OOTP Fielding

[Slyder]

I'm bored, slightly buzzed, and completely bored (did I say that already) I wanted to post a question and just see what various gms in the league use when looking at Defense.

A) Range
B) Fld pct
C) Hybrid
D) WTF is defense?

Have fun feel free to post here!

[Providence A's]

It depends on your pitching somewhat. If your staff as a whole strikes out a lot of batters, it's less important obviously (high stuff, above average-to-high control, movement whatever). If your pitching gives up a lot of hits, then you need it (stuff average or slightly above, control high, movement highest).

For me, it would be a hybrid. Above average-to-high range and fielding percentage. I find the high stuff pitchers usually cost the most...at least they did back when I first started so I go for the less sexy / cheaper 6,7,8 / 7,8,9 / 6,10,10 type guys.

[LJMets1989]

Definitely hybrid. Though, I'd generally be more hesitant to use a guy with a mediocre to bad fielding percentage than I would be with a guy with only like 5 range.

[schisno]

seriously, what are these stats people talk about.

[Kingdom]

In a perfect world, a mix. But I don't mind if I'm playing someone out of position and their range is limited if their bat is too good to bench. At the same time, it also depends on the position. I'm good with an infielder posting a .970 fielding but I'm very concerned if an outfielder is posting the same.

[Hammer]

it all depends on the position. without breaking it down too much... 2nd and 3rd are positions where i dont mind one or the other. either high range and a mediocre percentage, or mediocre range and a high percentage. 1st base id lean high percentage... they dont have to get to everything, but everything that gets to them, they have to eat up. short and centerfield are obviously positions i want both... i cant play a bummy defender at one of those spots. everything in the outfield, in fact, id prefer not to play anyone with below a .980 percentage... left id deal with less range than right.

[Kingdom]

Hammermetrics

[Mach]

it all depends on the position. without breaking it down too much... 2nd and 3rd are positions where i dont mind one or the other. either high range and a mediocre percentage, or mediocre range and a high percentage. 1st base id lean high percentage... they dont have to get to everything, but everything that gets to them, they have to eat up. short and centerfield are obviously positions i want both... i cant play a bummy defender at one of those spots. everything in the outfield, in fact, id prefer not to play anyone with below a .980 percentage... left id deal with less range than right.

That's pretty close to my real world philosophy, save for in RF I can sac range a bit, but need an arm and LF I need more range. It also depends on park. DNYS LF and CF are huge but RF is tiny.

[Shadow29]

I had Cliff Floyd play second base (or was it 3rd?). I believe that says enough.