How Much Emphasis Do You Put On Defense?

Willing to share a link to that league? It would be interesting to keep track of.

I will go to my grave saying defense is underrated. Yes you pay for it in the price of the player, but, a good defensive team allows you to spend less on your pitching. So you can afford better offensive players who happen to be solid defensively.

And when it comes to defense, everything matters: Range is king, errors less important. OF Arms are big too. Never overlook the little things.

I agree that you can get by with cheaper pitcing if you have excellent defense. My brain tends to work in the direction of paying more for pitching in order to get cheaper offensive players who can really hit, even if their defense isn't as dominant.

I'm not sure one approach is better or worse. To a significant extent, it may just be a matter of personal style--or what one feels comfortable with. A tangible example is Larkin's best card vs the best card of Willie Wells. Which one would you rather have? Wells hits better, esp vs RHP, but Larkin's defensive 1-20 at SS is better than Wells' 2-22. But all other things being equal, which one would you rather have? In a recent league, I got both L & W in the draft and a player w/o a SS and I worked out a deal where I would get a topflight pitcher in return for sending my choice of L or W to the other team. I ended up keeping Wells, even though I knew I was sacrificing defense. I was in Navin and wanted to strengthen my hitting vs RHP, so Wells's better offense vs RHP was a factor for me. There's also the cost factor. These players seem almost exactly even to me. Should Larkin really cost 1M more?

There may not be a right or wrong in this case. What would any of you do in a similar situation? BTW, I would also be interested in a link to that match-off league.

I will go to my grave saying defense is underrated. Yes you pay for it in the price of the player, but, a good defensive team allows you to spend less on your pitching. So you can afford better offensive players who happen to be solid defensively.

And when it comes to defense, everything matters: Range is king, errors less important. OF Arms are big too. Never overlook the little things.

I agree that you can get by with cheaper pitcing if you have excellent defense. My brain tends to work in the direction of paying more for pitching in order to get cheaper offensive players who can really hit, even if their defense isn't as dominant.

I'm not sure one approach is better or worse. To a significant extent, it may just be a matter of personal style--or what one feels comfortable with. A tangible example is Larkin's best card vs the best card of Willie Wells. Which one would you rather have? Wells hits better, esp vs RHP, but Larkin's defensive 1-20 at SS is better than Wells' 2-22. But all other things being equal, which one would you rather have? In a recent league, I got both L & W in the draft and a player w/o a SS and I worked out a deal where I would get a topflight pitcher in return for sending my choice of L or W to the other team. I ended up keeping Wells, even though I knew I was sacrificing defense. I was in Navin and wanted to strengthen my hitting vs RHP, so Wells's better offense vs RHP was a factor for me. There's also the cost factor. These players seem almost exactly even to me. Should Larkin really cost 1M more?

There may not be a right or wrong in this case. What would any of you do in a similar situation? BTW, I would also be interested in a link to that match-off league.

According to a chart I printed up years ago, Larkin is worth about 4.7 NERP points over Wells due to his defense. With DD up and running we could actually make the comparision, but alas.

I rarely spend big money on a SS, so this is a unique analysis for me. In Navin 24, assuming a normal distribution of pitchers in the league, I would rather have Larkin over Wells. To me he has the higher overall rating and is also the better value after consideration of cost. There is a fair amount of defensive value going from a 2e22 to a 1e20. Plus Larkin has value in his stealing (19v15) and running (17v16). Wells might be a better value vs RHP, but it is only slight. I would also probably like Rodriguez and Yount over Wells, but that would depend on the %LHP in the league and the importance of injuries for this team. Just an opinion.