Fielder or Davis?

[Yoda]

For the record, there is no question about Fielder over Davis right now. That could change depending on what Davis does.

Cecil's decline started after his 51 HR season. The following year he maintained his production somewhat but the decline had already begun.

You guys seem to be pretty much in agreement and only arguing over specifics, but I don't think it's fair to say C. Fielder's decline began after his 51 HR season. He had a career year and it happened to be his first productive season. So while you are technically correct that his numbers declined from that point, it wasn't a steady decline. It just seemed like he regressed back to something more normal (his BABIP in his 51 HR season was markedly higher than any others where he saw significant ABs). He just started hitting 30+ HRs and batting .250-.260...and actually saw an improvement in his K/BB ratio.

You could argue the same for many players. If Quentin never has quite the year he did last year, but instead hits 30HR and bats .270 for the rest of his career...would you say his decline began after his 2008 season? I don't think that would be fair, although using the strictest definition of the word "decline" you would be correct.

Yeah maybe I should have used peak instead of decline but I think you get what I'm saying.

[lastingsgriller]

For the record, there is no question about Fielder over Davis right now. That could change depending on what Davis does.

Cecil's decline started after his 51 HR season. The following year he maintained his production somewhat but the decline had already begun.

You guys seem to be pretty much in agreement and only arguing over specifics, but I don't think it's fair to say C. Fielder's decline began after his 51 HR season. He had a career year and it happened to be his first productive season. So while you are technically correct that his numbers declined from that point, it wasn't a steady decline. It just seemed like he regressed back to something more normal (his BABIP in his 51 HR season was markedly higher than any others where he saw significant ABs). He just started hitting 30+ HRs and batting .250-.260...and actually saw an improvement in his K/BB ratio.

You could argue the same for many players. If Quentin never has quite the year he did last year, but instead hits 30HR and bats .270 for the rest of his career...would you say his decline began after his 2008 season? I don't think that would be fair, although using the strictest definition of the word "decline" you would be correct.

this is pretty much the point I was trying to make..

[Inukchuk]

I still don't get why you wondered if the OP's question was serious. I think it's a pretty debatable topic, as evidenced by this lovely 4 page point/counterpoint...

[fezzik]

Yeah maybe I should have used peak instead of decline but I think you get what I'm saying.

I think I do too.

[Ender]

ok.. the age he is can get confusing, especially since his birthday was during the season..

Baseball age is generally the age of the player on July 1st of that season. That is how the majority of sites track it.

[KCollins1304]

I'm making these numbers up, so don't trash them. I'd say in a keeper/dynasty league a player's worth is approx. 75% what he is going to do in the current season, 20% the following season, and 5 % the next year. I wouldn't ever look more than 3 yrs ahead unless you're just talking storing minor league players on a separate roster.

[lastingsgriller]

I still don't get why you wondered if the OP's question was serious. I think it's a pretty debatable topic, as evidenced by this lovely 4 page point/counterpoint...

well not necessarily.. i don't think anyone has really said they would choose Chris Davis.. I think this has just turned into a 4 page tangent on how Prince's career will pan out and how it relates to his father's...

[Neato Torpedo]

I'm making these numbers up, so don't trash them. I'd say in a keeper/dynasty league a player's worth is approx. 75% what he is going to do in the current season, 20% the following season, and 5 % the next year. I wouldn't ever look more than 3 yrs ahead unless you're just talking storing minor league players on a separate roster.

In the first 8-10 rounds, I'd say it's closer to 82.5/12.5/5, with the exception of the extremely rare Wieters-type or Lince-type on the year they figure to break the majors permanently, and unless you're attempting a serious keeper rebuilding period. Obviously, Fielder and Davis both fall under that category, and there's not much difference in what you want between round 3 where Fielder will be taken and round 5 or 6 where Davis will be taken.

[Inukchuk]

I still don't get why you wondered if the OP's question was serious. I think it's a pretty debatable topic, as evidenced by this lovely 4 page point/counterpoint...

well not necessarily.. i don't think anyone has really said they would choose Chris Davis.. I think this has just turned into a 4 page tangent on how Prince's career will pan out and how it relates to his father's...

You're right, no one has said right out that they would choose Davis in a keeper, but by questioning the seriousness of the OP's inital query, you're essentially dissmissing it as even debatable, which was a foolish move, IMO. Many in this thread have questioned Cecil Jr's health, and their potentials are definitely close enough to at least merit a discussion, as has been evidenced by the past 4 pages.

That being said, I think the answer to this question will become quite a bit more clear after Davis has had a full season under his belt. In keeping with the OP's question, I like KC's take on it best. You should definitely weigh your present decision mainly on this season, as rosters in keepers tend to fluctuate a lot over the years (at least in my experience... ). Your safest bet here is Prince (unless keeping Davis will cost you a good amount less, that is...).