What's better in LF, 4(-4)e12 or 3(+1)e10

[BDWard]

For LF I've got $4.84 mil Stargell, 4(-4)e12, and $6.41 mil Guerrero, 3(+1)e10, on one of my $100 mil teams and will play one in LF and DH the other. I'm leaning towards playing Stargell in LF, as I believe the arm comes into play far more than FB(lf)X. I also think that having at least 1 big arm in the OF also has a prophylactic effect when opposing managers set baserunnung strategy. Of course, I realize that every flyball is an adventure with Stargell in LF, but Guerrero isn't far behind in that department.

Which one will hurt my team least, benefit the team the most in LF? - Bernie W

[216 Stitches]

I would be surprised if there is convincing argument to conclude
this. But there was a really nice article sugesting the impact on OF arms
is rather neutral* -- the number of runners the better arms removed
from the basepaths was offset by the less attempts against the stronger
arms, apparently. Since the scoring system on that study was
runs allowed over a season on a CD scenario where everything but
OF arms were held constant, it seemed reasonable enough.

Still, OF-assists are rally killers. If you like to read boxscores, you
can see that a timely OF assist can tilt a game outcome by itself,
sometimes.

For me, if I felt I had a strong team, I would want to go with getting
the highest % on the range and errors. Go with the best % on a strong
team.

But if the team is struggling, arm effects (and other aspects
that factor in more luck) might give you more of a chance.

* Sorry, can't remember who did this study.

[AeroDave10]

Over the long haul, I don't see it being much of a contest. 3e10 is a much better option than 4e12, regardless of arm.

[BDWard]

Thanks for the replies guys. In response to River Field View's comments, I've posted a link to an arm range study below. Interesting stuff. Regarding the conclusion that arm differences of a couple of points make little difference in terms of runs scored against a regular MLB team over the course of a season, it would seem to me that in the ATG context, with more hitting and thus more base runners, that OF arms could have a greater impact.

http://forums.sportingnews.com/viewtopic.php?t=251327

[nevdully's]

Well off the top of my head it would seem the E10 to E12 is obviously what it is, a slight advantage for the lesser errors...but not so fast...the opposition will certainly run more on the +1 arm as opposed to the -4 arm so maybe the E 10 actually commits a *bunch more throwing errors*, *in addition* to allowing that many more runs that the net result of -5 arm (a +1 compared to -4) would generate.

It seems to work this way when they run wild on C's with a + arm but low e's...they far exceed their error totals each year because of throws into cf.

In this case I'd take the arm over the range..or use Clemente.

[nevdully's]

To use info based on a 200X game here, at least in this case, is about as apples and oranges as you can get.

[216 Stitches]

Thanks for posting the link... well looking at the study numbers
and making the crude estimates, the arm difference is looking
more and more attractive.

Understanding this is just a crude estimate:

The arm difference may result in closer to 17 more runs than 2 more runs

Extra errors (at least on my teams) usually result in unearned runs at
a rate of about errors x 0.75 approx unearned runs.

And if you use the Berce website range-error comparison
[url]http://strato.berce.us/[/url] (under extras)

[quote:b6b79a5dd6]3e22 = 4e10 [/quote:b6b79a5dd6]

which suggests about 14 extra misplays, and my crude estimator,
10 extra runs... so a really slight advantage for the arm based
on a really rough guesstimate....

[PotKettleBlack]

It depends on your philosophy. And the other arms in your OF.

But generally speaking, as you've puzzled out, fewer misplays with 3e10 and 4e12. Make the basic plays, win games.

[Valen]

One factor not mentioned so far is the difference between a 3 and 4 fielder with respect to how many hits and what kind. Been a while since Ii looked at a fielding chart but memory seems to be there were a significant number of additional doubles in the 4 column. Who cares if the -4 arm limits baserunner advancement if the baserunners have already got their baserunning advance up front (double verses single or out).

I only play a 4 in the outfield if you beat me senseless first and then hold a gun to my head.

[BobBoone]

I love this question because it is so close.

I consider 1 in a corner outfield range to be worth 9 hits a season. 3 doubles and 6 singles. The two extra errors I consider to be 2 doubles. For me Stargell will give up the equivelant of 5 doubles and 6 singles more over 162 games.

I would play Stargell. DH Pedro. The OF assists he gives you might make up for the 9 hits, but it is unlikely. However, the runners that he will hold on first base, and thus create double play opportunities, should more than make up the rest.

If you could choose between two hitters, one that would get 9 hits less on a season, but was a 1-17 runner instead of 1-12, all else being equal, would you do it? It still comes down to your park, your style and your opps. parks of course.

If you argue DH Stargell, play Guerrero, you could well be right. This is a beautiful question, and the kind of decision that may well make or break a team.

This question illustrates why it's worth playing this game over and over and over, to try to figure things like this out.

Kudos.