Where should be the focus on when drafting or taking over an ophen team? Should u build on solid hitting or Pitching. I know hitters play everyday, but still having a great pitching staff can really help. So my ? is which would u try a build on getting really good hitters and waiting on pitchers or get solid pitching and waiting on position players? If u had the first pick who would u take and build ur team around 1. J.Santana or A.Pujols or J.Reyes?
I feel that it's imperative to get good hitting first. You can almost never find good hitters off the WW- they're just more predictable. Almost all the best hitters go in the first 6 rounds, and the unexpected (JJ Hardy, maybe less so- an Alex Rios) are still taken in the draft.
However, for pitching, you can always get good pitching off the waiver wire and good pitching late in the draft. For example, I got Chris Young, Rich Hill, and Randy Johnson in the 10th, 11th, and 12th rounds.
Something you might want to take earlier (not early) are closers- I got Krod in the 5th and Jenks in the 0thth and that has worked out for me. It's great when you can get a solid closer and don't hjave to worry about saves- they also lower your ratios.
First off, this is completely dependant on the scoring system in your league. COMPLETELY.
I've seen categorical scoring systems be set up rather evenly, but generally the standard 5x5 is slightly weighted towards better hitting. Top-shelf batters and hitters will help you in 4 categories, so those are usually pretty even, but middle-tier batters contribute more than middle-tier pitchers.
If it's a scoring league, there can be HUGE advantages to having dominant pitching, with one pitcher sometimes capable of beating an entire offensive lineup in one good start.
For the most part, in 90% of leagues that you're going to be in, it's going to be very close to even or very slightly slanted towards hitting. It's rare that you'll get in a league where pitchers are far-and-away the most important.
Unless you have a scoring system that heavily favors pitcher production, it's generally accepted that you want to weight hitters higher due to their reliability (compared to pitcher who are generally more volatile). This is even more important in Head-to-Head formats because you aren't locked into the need to achieve a certain amount of success in any one category. Having said that, if you're in a draft where everyone is employing that strategy you can actually turn it around and gain a lot of value by favoring pitching. It's still a risky proposition though.
Maine has a good swing for a pitcher but on anything that moves, he has no chance. And if it's a fastball, it has to be up in the zone. Basically, the pitcher has to hit his bat. - Mike Pelfrey
Conventional wisdom says to try to get solid hitting, then worry about pitching, which is exactly why I go for pitching first. In basically any scoring system, hitting and pitching will each make up half the points overall, yet hitting is always drafted first. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying take Roy Oswalt 5th overall, but I'll be more than happy to take pitchers in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th round, and get the second best pitcher rather than the 55th best hitter.
Amazinz wrote:Unless you have a scoring system that heavily favors pitcher production, it's generally accepted that you want to weight hitters higher due to their reliability (compared to pitcher who are generally more volatile). This is even more important in Head-to-Head formats because you aren't locked into the need to achieve a certain amount of success in any one category. Having said that, if you're in a draft where everyone is employing that strategy you can actually turn it around and gain a lot of value by favoring pitching. It's still a risky proposition though.
Exactly. When you look at statistics such as the fact that 50% of all pitchers will be on the DL at least once every three years it's pretty eye opening. Throwing a baseball is unnatural and there's a lot that can go wrong physiologically if you do it too much or too hard - in other words, if you're a major league pitcher. It's all a question of getting the best value though so as Amazinz mentioned if everyone ignores pitching then at some point even with their risks the remaining pitchers will have the best value.
I'd take more hitters, if you keep up with baseball and the waiver wire, you can count on finding at least 1 closer and 1 starter every year from free agents. With hitters it is harder to find hitters that will be productive for the entire season.
"Let's Keep The Friendly Confines Friendly" - Ernie Banks
I think most people prefer to take hitting earlier, its generally more predictable, and its generally far less injury prone. In addition statistically speaking there about 10-15 pitchers that compose the top tier of pitching and are noticeably better than just about everyone else.(talking about starters here) After that top 15 or so there are between 30-60 pitchers that can put up damn near identical numbers from year to year(and allstar numbers over a shorter length of time)... so there is a HUGE compressed middle class of pitchers. There are also a lot more unknown pitchers(guys who suddenly find a groove or turn it around, generally NOT actual rookies) who can do very well for months at a time.
So to explain it simply, there are a lot more productive pitchers that go undrafted and can be picked up, and pitchers are far more injury prone and risky than hitters.
I generally apply this only to starters, as I think closers are a totally different animal.