Clark in CF:
[url]http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/baseball/stratomatic/2006/team/team_other.html?user_id=2861[/url]

[durantjerry]

Thank you, but my purpose is really not to pat myself on the back, but to see what others think of winning with a "4" rated player in CF. I think it is somewhat significant that I played the first 3/4 of the season with one of the best CF in the set and struggled, then cut him for a "4" rated player and proceeded to go on to win the league. Most of the advice I see on the boards blindly follows the defensive tenets that I believe were handed down by Moses. I don't believe most would even admit the possibility exists that you could win a league with a "3" at SS or CF, never mind with a "4". That may have changed a little this year with the higher amount of good offensive/defensively challenged SS, but I think most stil believe in the "1" and "2" up the middle philosophy.

[cummings2]

Very interesting team, Thnx for sharing.

J-Pav had a team towards the end of 05 with 3s up the middle that won the ring and I saw another post with a 4 in SS that apparently also won it all. But it's still always interesting seeing the teams that "defy the standards".

One of the things I find very interesting about your your Chumps IV is the defense against the running game, not only the CF zone. Other than Abreu not one ([b:315f150239]-[/b:315f150239]) Arm and the battery, other than Carpenter was pretty running friendly :shock:

[durantjerry]

I honestly rarely even consider defense against the running game when putting my team together. After it takes form, I might consider a good throwing catcher if I have great IF "D", or check the hold ratings if I'm considering using a Piazza type behind the plate. I've won with Pierre in CF. I Have had some gaudy records from pitchers with +9 hold ratings, who it would seem anyone could run on all day. Like the SB itself, running game defense should be way down on your list of what you are trying to get when putting a team together IMO.

[visick]

IMO-What helps with your team the most was having Everett's D up the middle.

Belliard @ 2B isn't a chump with the glove either.

When all else fails for me and I can't get the best defensive/offensive CF out there, I make sure I grab Everett and then go with a 3 in CF.

[geekor]

My one 03 title I had B giles in Cf as a 4...... :shock:

[MARCPELLETIER]

Bump.

My opinion: for sure you can win with a cf-4, but it's a burden on your team. There is a real discrepency between of-3 and o-4, no other level difference has a gap as wide as this one. For this reason, I would avoid any of-4.

That said, now that defense is appropriately priced, I don't see any reason why one shouldn't go with a cf-3 instead of cf-2.

That said, you have to be logical with your line-up. If you are looking to fill out the #8 or the #9 slot of your line-up, go for the best cf defense. If you're a looking for a lead-off, then pay (when limited) for the best offensive card, not the best defense.

[durantjerry]

I think your last point concerning being logical with your lineup is very valid. The times I have had success with poor defenders in key positions, I kind of fell into using them based on how my team was taking shape(or in the above case, seeing it's shortcomings)rather than forcing them into a particular situation just to use them. I think that the key to being successful with them is using them at the right place and the right time based on team needs.