1992 All-Star Voting

[Carlos]

I could be wrong, but I think there are some schools of thought in the OOTP circles that it's best to put the better of the two, SS/2B, at 2B. Which is counter to real life, where you normally put the best middle infielder at short.

What is this attributed to? Did someone do a study showing that 2B get more ground balls than shortstops?

That would make very little sense unless the league was predominantly left-handed.

[Pat]

What is this attributed to? Did someone do a study showing that 2B get more ground balls than shortstops?

That would make very little sense unless the league was predominantly left-handed.

I honestly don't remember and I don't follow the strategy. I just play the players where they are their best at.

[Carlos]

I honestly don't remember and I don't follow the strategy. I just play the players where they are their best at.

I'm gonna have to look for this now because it sounds mostly ridiculous - but, I'm also a talking mad man that has no stats in front of me and enjoys making off-hand comments about things I do not understand.

[Pat]

Jistic?

[Carlos]

Jistic?

We are one in the same now.


Sent from my mobile device.

[Lintyfresh85]

What is this attributed to? Did someone do a study showing that 2B get more ground balls than shortstops?

That would make very little sense unless the league was predominantly left-handed.

It's a theory I created.

Basically, it's based off of Total Chances. If you look at the stats... a really rangy 2B gets to nearly as many groundballs as a SS does... factor in turning the Double Play, and they get more total chances during the year than a SS does.

So, if you put your best fielder at 2B, he's going to handle the ball more than your SS will... so, if you take a 2B with great range, error and turn DP ratings they usually end up more valuable than a good SS defensively.

Also, it has a bit to do with the undervaluing of defense at 2B... so a superior defensive 2B is going to provide a bit more value than most would expect as a lot of people see it as a primarily offensive position.

[Jistic]

To me it depends on what they're good at though. Not just the overall position rating. And it depends what your other middle IF is. If a guy is an 8 at SS but a 6 at 2b, then I'm playing him at SS unless of course I have a viable backup option.

"Turn double play" applies to both IF not just the 2B. To me, I would put the better IF at SS all things being equal, but that's just me.

[Carlos]

It's a theory I created.

Basically, it's based off of Total Chances. If you look at the stats... a really rangy 2B gets to nearly as many groundballs as a SS does... factor in turning the Double Play, and they get more total chances during the year than a SS does.

So, if you put your best fielder at 2B, he's going to handle the ball more than your SS will... so, if you take a 2B with great range, error and turn DP ratings they usually end up more valuable than a good SS defensively.

Also, it has a bit to do with the undervaluing of defense at 2B... so a superior defensive 2B is going to provide a bit more value than most would expect as a lot of people see it as a primarily offensive position.

Ok I'm just gonna argue for discussion here.

But if you have a really rangy short stop won't he get to more balls than the 2B? And both are going to turn just about the same number of DPs with the 2B likely only getting a few more from a very rangy 3B (a skilled 1B may up the ante for a SS on 3-6-1/3 double plays but those are less likely than a 5-4-3 DP).

Also at that point range isn't a factor as turning the Dp and arm likely come into play when receiving and throwing a ball on a potential DP.

I think if you stick a rangy 2B next to a less rangy SS, the 2B definitely scoops more balls. But I'm not sure that happens if the SS is more rangy than the 2B.

You studied it so you likely have more to base this on. I never looked but I will definitely investigate now.


Sent from my mobile device.

[Pat]

The '92 IL All-Star team should be announced here shortly.

[Lintyfresh85]

Ok I'm just gonna argue for discussion here.

But if you have a really rangy short stop won't he get to more balls than the 2B? And both are going to turn just about the same number of DPs with the 2B likely only getting a few more from a very rangy 3B (a skilled 1B may up the ante for a SS on 3-6-1/3 double plays but those are less likely than a 5-4-3 DP).

Also at that point range isn't a factor as turning the Dp and arm likely come into play when receiving and throwing a ball on a potential DP.

I think if you stick a rangy 2B next to a less rangy SS, the 2B definitely scoops more balls. But I'm not sure that happens if the SS is more rangy than the 2B.

You studied it so you likely have more to base this on. I never looked but I will definitely investigate now.


Sent from my mobile device.

You're probably right. I don't remember why I invented the theory... or what stat made me think it up.

I thought it was weird at the time because it goes against baseball logic of SS/CF/C being most important fielders... but I saw something that made me think that way.

I'll have to go look it up and figure out what it was, that made me think that way.

[Carlos]

You're probably right. I don't remember why I invented the theory... or what stat made me think it up.

I thought it was weird at the time because it goes against baseball logic of SS/CF/C being most important fielders... but I saw something that made me think that way.

I'll have to go look it up and figure out what it was, that made me think that way.

Either way, I'm intrigued and I'm going to look into it.